GIbby shapes?

[jr73]

why is it Jackson & BCRich can NOT make gibby shapes, but most Hamers are basically gibby copies. does hamer pay gibson....

& did Jackson stop making them before or after the fender thing....if its after thats BS.

[mm2002]

Re: GIbby shapes?

It's because the Gibby shape sucks and is uncomfortable to play. OK LP fans, flame away!! [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[ChickenScratch]

Re: GIbby shapes?

To each his own man, I love the LP, Explorer and flying V shapes a lot. The SG I don't dig.

[Shawn Lutz]

Re: GIbby shapes?

Originally posted by mm2002:
It's because the Gibby shape sucks and is uncomfortable to play. OK LP fans, flame away!! [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">not the Firebird, Jackson FB tho [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[toejam]

Re: GIbby shapes?

Hamer just makes them better than Gibson! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[Newc]

Re: GIbby shapes?

If you directly compare Hamer's V and Explorer shapes to Gibson's, you will see the distinct horn angle differences which keeps Hamer from violating Gibson's trademark/design. While they cast similar shadows, they are not identical, and Gibson can't touch them for that.
Given Fender's high-profile (side by side with Gibson), Gibson had to get tough with Jackon's use of their body styles, even if (as Kevin Easton said before) Jackson found a "loophole" in the design like Hamer, Gibson would tie up production in court even if they knew they couldn't win, simply because of Fender's distribution muscle. That muscle could deliver Jackson Explorers, rounded Vs, and Firebirds to every corner of the free world better, faster, and cheaper than Gibson wants to.

Newc