Losing their F#$%^&* minds!!!!!

[VitaminG]

Yup. 2 minutes of my life I'll never get back...

it's like pissing into the wind

hey lefty, you haven't presented any facts in this thread. It has all been anecdotal

[VitaminG]

Long and the short of it is this. I love the way Les Pauls look, would prolly kill for a real '59.... But after months of trying brand new ones there is no reason that they should be as expensive as they are. It's sad that they charge as much as they do... and no boxy frets may not be a QC thing, lose frets are and not only did mine have this issue, three of the 5 Gibson I played yesterday did. Point is.... sadly I've just been seeing and playing import guitars that play better for far less money.... Even sadder is that Fender another US company doesn't have these problems... and they're still a quarter the price of a Les Paul Standard. To top things off look at what Gibson calls innovative and new.... the sherman explorer? At close to $4000 it's a total POS. I don't care who designed or endorsed it... it's fugly. Gibson fans can say what they want, actual players should shy away from these overpriced pieces of garbage... and leave them to the collector and players who `need`a Gibson to be good... Me I`ll be good on a freakin squier affinity strat... so eat a D*ck. Report me if you want, I could really care less.

you can buy a brand new production Gibson for around a grand. Same with a Fender. Both companies also sell guitars for a helluva lot more. Fender have their own $4000+ guitars. And people have been saying for years that the Japanese Fenders are better quality than the US ones. So they may not be a the shining example you suggest.

And why all the hostility? People should eat a dick? You're expecting people to report you for expressing an opinion here?

[roodyrocker]

This is what I've been saying since the thread began!!! And at the price they charge for a guitar any of these issues is a crying shame! Over a new Les Paul hell yes I would take any of my Ibanez guitars or my Kramers or My Jackson!! I've been trying to tell everyone on here that these Quality Control issues are the norm now. It's not a fantasy my friends.

Well, being that I have several newer Les Pauls I can say from first hand experience that QC issues are not the norm. That is unless I happened to buy every exception they made. Not putting you or your opinion down I'm just stating my own experience with more than just one guitar from them.

Yeah I should let it go becuase people on here call facts Like Q.C., neck breackage and wildy over priced"Anecdotal."

I wasn't one of those that said that. But I did state that I don't believe the neck breakage issue happening merely hanging on a guitar stand and I stand by that. I still say that guitar had to have suffered a hit/drop and no one is admitting they did it. Guitars don't usually suffer spontaneous neck breaks like that.

Long and the short of it is this. I love the way Les Pauls look, would prolly kill for a real '59.... But after months of trying brand new ones there is no reason that they should be as expensive as they are. It's sad that they charge as much as they do... and no boxy frets may not be a QC thing, lose frets are and not only did mine have this issue, three of the 5 Gibson I played yesterday did. Point is.... sadly I've just been seeing and playing import guitars that play better for far less money.... Even sadder is that Fender another US company doesn't have these problems... and they're still a quarter the price of a Les Paul Standard. To top things off look at what Gibson calls innovative and new.... the sherman explorer? At close to $4000 it's a total POS. I don't care who designed or endorsed it... it's fugly. Gibson fans can say what they want, actual players should shy away from these overpriced pieces of garbage... and leave them to the collector and players who `need`a Gibson to be good... Me I`ll be good on a freakin squier affinity strat... so eat a D*ck. Report me if you want, I could really care less.

See, to me its the real '59 Les Pauls that are overpriced. You really think a real '59 Les Paul sounds $2-300K better than a newer model, or any other year for that matter? I don't. Gibson sells Les Pauls in various price ranges, they're not all $4K. The Studios are much cheaper and some sig models are much more than that. I think I'm an actual player, as well as collector, and while Jacksons are my favorites I still enjoy playing my Les Pauls out live as well. And I can assure you they are by no means pieces of garbage.

[Shawn Lutz]

Wait a minute here Rudy....are you saying you actually use a Gibson Les Paul live on stage to make music? How can that be? Has that ever happened before?

This thread is a trip. If you don't like xyz brand why waste all the every talking about it? Just play what works for you.

[Lucifarion]

I understand that Gibson does make guitars in the thousand dollar range.. They're called Melody Makers and Studios. If it appeases the audience one of the best playing (not sounding) Gibsons I've played recently was a Melody Maker. As for the studios, they are really nothing special and I would rather have a high end Epiphone then a Gibson studio... Cause really a studio is nothing more then a mid-quality Epiphone Standard without binding... that say Gibson on the headstock (and it's not even MOP it's gold print screened). It's not that I hate Gibsons' it's just that they're not as good as what you'd expect for the kinda cash they expect you to fork over, again I've owned a few and have been disappointed by all of them unless I dump cash into them (new pick-ups, fret work etc). More so since I've found better playing and sounding Les Pauls (outta the box as they say) from Epiphone (I just sold a MIK Classic Plus that blew every Gibson I've played or owned outta the water.... stock).... sad but true. I have really come to believe that playing a Gibson is kind of like driving a Ferrari it's a status thing. If you like your Gibson great, I just don't get the draw anymore. Even if the concerns Lefty has put forth are anecdotal there are valid QC issues.... I have seen everything from crooked binding, bad frets, paint over-spray, improperly plek'd nuts, poor cut and carve quality on the tops (yes I know they're CNC'd and not hand made anymore... maybe they need to adjust they're settings to get better carves), runs in the paint that were sanded and buffed flat but were still noticeable to the naked eye, scratchy pots, lose pots, and sharp edges on frets and saddles. These are things that are not anecdotal, these are QC issues, and yes I checked for B-stock stickers lol. I can't speak for neck breakage while sitting on a stand.... that would indicate a much bigger problem like there was not enough glue on the tennon. I understand that Fender US was out-shined by Fender Japan.... hence the reason Fender shut them down. What I am saying is I can get an outta the box MIA standard strat for a grand... it will have nice smooth frets with no sharp edges, the pot's will be clean, the paint will be flawless, and it will sound like a strat... Or I can drop a grand on a Gibson Les Paul Studio... and it will have thin sounding pick-ups (with or without coil tapping), boxy and sharp frets, baked maple fretboards (not even rosewood), with crap action. I know what I expect for my money.... and that is something that will awe me. I pick-up a new strat or US Jackson or Charvel, and I'm blown away. I'm not with Gibsons, they just don`t sound or feel right to me I`ve played classic Gibsons and they were incredible.... the new ones just don`t awe me.

[paulbag]

Wow...this threads still going...

[vector]

Right?

[toejam]

and the pick-ups sounded tinny and thin. I talked the guy at the shop into doing a full fret job, and adjusting the pick-ups to try to get it right... and the pick-ups had a slightly richer tone after he fiddled with the poles.

So adjusting pickups up and down, and also their pole pieces up and down, to get a specific sound or string balance, is now a quality control issue that you had to have someone else do when you could have easily done it yourself?

[Nimitz]

^ burn...

[leftykingv2]

Well, being that I have several newer Les Pauls I can say from first hand experience that QC issues are not the norm. That is unless I happened to buy every exception they made. Not putting you or your opinion down I'm just stating my own experience with more than just one guitar from them.



I wasn't one of those that said that. But I did state that I don't believe the neck breakage issue happening merely hanging on a guitar stand and I stand by that. I still say that guitar had to have suffered a hit/drop and no one is admitting they did it. Guitars don't usually suffer spontaneous neck breaks like that.



See, to me its the real '59 Les Pauls that are overpriced. You really think a real '59 Les Paul sounds $2-300K better than a newer model, or any other year for that matter? I don't. Gibson sells Les Pauls in various price ranges, they're not all $4K. The Studios are much cheaper and some sig models are much more than that. I think I'm an actual player, as well as collector, and while Jacksons are my favorites I still enjoy playing my Les Pauls out live as well. And I can assure you they are by no means pieces of garbage.

Someone else on the forum said their neck broke in the stand not me so get your facts straight. I agree 100% with you on that. All of the breaks I have seen have been from a fall or a hit or my one buddy who was so dumb he stepped on it in a drunken stupor. Things like that aren't Gibsons fault. That just falls right under abuse/ misuse clause in the warranty. I will say this though, I have seen Fender, Jackson, ESP, Kramer and a myriad of other guitar necks that take a hit or fall way better than any Gibson and that's a fact.

[Chad]

Things I've learned in this thread:

1. Adjusting pickups is a quality control matter.
2. Knocking guitars in the floor, smashing guitars into walls, etc. and causing damage is a quality control issue.
3. A guitar being body heavy, neck heavy, or even perfectly balanced is a quality control issue.
4. Crowning frets in a certain style is purely a quality control issue.
5. 59' Les Pauls are underpriced (most well over 6 figures), yet late model Les Pauls (most well under 5 figures) are overpriced.
6. Les Paul headstocks break if you so much as look at them.
7. Every Les Paul made in the last 40 years has quality control issues.
8. Les Pauls should first and foremost be designed to be adverse to destruction with no regard for tradition, tone, or anything else.

....

[leftykingv2]

it's like pissing into the wind

hey lefty, you haven't presented any facts in this thread. It has all been anecdotal

Neither have you! You just happen to be one of those people who thinks their opinion is factual. I can sit here and say everything you and your"Bro's" on here have said is anecdotal as well .

[leftykingv2]

Things I've learned in this thread:

1. Adjusting pickups is a quality control matter.
2. Knocking guitars in the floor, smashing guitars into walls, etc. and causing damage is a quality control issue.
3. A guitar being body heavy, neck heavy, or even perfectly balanced is a quality control issue.
4. Crowning frets in a certain style is purely a quality control issue.
5. 59' Les Pauls are underpriced (most well over 6 figures), yet late model Les Pauls (most well under 5 figures) are overpriced.
6. Les Paul headstocks break if you so much as look at them.
7. Every Les Paul made in the last 40 years has quality control issues.
8. Les Pauls should first and foremost be designed to be adverse to destruction with no regard for tradition, tone, or anything else.

....

Very funny! I like how far you took it!

[CowboyFromHell]

Hey Lefty, you think you got hit hard here? Jump over to the Les Paul forums with the same "stories" you presented here and see how hard you get roasted.

[Amerturk]

As mentioned, my QC issue was with one guitar. I was pissed, attempted to return it but it was the last one so I kept it and got a discount.

Here were my issues...
~Upon arrival, guitar was tuned about 3x over 440.
~The neck needed an adjustment not for personal preferrence, but so the strings wouldn't rattle on the frets
~The action was way off...just for normal playing, not just to fit my style
~The new pots were so stiff, it took two hands to turn them...all of them.
~The guitar had been opened at one point and it was missing the plastic to protect it and missing some paperwork (case candy)
~The guitar was so damn sticky to the touch with some unknown residue that it took a day to clean off. I don't know what it was, but it was real gummy.

So my opinions are based on this one guitar only. This stuff could have been handled at the factory before it was sent out IMO And with such a trusted name as Gibson, this never should have happened.