Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by Rocco Crocco, Jun 20, 2019.
While most of the up and coming bands I have seen live lately are playing Fenders (could be a genre thing, but F is winning them over), ‘Vintage’ by Trev Wilkinson bridge guy is working to sell in to touring indy acts. Free use of gear ready for them
on arrival in major cities, etc.
Very close but tweaked SG,LP, 335 etc
Imagine if they had done a video that made the same point about IP, but was a bit self-deprecating and fun. This was a gigantic missed opportunity for Gibson. Their marketing department appears to be completely out of touch.
Agnesi is probably done as the face of the brand. I actually feel bad for him.
Here’s a bit of a rational take on the whole thing.
Two years ago I wanted a Gibson SG...the real deal, binding, trapezoids, pearl inlay, etc. I tested a few and wasn't digging it. Ended up with a PRS Mira, which was kind of like an SG/Special hybrid. Excellent quality guitar but it is super beefy sounding.
Was thinking of moving that along and getting a Tribute Special. I got a Tribute LP last year and really like it. Thought P90's would be fun. Now I'm thinking of a Yamaha Revstar instead.
Make sure you try the Revstar first. I didn’t like the neck.
I've thought about getting one of their 335's several times, but I hate how off-kilter it feels with the upper 'mouse ear' being so much higher
their strats on the other hand (especially with their custom shop options) I wouldn't mind grabbing one
I originally thought this was going to go down like the Bud Light "Dilly Dilly" thing, where there was a cease and desist for a microbrewery using that phrase:
They actually have the scroll framed and up on their wall...got invited to Bud Light's Superbowl suite and everything.
I think the issue is that it's TOO commonplace and making that aggressive video certainly didn't help their cause. If they genuinely feel they have a case they should've done so quietly.
Our trademark attorney urged me to file a claim against IK for using "AXE I/O". I declined because I don't think it's an egregious violation and IK seems like a bunch of nice guys.
The only people that win in these sorts of things are the lawyers. There's not a lot of money in the MI business anymore. It's best if we all just try to play fair and get along.
Absolutely. The one time I played it the guitar was horribly set up. I need to find a few more examples to get a better baseline. I'm not super picky about necks, but I just don't like the thin cheap feeling import necks, like on Reverends or Classic Vibes or PRS SE Wide Thin. I can do Gibson Slim Taper, Fender modern C, PRS Pattern Thin, etc.
I actually like the PRS Mira a lot and it would be pretty much perfect if it didn't sound so bad plugged in. The neck is nicely beefy and comfortable, locking tuners and hardware are great, very solid guitar. But I've had half a dozen pickups in there and none of them clicked. So while I could try some other humbucker sized P90's I got a feeling it's going to end up as uninspiring as the rest.
Sorry about that little rant ya'll, made a complete ass of myself... the above is a good example of why you don't get on here while you've been drinking...
EXACTLY. They could have had some fun with it, not come off as half-assed wiseguys and garnered some good will for the brand. The whole thing is mind-blowingly tone deaf. If Agnesi conceived and scripted the thing (which I doubt), they need to cut him loose.
My concern is that he was only reading something scripted by the lawyers, but they'll scapegoat him to try and save face.
I don't think it's sticky. Buy what you like, and if your intent is to not help fund the lawsuit and promote their current behavior, buying used accomplishes that.
None of us are famous enough that being seen with a G!bs#n on our headstock is going to spur sales.
I agree, Agnesi is finished. No one will take this muppet seriously again.
As for Gibson, as a corporate entity, what they've done is mind boggling. This will do major damage.
It would be like McDonalds telling off anyone who orders a burger elsewhere, or Marshall having a crack at any guitarist who puts an amp head on a 4x12. Some things are just so ubiquitous, they become public domain.
This is what happens when corporate goons spend too much time around the meeting table. What a pack of nitwits.
I watched the video. I think we’re overreacting. I never liked the guy to start with but this isn’t his fault and he shouldn’t have been asked to do this.
Son, you don't have to be Warren Buffet to look around you and see that the vast majority if guitars out there were made overseas by businesses run by astute marketing experts and companies who know how to make and market a superior product for a reasonable price.
Walk into any used music store and look at the hundreds of guitars hanging on the wall. The percentage of them that are domestic is embarrassing.
My "sweeping generalization" is obviously, to anyone with any level of cognizance at all, a reality.
I have had plenty enough education in business to know that in order to sell a product you have to 1) sell it at a price that makes people want to part with their money for ( which is a very basic marketing concept) and 2) if you are not the only company making that product, you have to be competitive.
Considering that during the 1990s I read more than one article that said that Samick was making more than 70% of the guitars sold under various names, I seriously doubt if that figure has gone down, other than the fact that it isn't just Samick now, there are apparently even more manufacturers in Asian countries churning out high quality instruments.
This isn't about what I play or what any individual plays, it is about simple economics and common sense. If you are going to sell a cost prohibitive item, it better be cost prohibitive for a substantial reason. Particularly if it is item that is a tool or a toy, which is pretty much the range of what guitars are, items for self enjoyment or for turning a buck.
If a similar item that is just as well made, if not better, is being sold far cheaper, it is quite obvious the market is going to shift toward what the buying public is more likely to be able to afford.
Which once again, isn't rocket surgery.
Something that I think Fender realized and counted on also is that there is indeed a market for entry level instruments, which was also very obvious at the time. No doubt a large chunk of new guitars sold are for a kid at Christmas who wanted to be a "rock star" and now whatever is popular, pop star or country star, and thought guitar would be easy to learn.
Squier filled both needs because they were inexpensive enough to be a present for a kid ( or for a kid to save his money and buy) but at the same time was easily high enough quality to be used professionally.
The fact is that your response to me applies to yourself more than me. Just because you are willing to pay a lot of money for the name on a headstock and the shape of the headstock doesn't mean everyone else is. Most guitar players just want to play guitar.
And as I said earlier, there is a new generation that doesn't give a rats ass about what Jimmy Page or Dickie Betts or Steve Marriott played, there is a whole new bunch of celebrity musicians they follow, many of whom are not playing domestic guitars, and of those who are are choosing brands other than Gibson or Fender.
Something that also hasn't been mentioned here is that there are luthiers all over the globe, a lot in the united states, who you can walk into their shops and sit down and talk with the builder and he will build you a custom fit guitar, to your specs. A company charging thousands of dollars for just one guitar is also competing with that.
Again, this isn't rocket surgery. Gibson is, as I say, still trying to sell Rolls Royces in a Honda Accord economy. And guys are not driving to their cell phone store job in Rolls Royces.
Something also not mentioned here is the fact that Gibsons instruments are in a price range that has them competing with independant botique luthiers, not mass producers of guitars, and Dean is not generally considered to be a boutique guitar , they are obviously a mass producer of guitars.
Think about what bad psychology it is for a company with boutique pricing to be suing a mass producer of a similar product over design.
In my opinion, and this is indeed an opinion, Gibson is sending a mixed message, because they seem to be conveying the message that mass producers are a threat to their boutique priced instruments.
Again, very bad psychology. Using the car analogy once again, I doubt Rolls Royce ever concerned themselves that a couple of cheap Dodges had tail lights that looked like theirs.
I’m not your “son”.
Great post. I like that.