This. I really like Gibson electric guitars and the sound that a great many players get from them. I find them visually appealing - some are just stunning beauties. I have played and owned a few examples of Gibson electric's over the years that I really liked (a Custom Shop Les Paul R4, the R4 was an extraordinary guitar - a '61 SG Reissue, lightweight and just a great sounding rock guitar - a Custom Shop ES-339, similar sound to the aforementioned SG Reissue with a bit more versatility). As tempted as I was to purchase each of these guitars I decided to pass - not because of QC issues or factory setup but because I know that they wouldn't see much use. I generally prefer bolt-on neck guitars with medium lightweight bodies. I cut my teeth on alder bodied Strat's and that's what my ears prefer. This isn't a Gibson thing. Every set neck electric I have owned over the past ~40 years has eventually been sold because I eventually stop playing them in favor of the bolt-on neck guitars that I owned/played at the time. I have to agree with Robot B9 though - the QC issues that plague Gibson guitars are simply unacceptable. I have picked up Custom Shop Les Paul's that sounded amazing but would have required several hundred dollars in fret work and a properly cut nut just to play comfortably and to stay in tune. Most Gibson electric guitars that I have demo'd would require a new nut due to being improperly cut nut at the factory. I've seen electronics issues that I could easily overlook as I would have been able to address them at home for little to no extra $$. I find these issues unacceptable though as many buyers may not be able to, or may not be comfortable with, resolving electronics issues on their own, nor should anyone ever have to on a brand new guitar. There's simply no excuse for allowing $1,000+ production guitars and $2,500+ custom shop guitars to leave the factory with intermittent and non-working electronics. None whatsoever. It's worth mentioning that Gibson's value brand Epiphone manufactures guitars with far fewer QC issues by far than the U.S. built Gibson guitars. The closest analog to Gibson in the guitar world is Paul Reed Smith. Most every core PRS guitar leaves the factory with a good setup and free of any QC issues. Even their mid-level (PRS S2) and value(PRS SE) guitars come well set up and free of QC issues. If PRS can do this at comparable pricing why is Gibson seemingly incapable of doing so? I personally don't care much about poor setup on production instruments, whether Gibson or any other brand, as I perform a setup on most guitars I acquire to suit my playing. Many players spend good money out-of-pocket to have their guitars set up for the same reason. Just the same - there is no excuse for a poor factory setup on a $1,000+ guitar I have no comment on Gibson's acoustic guitars except to say that the relative few that I have picked up to play sounded great and played comfortably with no obvious issues. I have no comment on Martin acoustic guitars as I've not spent enough time playing them to form an opinion.