Guitar Gear Forum

Honeyburst

Gibson, as a brand, shouldn't try and innovate. They're no good at it and people don't want it. People want meat and potatoes from a Gibson. Fender have always done wacky shit so they can get away with it.

spawnofthesith wrote:

RaceU4her wrote:the vixen lol

I actually might fuck wit dis one tho

The Vixen was ok. The Les Paul Goddess was the one I really liked.

oh yeah the goddess, thats actually the ones i was thinking of, that is actually pretty sexy lol

The original run of the Smartwoods was like this too. I love my thin smartwood. The finish choices and the matching peghead on these are wrong for me though. I want a thin Custom Lite from the 80s but they are way beyond what i want to pay.

GuitarBilly wrote:They've been doing the thin Les Pauls on/off since 1988.
It's never worked and it never will. Literally no one wants a thin, carved top LP.

Id love a custom lite myself, but fuck the markup of the used ones, $3500+ these days.

I imagine this makes that Fibertone LP copy more appealing, for those who want the thickness, but not the weight.

https://fibertone-guitars.com/lp-model/

Zozobra wrote:Gibson, as a brand, shouldn't try and innovate. They're no good at it and people don't want it. People want meat and potatoes from a Gibson. Fender have always done wacky shit so they can get away with it.

I agree that people don't want them to innovate. Even when they come up with variations on existing models, people just don't accept them. I don't think they are necessarily bad at innovating, some of the ideas they had over the years like the titanium nut with adjustable height or the Access cutaway for the Les Paul were quite good. But no one wants them. It's a blessing and a curse for the company.

Here’s what they remind me of https://reverb.com/item/75344421-gibson ... t=75344421


They’re trash

Dave wrote:Here’s what they remind me of https://reverb.com/item/75344421-gibson ... t=75344421


They’re trash

I'd take this over the lites in a heart beat. Bag of dicks inlay and all

GuitarBilly wrote:

Zozobra wrote:Gibson, as a brand, shouldn't try and innovate. They're no good at it and people don't want it. People want meat and potatoes from a Gibson. Fender have always done wacky shit so they can get away with it.

I agree that people don't want them to innovate. Even when they come up with variations on existing models, people just don't accept them. I don't think they are necessarily bad at innovating, some of the ideas they had over the years like the titanium nut with adjustable height or the Access cutaway for the Les Paul were quite good. But no one wants them. It's a blessing and a curse for the company.

The problem is when Gibson innovates you get the Firebird X. Or the Corvus. The MIII was cool. If they made a Headless MIII peoples heads would explode.

That is a horrible take.

thermionic geek wrote:

GuitarBilly wrote:

Zozobra wrote:Gibson, as a brand, shouldn't try and innovate. They're no good at it and people don't want it. People want meat and potatoes from a Gibson. Fender have always done wacky shit so they can get away with it.

I agree that people don't want them to innovate. Even when they come up with variations on existing models, people just don't accept them. I don't think they are necessarily bad at innovating, some of the ideas they had over the years like the titanium nut with adjustable height or the Access cutaway for the Les Paul were quite good. But no one wants them. It's a blessing and a curse for the company.

The problem is when Gibson innovates you get the Firebird X. Or the Corvus. The MIII was cool. If they made a Headless MIII peoples heads would explode.

Yeah these are certainly examples of some bad ideas. The Robot tuners too. But they're just a handful of cases over a 70+ year period so it's not too bad. But they also had a few cool ideas that just didn't catch on. The M-III was one of them. The Nighthawks were cool guitars too.

But at the end of the day, people just don't want Gibson to make anything different than their classic instruments. The market just rejects it almost automatically. The only exception are signature models, I think. They have a bit more leeway with that. But even those still can't stray too far away of their classic models.

spawnofthesith wrote:

Dave wrote:Here’s what they remind me of https://reverb.com/item/75344421-gibson ... t=75344421


They’re trash

I'd take this over the lites in a heart beat. Bag of dicks inlay and all

i honestly always kind of liked these

RaceU4her wrote:

spawnofthesith wrote:

Dave wrote:Here’s what they remind me of https://reverb.com/item/75344421-gibson ... t=75344421


They’re trash

I'd take this over the lites in a heart beat. Bag of dicks inlay and all

i honestly always kind of liked these

Yeah I don't mind these tbh. Funny how it works. Once it's labeled as a Melody Maker and not a LP, it becomes way more acceptable

GuitarBilly wrote:

Zozobra wrote:Gibson, as a brand, shouldn't try and innovate. They're no good at it and people don't want it. People want meat and potatoes from a Gibson. Fender have always done wacky shit so they can get away with it.

I agree that people don't want them to innovate. Even when they come up with variations on existing models, people just don't accept them. I don't think they are necessarily bad at innovating, some of the ideas they had over the years like the titanium nut with adjustable height or the Access cutaway for the Les Paul were quite good. But no one wants them. It's a blessing and a curse for the company.

Yeah that's a probabaly a more fair and measured take on it

It's funny how some brands are forever nailed for good or ill to their core aesthetic. Marshall can't really stray too far from what people to expect. If they released an amp that was distinctly American in tone or sounded like an Engl people would wtf pretty hard at it. If it can't be dialled to sound like an 800 then folks will throw an undignified bitchfit over it

whats the term about being hindered by your own success??

Zozobra wrote:

GuitarBilly wrote:

Zozobra wrote:Gibson, as a brand, shouldn't try and innovate. They're no good at it and people don't want it. People want meat and potatoes from a Gibson. Fender have always done wacky shit so they can get away with it.

I agree that people don't want them to innovate. Even when they come up with variations on existing models, people just don't accept them. I don't think they are necessarily bad at innovating, some of the ideas they had over the years like the titanium nut with adjustable height or the Access cutaway for the Les Paul were quite good. But no one wants them. It's a blessing and a curse for the company.

Yeah that's a probabaly a more fair and measured take on it

It's funny how some brands are forever nailed for good or ill to their core aesthetic. Marshall can't really stray too far from what people to expect. If they released an amp that was distinctly American in tone or sounded like an Engl people would wtf pretty hard at it. If it can't be dialled to sound like an 800 then folks will throw an undignified bitchfit over it

Yep, it's the same thing with Marshall. Forget about tone, if the knobs are on top of the head like a JCM600, people won't like it. Or even if the panel is not gold or silver The iconic companies are pretty tied to their tone and aesthetics.

Fender gets a little bit more leeway, since their guitars were modded so often by iconic players. So a strat with bridge HB is not necessarily shunned upon, for example.
But they can't go much further than that. For example, almost every attempt of making a Fender set-neck guitar has failed. The Fender Esprit was a great guitar and failed miserably. The Showmaster is somewhat accepted, but not much when compared to their core models.

I think the best strategy for these companies is the multi-brand environment they developed. Gibson can release different ideas into the Epiphone or Kramer brands with much less resistance. Same with Fender under EVH, Jackson, Guild etc....

If Gibson had released this guitar as a US made Kramer Assault, people would have been a lot more receptive. They could even throw a Floyd on it and it would still sell.

I guess it's like McDonald's trying to sell pizza