Absolutely. I've been hearing this Gibson argument for 30+ years now and yet, they're still here and they're still selling. Especially since the advent of the original series.
I don’t think young people outside of the metal genre want “new age” looking guitars, they want quirky, unique guitars. Or offsets or F-type guitars, because that’s what the people they listen to are playing.
That's one thing, but being ridiculously overpriced for something that's been standard for decades is another. People say Strandberg are overpriced (they are), but at least they're a frontline in something new. That somewhat justifies it. And as far as what people "want", it's mostly just quality and variety in spec. Gibson are anathema to variety lol that's why the only people who buy them buy like two dozen and treat them like stock investments
@@Vkiller711 All the iconic guitar shapes originated from Gibson and Fender; other brands often replicate or iterate upon them. These classic designs have lasted through time and are still sought after today. For those seeking unconventional shapes, there are numerous options available. So I don't know why there are still people trying to push Gibson to do something different? Let them be!
Heavy fragile and crazy expensive is a very bad combination. Add poor workmanship and the fact they will not stay in tune . $ 5000? Only for the posers
@danieljdtaylor I looked at 2(3rd one was gonna be a modern, but there was a headstock repair on it already) brand new Les Paul Standards, all costing $2699, the first one was egregious, there was a 5mm gap about 1.5 inches long that wasn’t stained like the rest of the body connecting to the binding. The other one was actually really beautiful aswell, but it played worse. Compared to the other $2600 guitars, off the shelf, I was very disappointed. I just hate thick necks, tiny frets, and every Gibson I’ve ever tried has had high action. Gibsons just aren’t for me, if people like them, I’m happy it makes them happy, but I just don’t get what they like about them.
Gibson thinks "they" are the company that dictated the 50's, 60's & 70's stereo typical "sex, drugs and rock'n roll" life style. They never took into account, it was the musicians that played their brand of instruments, (tool) & Fenders instruments to create the music for a few generations to change the world. They stopped being a company and became a corporation if you ask me.
Gibson is playing the mind game of "it's only good enough if you go custom shop" because thats how they produce... the custom shop qualitiy is great and the guitars sound and play great. everything below that is an actual step down in quality. If you spend the 3k for a standard on an ESP E-II eclipse, you basically get the +5k custom shop quality on a much more affordable guitar. Only difference is that the collectors won't care about you with your Eclipse on stage. Deep down I'll always be a Gibson Fanboy, but with my current income, the 2k$ Nametag ain't something I wanna pay for the quality I expect.
This is an excellent point mate, and another example of how competitive the market is. As a player/working musician, the ESP E-II is a much more attractive prospect, but a collector would always go Gibson custom shop.
I have a 1999 Les paul standard I bought in 99 slightly used for $900 .. played that guitar in bands for 20 years .. no fender can even come close to it and I have a lot of fenders ! I also don’t play quilly electronic or boxes pretending to be amps .. I still use my Marshall jcm800 !
You could buy a secondhand Gibson LP Standard for the price of the Epiphone Greeny! Btw its not known as the Gibson book matched headstock its actual called the Gibson open book headstock.
Good point, and thank you for the correction! I think that’s part of the problem though, why buy the Epiphone when you could get some new Gibsons or a great used one for the same price? The Epiphone is just not what we asked for.
lots of low-end gibbys out there.no reason to spend a fortune it isn't going make you better.the more you play em the better they are because you get to know how to get what you want from your git
I bought a newish 2021 SG Std last year for $1100, and its proved to be a good one. But agree, its hard to justify buying a Gibson when decentTeles and Strats are everywhere for much less, not to mention all the LP inspired brands like ESP, etc. Back in the late 70s/early 80s we didnt have a choice of good imports, I couldn't afford a Fender much less a Gibson so I played a $300 Carvin thru a pawn shop 70s Peavey for years. Still have that rig. At this point a Gibson is a luxury for us old farts.
A $300 carvin sounds fun! I think the fact there are so many alternatives for a competitive price is a great point as to why Gibson isn’t what it once was.
In all types of industries, watches, shoes, or anything else really when something is hand made the craftsmanship always surpasses the more, machine made products, and that also happens with some guitar brands, not with Gibson thoe, in that case, it's the exact opposite, the human factor it's not used to take the instrument to the next level, but to justify imperfections, which is just ridiculous
Problem is, Gibson isn't even that "good gear" as far as QC is concerned. It's difficult to find one that stays in tune out of the box really. It's a collector showpiece. A "street cred" you can buy and flex to your buddies.
Very Cool, Thankyou. I don't own any Gibsons. But have a couple of early 2000's Epiphone SG's and 4 Artist Guitars Gibson copies, an AP59 'Apricot Burst' LP, an LP59 'Cherry Sunburst' LP , an AP58J 'TV yellow Junior' and a Cherry58 335 copy. All guitars purchased at discounted prices with Hardcases and Total well under $1000-. All these guitars are amazing and all I need. Awesome Finish, build quality and playability. All the Best. Cheers
Artist make great stuff, and you raise a fair point. Those guitars are so good for the money, maybe there’s no need to spend $$$$ on an actual Gibson when you can get a good guitar for real cheap.
I get the idea of looking at a company strategy and have an opinion on it, what I am confused about is why on hearth does it even matter? I always thought that you should choose an instrument on its qualities and how it fits your playing style, how it feel in your hands. For example I remember a friend falling in love with a G&L and buying it instead of a Fender back in the late 80's, it wasn't about price, it was the sound and the neck. Give and take it's 40 years that the myth of only Fender and Gibson have quality has been busted, if you have budget constrains just get a second hand and you have lots to choose from from the last 30-40 years. Lastly remember that even if you have 2 guitars exactly the same model, same specs, same year, they will be different, one will be better than the other.
These are some good points, but I think the competitive market these days means that Gibson needs to try and be a bit more competitive too. You can go so many good guitars for insane prices, maybe it’s time for Gibson to bring something a bit more competitive to the table 🤷♂️
Exactly why when I got the itch for black LP Custom, I bought the "inspired By Gibson" Epi version. $799 all in with a HS case back in 2020 and, it's been a great guitar. Nothing against Gibson players but, if I bought the Gibson version for $5k+, I am not sure it would get used at all just because of the cost alone.
I PLAY my Gibsons. I don't give a shit what they cost. They are guitars and made to be played. They arn't for people who can't afford them, obviously. Shit you can get a Squire and a Stage Right for 600$ out the door and be in amazing shape! This is the greatest day and age for good cheap gear ever. But if you can affford a Gibson and Gibsons make you tick buy Gibsons. I absolutely LOVE Gibsons! I like the way they sound. I like the way they feel and I like the way they look. I set up all my guitars to play the way I like them to and the plecked Gibsons set up fantasticly .
Anyone that knows how to work on their own guitar is fortunate to have current companies like Harley Benton, and a few others now. You can literally buy good bones for $200, swap some parts, do a set up, and have a better guitar for $600, than you could buy for $2k+. They are robbing people. Many think that high price is directly related to QC, or Sound. IT’S NOT.
I play and modify all of my 28 Gibsons. Not a single stock guitar in the bunch. Fender has always tried appealing to entry level players, and Gibson has always been the opposite until recent years. They still remain the largest supplier of American made guitars with the cheapest options. It's hard to get a made in the USA anything for $1000 anymore. And people have been saying Gibson won't appeal to the next generation for ages. Yet here we are. Again.
I’d be interested to know how long that argument has been thrown around! Because it seems there has always been a huge, modern guitar hero playing Gibson up until now. The only one I can think of that young people really like is Dave Grohl, I’d love to hear more that I’ve forgotten though!
you got something confused here: we are still speaking about only two generations of Gibson players, basically. There is the boomers and then there is Gen X. Both these generations grew up with their heros playing Made in US guitars and essentially either they aspired to owning one of those guitars for years or they bought one of those guitars with their "first real money" or summer job money or whatnot - we all know these kind of stories, right? Millenials, like myself, we grew up with importstuff being more and more normal and becoming the consumer level stuff. Because of that, we also are the first generation where "collecting" guitars became way more serious and most guitarists who keep playing for a few years own not only one or two but six or seven guitars. That was something near unthinkable back in the 80s or 90s, other than for big professional players. Why have one Gibson when I can have three Epiphones and a Squier (or any of the myriad of other brands) instead? Are millenials still playing Gibsons? Yeah they do. But to a way way way smaller degree than the old farts. In my circle (working in a concert venue in europe as live engeneer, having done hundreds and hundreds of shows) Gibsons are often referred to as "midlife crisis" or "quarterlife crisis guitars" - something guys (and only guys) buy to "treat themselves" while only ever playing it at home because they gave up on playing in a band ten years ago when they entered the job market. Thats basically a softer version of the often (and not incorrectly) repeated "dentists guitar" label people apply to Gibsons, and it not only applies to the iconic guitars of the 50s and 60s - so what the boomers aspired to, but to all the flying Vs, the explorers and the 80s signature stuff as well - the gen x guitars. I find it very telling that Gibson seems to know that about their brand themselves: just look at their signature/endorsee rooster since the bancruptcy. they try to get their share of midlife crisis nostalgia money from these people BIG TIME.
@@ithembaThis is honestly a really good point. Way back when, you would basically buy one guitar because they were fucking expensive. Then artists would "make it" or... get old, and overtime collect guitars for one reason or another as they got less costly compared to their earnings. The truth is that musicians today have no need to pay 1K, 1.5K, 2K+ for their first usable guitar (adjusted for inflation the first solid bodies retailed for 1-2.5K if I'm not wrong). Nowadays, musicians earn less and guitars are cheaper. It's a no-brainer for most. Especially when there's much more variety in specs. I'm not even into "modern" guitars, I just like flatter fretboards, thin-wide necks and tall stainless steel frets.
@danieljdtaylor I just know that the advent of the super Strat back in the 70's and 80's when now you had way more options in color and shape, people thought Gibson would die out. And every time there's a resurgence for tradition at some point. It's a cycle. Currently Gibson is pulling in players from Hammet to Mustaine to appeal to those older players. They're just adapting to the time like all brands. Young people today will eventually get their Gibson to put in their collection. Ebb and flow. The original collection put them right back in the map in sales.
@ithemba That’s a really good point mate and something that would’ve been worth touching on in my video if I had of thought of it. Great to hear a unique take on it!
Good points raised here. Ironically, Gibson has been better at hitting the working musician price point in the past. The faded special series was great. I have heard QC can be spotty, but I still have an ‘05 SG special faded I bought in the late 00’s for $550 and it’s great. I put it through the wringer, gigging it all over with the stock thin crappy gig bag. It’s never even needed a truss rod or saddle adjustment in well over a decade. They seem to be moving way more towards the legacy cork sniffer crowd. It’s a shame because a good no frills Gibson can be an amazing working class instrument.
I have a G L tribute Fallout & Jim Root Squire Tele. I feel my set up is as good as any working guitar set ups. I've had a Gibson Les Paul & a Hondo 2 from the way back. I didn't care for a Gibson Les Paul. All the way from Liverpool UK
This is weird because I just watched a video from the RUclipsr Agufish who visited Sweetwater. He said 3 out of 5 guitars leaving Sweetwater were gibsons. He was shocked. I guess somebody is buying them.
I saw a similar comment to this before and it’s a fair point. Apparently 34% of the market share last year in guitar sales in the US was Gibson and its subsidiaries, that’s the highest market share of any other brand. So they are selling well, but I’m willing to bet they’re selling well to older collectors, and not a lot of working musicians or young people make up that market share. That’s the point I’m trying to make but maybe didn’t get across well; they sell very well the collectors, but there’s little longevity in that when young people won’t want to collect them in future because not many musicians they like are playing them.
cheers for giving my comment the time of day. people treat gibson guitars like bars of gold. old heads are scouring reverb spending 10 grand on a guitar hoping that its worth 20 grand in 10 years. If someone wants a Gibson vibe just get a PRS, although i feel PRS is starting to go the gibson route unfortunately
I agree. It's a vintage style giutar company. Gibson should keep catering to the adult. What's the issue? What does anyone who's not interested in Gibson guitars care what happends to them?
I like Gibsons but I agree that their pricing has gotten out of control. They also need to get away from their penchant for tradition over everything else. I applaud them for finally offering more color options than just a shade of brown wood-grained stain. Now if they can only add a few pickup options beside just humbuckers or P90s and think about fixing the headstock angle and add a volute on the Modern range. They can keep the traditionals and standards the same, but by offering the modern with a modern more durable and functional headstock people would be less afraid to actually play them rather than keep them in cases for fear of damage. Also, the humbuckeror P90 only thing really constrains their appeal to people that want to play varieties of rock or heavier music. Fender offers all kind of options on the pickup front, equips all of their guitars with the correct Fender headstock, has some set-neck options, and does so all at more affordable price points. I’m a traditionalist and like my LPs and SGs just the way they are, but if Gibson wants to remain relevant they must break with their habit of dismissing anything that doesn’t fit in the existing canon as not being authentic. It is possible to be both authentic and innovative.
I agree mate, no one is asking them to give up their traditional and classic models, because they’re great. But ONLY doing that stuff doesn’t make for long term viability. I mean even fender push innovation, take the newish release of a new shape in the meteora in cool colours which has proven to be a pretty decent success. Gibson only needs to make minor additions to the lineup to appeal to a much wider range of players (as long as the price point is right).
I'll bet it doesn't cost Gibson more than $50.00 a piece to make that $999.00 pickup set. And as far as making an electric guitar goes, most of that process is done by CNC machines on an assembly line to include their "Custom Shop" guitars. Most of what these luthiers at Gibson are doing is assembling guitar kits made one building over from where they are.
LP's ruled the 1970's largely because Jimmy Page played one. Then in the 1980's everyone wanted a super strat mostly because of EVH. LP's we're dying then until Slash came along. When the next guitar god comes along, if he (or she) is playing a LP, Gibson will be fine.
I think I don't know one single professional or semi-professional musician playing Gibsons (and I know literally hundreds of gigging musicians). Those who actually have the doe for those kind of prices all chose to buy other brands, like Gretsch or Fender. People who want the Les Paul kinda thing overwhelmingly play ESP or LTDs. Hell, a lot of them actually spent real money on old japanese copies like the pre-lawsuit Ibanez, Burny or Greco instead of buying a Gibson for a few hundred bucks more.
No, maybe the 10k new ones or 40-50 year old gibsons are for collectors. I love the look and sound of Gibsons flyng V and explorers and in my opinion nothing can top those guitars. They have a certain feel and sound that no other Guitar has.
Sir, Please read up on the the Falcon 20. Most amp techs hate them and think the design is terrible. I really have no skin in this game, but if you look at the build quality and components it is not a solid tube amp.
I haven’t seen any of that coverage actually, but then again I didn’t go actively looking for an amp techs perspective. It seems to general consensus is that they could place well in the boutique amp market if they can prove to compete with the likes of Tone King, Bad Cat, Milkman, etc.
When you can buy a very nice sounding Squire for $120, most kids introduction to electric guitars are Strats, not Les Pauls. By the time they grow buying a Les Paul is very unlikely.
If that’s what the market thinks they’re worth, then that is what they are worth 🤷♂️ I agree it’s expensive for those model guitars, but it is what it is
Gibson had their finger at least somewhere near the pulse about a decade ago with the Standard and Custom Shop series without Murphy Lab. The standards were still good at that point and there wasn’t such a vast difference in quality and aesthetic between them and the CS. Nowadays the Standards look like toys in comparison to the ‘real thing’ of the Customs and Murphys and seem to be marketed as such .
Gibson has the largest marketshare for any manufacturer in the US for 2023 as reported by NAMM but they're for collectors? Okay....It's interesting the narratives that people create.
unpack that claim for me please. Biggest marketshare for any manufacturer in the US: does that mean the Gibson company overall including all the brands (so Epiphone and Kramer) and in contrast to Fender (including squier) - or does that mean they have the biggest share in "made in US" guitars?
Those figures would make sense though because collectors would buy and buy and buy Gibson all throughout the year with all the different high end “collector” models there are. I have no doubt those stats would be correct, but I’d be interested to see how much of that 34% buying Gibson are collectors buying multiple guitars a year, and how much of it is working musicians buying a Gibson to use as a tool, that’s the stat that really matters in the context of this video. I think you could safely say that almost all of the 30% that bought fender bought them to play them and use them as a musician’s working tool. Same with the 12% who bought Ibanez. But I’m willing to bet that a decent amount of the 34% that bought Gibson guitars were collectors who buy it for historical value and significance, and were not gigging/working musicians looking for a tool for the job. I’m not saying this is a bad thing either, but it doesn’t create longevity because it means that not many modern day guitar heroes are playing Gibson and therefore not inspiring young people to buy Gibson.
Sarcasm or not, this is probably the answer to marketing to a young audience! Young people playing them = young people who listen to them wanting Gibson guitars.
I’m a Gibson guy. You can see my avatar. You don’t need to buy the collector editions. Most Les Pauls and SGs are at the 2-3 thousand mark. No need to buy the higher end stuff if you don’t want.
I think 2-3 thousand is still a high price considering how competitive the market is. I know Gibson can always claim to be American made but I don’t think that matters to young people as much anymore.
Good point, as the point was made in my previous video on the topic though, I don’t know any young people who was watching it, heck I didn’t even know it was on. Not saying ALL young people aren’t interested in it, but I think a lot of young people have moved on from that world. It’s the nature of the world though right? The younger generations want to be antiestablishment against what their parents like (R&R HOF for example) and create their own thing that will then, in turn, be rebelled against lol!
My main takeaway from an otherwise excellent video deep dive is it sucks to buy in Australia. Over here we got what yall wanted. I'm sorry for that, but its awesome over here.
Gibsons way too expensive they need to be like PRS and schecter if they can do one for like $500 or 600 or 700 that would be fine and they would have more young players to play these guitars but the way Gibson is taking it right now. They’re making these things like expensive cars, and also only for celebrities too to buy them too.
PRS SE guitars are seriously winning at the moment in that market. You get a pretty consistent high quality guitar ready to gig consistently. You can’t say the same for Gibson/Epiphone in that price.
This is a socioeconomic thing. Period. I play Gibson because I can. What they cost really doesn't matter to me as much as it would have 20 years ago when I couldn't afford them. I think this is true of a lot of things.
I think there is definitely an element of socioeconomic status influencing it, young people in general have less money, but I think the difference is young people no longer dream of a Gibson when they eventually do have money.
Yes and I love Jimmy Page, but that doesn’t change the fact that no new modern artist is playing Gibson which means not a lot of young people are seeing Gibson on stage. See my previous video on this topic for elaboration, but as good as Jimmy Page is, he just isn’t the super hero rock god he was to the older generations. Nothing against him or his music because it’s great, but that’s just what I’ve observed across a vast cross section of young musicians.
@@danieljdtaylorYou are correct in your observation. I would add that the cost of a Les Paul is typically more than many young musician may be able to afford. Gibson LP price is steep so for a first or second or even third guitar out of reach for many. For younger musicians add Slash, Duane Betts, Dave Grohl to the list. A LP tone is still hard to beat.
@@rjb7260 I think slash and Dave grohl are genuine champions for Gibson guitars for a young audience. Slash in particular seems to never die down in popularity and was often what a lot of young kids wanted to learn back when I was teaching, if they were into rock music. The problem with Gibson’s pricing is that, most young people don’t care a whole lot about branding, so if they want a Les Paul guitar they’ll go to Epiphone, ESP, Harley Benton, or any of the other great affordable brands making clones. Sire is another brand kicking goals in that area. Because brand loyalty or brand recognition exists less with younger people, they won’t bother saving up for a Gibson when they can get a similar guitar at a high quality for much, much cheaper. This is where Epiphone makes sense as a brand but they need to make sure the price is right and the specs and finishes appeal to young people still.
@@gabrielramos5338 you get the best sounding guitars played by the greatest, most talented and iconic players in musical history. It's a shame this autotune generation doesn't care about such things but their music certainly shows it.
Gibson should stay as it is. If people want new-age-looking guitars, there are plenty of options in the market.
Absolutely. I've been hearing this Gibson argument for 30+ years now and yet, they're still here and they're still selling. Especially since the advent of the original series.
I don’t think young people outside of the metal genre want “new age” looking guitars, they want quirky, unique guitars. Or offsets or F-type guitars, because that’s what the people they listen to are playing.
That's one thing, but being ridiculously overpriced for something that's been standard for decades is another. People say Strandberg are overpriced (they are), but at least they're a frontline in something new. That somewhat justifies it.
And as far as what people "want", it's mostly just quality and variety in spec. Gibson are anathema to variety lol that's why the only people who buy them buy like two dozen and treat them like stock investments
Na comments like this is why they don’t even try, i mean why should they if they know there’s people that think like you out here
@@Vkiller711 All the iconic guitar shapes originated from Gibson and Fender; other brands often replicate or iterate upon them. These classic designs have lasted through time and are still sought after today. For those seeking unconventional shapes, there are numerous options available. So I don't know why there are still people trying to push Gibson to do something different? Let them be!
Heavy fragile and crazy expensive is a very bad combination. Add poor workmanship and the fact they will not stay in tune . $ 5000? Only for the posers
Obviously a lot of Gibson guitars have good craftsmanship and stay in tune well, but QC has been an issue in the past for sure.
@danieljdtaylor I looked at 2(3rd one was gonna be a modern, but there was a headstock repair on it already) brand new Les Paul Standards, all costing $2699, the first one was egregious, there was a 5mm gap about 1.5 inches long that wasn’t stained like the rest of the body connecting to the binding. The other one was actually really beautiful aswell, but it played worse. Compared to the other $2600 guitars, off the shelf, I was very disappointed. I just hate thick necks, tiny frets, and every Gibson I’ve ever tried has had high action. Gibsons just aren’t for me, if people like them, I’m happy it makes them happy, but I just don’t get what they like about them.
Gibson thinks "they" are the company that dictated the 50's, 60's & 70's stereo typical "sex, drugs and rock'n roll" life style. They never took into account, it was the musicians that played their brand of instruments, (tool) & Fenders instruments to create the music for a few generations to change the world. They stopped being a company and became a corporation if you ask me.
Gibson is playing the mind game of "it's only good enough if you go custom shop" because thats how they produce... the custom shop qualitiy is great and the guitars sound and play great. everything below that is an actual step down in quality. If you spend the 3k for a standard on an ESP E-II eclipse, you basically get the +5k custom shop quality on a much more affordable guitar.
Only difference is that the collectors won't care about you with your Eclipse on stage.
Deep down I'll always be a Gibson Fanboy, but with my current income, the 2k$ Nametag ain't something I wanna pay for the quality I expect.
This is an excellent point mate, and another example of how competitive the market is. As a player/working musician, the ESP E-II is a much more attractive prospect, but a collector would always go Gibson custom shop.
I have a 1999 Les paul standard I bought in 99 slightly used for $900 .. played that guitar in bands for 20 years .. no fender can even come close to it and I have a lot of fenders ! I also don’t play quilly electronic or boxes pretending to be amps .. I still use my Marshall jcm800 !
You could buy a secondhand Gibson LP Standard for the price of the Epiphone Greeny! Btw its not known as the Gibson book matched headstock its actual called the Gibson open book headstock.
Good point, and thank you for the correction! I think that’s part of the problem though, why buy the Epiphone when you could get some new Gibsons or a great used one for the same price? The Epiphone is just not what we asked for.
lots of low-end gibbys out there.no reason to spend a fortune it isn't going make you better.the more you play em the better they are because you get to know how to get what you want from your git
I bought a newish 2021 SG Std last year for $1100, and its proved to be a good one. But agree, its hard to justify buying a Gibson when decentTeles and Strats are everywhere for much less, not to mention all the LP inspired brands like ESP, etc. Back in the late 70s/early 80s we didnt have a choice of good imports, I couldn't afford a Fender much less a Gibson so I played a $300 Carvin thru a pawn shop 70s Peavey for years. Still have that rig. At this point a Gibson is a luxury for us old farts.
A $300 carvin sounds fun!
I think the fact there are so many alternatives for a competitive price is a great point as to why Gibson isn’t what it once was.
I would buy Epiphone any day. Just as good. Love all 3 of mine.
Epiphone are great, my problem is just with this new one that is the price of a Gibson.
In all types of industries, watches, shoes, or anything else really when something is hand made the craftsmanship always surpasses the more, machine made products, and that also happens with some guitar brands, not with Gibson thoe, in that case, it's the exact opposite, the human factor it's not used to take the instrument to the next level, but to justify imperfections, which is just ridiculous
Interesting take mate, I’ve never thought of it that way before!
Too expensive, too heavy. LPs are aimed at the stockbroker/lawyer/dadband market. Dadband : amateur rockers that can afford the GOOD GEAR.
Problem is, Gibson isn't even that "good gear" as far as QC is concerned. It's difficult to find one that stays in tune out of the box really. It's a collector showpiece. A "street cred" you can buy and flex to your buddies.
That’s not true. QC has been excellent last few years since new leadership took over.
ruclips.net/video/GRrHKd-oBT4/видео.htmlsi=uu8w2a2431brL6Wk 😅😅
The QC has gotten better, and all brands have some QC issues that slip through the cracks. But Gibson certainly was notorious for it at one point.
Very Cool, Thankyou. I don't own any Gibsons. But have a couple of early 2000's Epiphone SG's and 4 Artist Guitars Gibson copies, an AP59 'Apricot Burst' LP, an LP59 'Cherry Sunburst' LP , an AP58J 'TV yellow Junior' and a Cherry58 335 copy. All guitars purchased at discounted prices with Hardcases and Total well under $1000-. All these guitars are amazing and all I need. Awesome Finish, build quality and playability. All the Best. Cheers
Artist make great stuff, and you raise a fair point. Those guitars are so good for the money, maybe there’s no need to spend $$$$ on an actual Gibson when you can get a good guitar for real cheap.
I get the idea of looking at a company strategy and have an opinion on it, what I am confused about is why on hearth does it even matter? I always thought that you should choose an instrument on its qualities and how it fits your playing style, how it feel in your hands. For example I remember a friend falling in love with a G&L and buying it instead of a Fender back in the late 80's, it wasn't about price, it was the sound and the neck. Give and take it's 40 years that the myth of only Fender and Gibson have quality has been busted, if you have budget constrains just get a second hand and you have lots to choose from from the last 30-40 years. Lastly remember that even if you have 2 guitars exactly the same model, same specs, same year, they will be different, one will be better than the other.
These are some good points, but I think the competitive market these days means that Gibson needs to try and be a bit more competitive too. You can go so many good guitars for insane prices, maybe it’s time for Gibson to bring something a bit more competitive to the table 🤷♂️
Why do you have a pop filter on podcast mic?
Because when I wasn’t using it I found I was getting a lot of pops.
Exactly why when I got the itch for black LP Custom, I bought the "inspired By Gibson" Epi version. $799 all in with a HS case back in 2020 and, it's been a great guitar. Nothing against Gibson players but, if I bought the Gibson version for $5k+, I am not sure it would get used at all just because of the cost alone.
5 GRAND?!!!! Dude, that thing literally has like 20 bucks of materials in it. That is utterly bat shit insanity
I PLAY my Gibsons. I don't give a shit what they cost. They are guitars and made to be played. They arn't for people who can't afford them, obviously. Shit you can get a Squire and a Stage Right for 600$ out the door and be in amazing shape! This is the greatest day and age for good cheap gear ever. But if you can affford a Gibson and Gibsons make you tick buy Gibsons. I absolutely LOVE Gibsons! I like the way they sound. I like the way they feel and I like the way they look. I set up all my guitars to play the way I like them to and the plecked Gibsons set up fantasticly .
Anyone that knows how to work on their own guitar is fortunate to have current companies like Harley Benton, and a few others now. You can literally buy good bones for $200, swap some parts, do a set up, and have a better guitar for $600, than you could buy for $2k+.
They are robbing people.
Many think that high price is directly related to QC, or Sound. IT’S NOT.
I do agree that someone who knows what they are doing can make a guitar with good bones as good as they want!
I play and modify all of my 28 Gibsons. Not a single stock guitar in the bunch. Fender has always tried appealing to entry level players, and Gibson has always been the opposite until recent years. They still remain the largest supplier of American made guitars with the cheapest options. It's hard to get a made in the USA anything for $1000 anymore. And people have been saying Gibson won't appeal to the next generation for ages. Yet here we are. Again.
I’d be interested to know how long that argument has been thrown around! Because it seems there has always been a huge, modern guitar hero playing Gibson up until now. The only one I can think of that young people really like is Dave Grohl, I’d love to hear more that I’ve forgotten though!
you got something confused here: we are still speaking about only two generations of Gibson players, basically. There is the boomers and then there is Gen X. Both these generations grew up with their heros playing Made in US guitars and essentially either they aspired to owning one of those guitars for years or they bought one of those guitars with their "first real money" or summer job money or whatnot - we all know these kind of stories, right? Millenials, like myself, we grew up with importstuff being more and more normal and becoming the consumer level stuff. Because of that, we also are the first generation where "collecting" guitars became way more serious and most guitarists who keep playing for a few years own not only one or two but six or seven guitars. That was something near unthinkable back in the 80s or 90s, other than for big professional players. Why have one Gibson when I can have three Epiphones and a Squier (or any of the myriad of other brands) instead?
Are millenials still playing Gibsons? Yeah they do. But to a way way way smaller degree than the old farts. In my circle (working in a concert venue in europe as live engeneer, having done hundreds and hundreds of shows) Gibsons are often referred to as "midlife crisis" or "quarterlife crisis guitars" - something guys (and only guys) buy to "treat themselves" while only ever playing it at home because they gave up on playing in a band ten years ago when they entered the job market. Thats basically a softer version of the often (and not incorrectly) repeated "dentists guitar" label people apply to Gibsons, and it not only applies to the iconic guitars of the 50s and 60s - so what the boomers aspired to, but to all the flying Vs, the explorers and the 80s signature stuff as well - the gen x guitars. I find it very telling that Gibson seems to know that about their brand themselves: just look at their signature/endorsee rooster since the bancruptcy. they try to get their share of midlife crisis nostalgia money from these people BIG TIME.
@@ithembaThis is honestly a really good point. Way back when, you would basically buy one guitar because they were fucking expensive. Then artists would "make it" or... get old, and overtime collect guitars for one reason or another as they got less costly compared to their earnings.
The truth is that musicians today have no need to pay 1K, 1.5K, 2K+ for their first usable guitar (adjusted for inflation the first solid bodies retailed for 1-2.5K if I'm not wrong). Nowadays, musicians earn less and guitars are cheaper. It's a no-brainer for most. Especially when there's much more variety in specs. I'm not even into "modern" guitars, I just like flatter fretboards, thin-wide necks and tall stainless steel frets.
@danieljdtaylor I just know that the advent of the super Strat back in the 70's and 80's when now you had way more options in color and shape, people thought Gibson would die out. And every time there's a resurgence for tradition at some point. It's a cycle. Currently Gibson is pulling in players from Hammet to Mustaine to appeal to those older players. They're just adapting to the time like all brands. Young people today will eventually get their Gibson to put in their collection. Ebb and flow. The original collection put them right back in the map in sales.
@ithemba That’s a really good point mate and something that would’ve been worth touching on in my video if I had of thought of it. Great to hear a unique take on it!
Good points raised here. Ironically, Gibson has been better at hitting the working musician price point in the past. The faded special series was great. I have heard QC can be spotty, but I still have an ‘05 SG special faded I bought in the late 00’s for $550 and it’s great. I put it through the wringer, gigging it all over with the stock thin crappy gig bag. It’s never even needed a truss rod or saddle adjustment in well over a decade. They seem to be moving way more towards the legacy cork sniffer crowd. It’s a shame because a good no frills Gibson can be an amazing working class instrument.
Agreed, a “working class” Gibson is a gigging machine, but they’re moving away from that slowly!
I agree, I have a 2017 Classic that has gotten used. It has wear, scratches and chips, but it has been reliable and surprisingly durable.
This is exactly the same arguments that people use about Harley Davidsons. You'll always have people who just want conformity
I have a G L tribute Fallout & Jim Root Squire Tele. I feel my set up is as good as any working guitar set ups. I've had a Gibson Les Paul & a Hondo 2 from the way back. I didn't care for a Gibson Les Paul. All the way from Liverpool UK
Great to hear mate! G&L are really cool guitars, wish they were more accessible here in Aus!
This is weird because I just watched a video from the RUclipsr Agufish who visited Sweetwater. He said 3 out of 5 guitars leaving Sweetwater were gibsons. He was shocked. I guess somebody is buying them.
I saw a similar comment to this before and it’s a fair point. Apparently 34% of the market share last year in guitar sales in the US was Gibson and its subsidiaries, that’s the highest market share of any other brand.
So they are selling well, but I’m willing to bet they’re selling well to older collectors, and not a lot of working musicians or young people make up that market share. That’s the point I’m trying to make but maybe didn’t get across well; they sell very well the collectors, but there’s little longevity in that when young people won’t want to collect them in future because not many musicians they like are playing them.
cheers for giving my comment the time of day. people treat gibson guitars like bars of gold. old heads are scouring reverb spending 10 grand on a guitar hoping that its worth 20 grand in 10 years. If someone wants a Gibson vibe just get a PRS, although i feel PRS is starting to go the gibson route unfortunately
I think PRS still have some real winners in the SE range which is what keeps them grounded. As long as SE stays strong, PRS is strong
Hey..
If you can afford it..
More power to you 😊
I agree. It's a vintage style giutar company. Gibson should keep catering to the adult. What's the issue? What does anyone who's not interested in Gibson guitars care what happends to them?
I suppose the point I was trying to make is that this attitude doesn’t equate to strong longevity
I like Gibsons but I agree that their pricing has gotten out of control. They also need to get away from their penchant for tradition over everything else. I applaud them for finally offering more color options than just a shade of brown wood-grained stain. Now if they can only add a few pickup options beside just humbuckers or P90s and think about fixing the headstock angle and add a volute on the Modern range. They can keep the traditionals and standards the same, but by offering the modern with a modern more durable and functional headstock people would be less afraid to actually play them rather than keep them in cases for fear of damage. Also, the humbuckeror P90 only thing really constrains their appeal to people that want to play varieties of rock or heavier music. Fender offers all kind of options on the pickup front, equips all of their guitars with the correct Fender headstock, has some set-neck options, and does so all at more affordable price points. I’m a traditionalist and like my LPs and SGs just the way they are, but if Gibson wants to remain relevant they must break with their habit of dismissing anything that doesn’t fit in the existing canon as not being authentic. It is possible to be both authentic and innovative.
I agree mate, no one is asking them to give up their traditional and classic models, because they’re great. But ONLY doing that stuff doesn’t make for long term viability. I mean even fender push innovation, take the newish release of a new shape in the meteora in cool colours which has proven to be a pretty decent success. Gibson only needs to make minor additions to the lineup to appeal to a much wider range of players (as long as the price point is right).
I'll bet it doesn't cost Gibson more than $50.00 a piece to make that $999.00 pickup set. And as far as making an electric guitar goes, most of that process is done by CNC machines on an assembly line to include their "Custom Shop" guitars. Most of what these luthiers at Gibson are doing is assembling guitar kits made one building over from where they are.
LP's ruled the 1970's largely because Jimmy Page played one. Then in the 1980's everyone wanted a super strat mostly because of EVH. LP's we're dying then until Slash came along. When the next guitar god comes along, if he (or she) is playing a LP, Gibson will be fine.
I don’t know if I see one coming anytime soon, but only time will tell!
they cost a lot, but they're definitely for musicians (and collectors).
I think I don't know one single professional or semi-professional musician playing Gibsons (and I know literally hundreds of gigging musicians). Those who actually have the doe for those kind of prices all chose to buy other brands, like Gretsch or Fender. People who want the Les Paul kinda thing overwhelmingly play ESP or LTDs. Hell, a lot of them actually spent real money on old japanese copies like the pre-lawsuit Ibanez, Burny or Greco instead of buying a Gibson for a few hundred bucks more.
No, maybe the 10k new ones or 40-50 year old gibsons are for collectors. I love the look and sound of Gibsons flyng V and explorers and in my opinion nothing can top those guitars. They have a certain feel and sound that no other Guitar has.
Once I played a Schecter I realized Gibson is no longer needed
Sir, Please read up on the the Falcon 20. Most amp techs hate them and think the design is terrible. I really have no skin in this game, but if you look at the build quality and components it is not a solid tube amp.
I haven’t seen any of that coverage actually, but then again I didn’t go actively looking for an amp techs perspective. It seems to general consensus is that they could place well in the boutique amp market if they can prove to compete with the likes of Tone King, Bad Cat, Milkman, etc.
When you can buy a very nice sounding Squire for $120, most kids introduction to electric guitars are Strats, not Les Pauls. By the time they grow buying a Les Paul is very unlikely.
Maybe if boomers weren't reselling crappy 2000s studios and LPJs for over 1500, maybe kids could afford them.
I would not want a crappy guitar, even as a kid... 🙈
@jcallseven I agree, people should stop buying them
If that’s what the market thinks they’re worth, then that is what they are worth 🤷♂️ I agree it’s expensive for those model guitars, but it is what it is
awwwwww. moo moo
Gibson had their finger at least somewhere near the pulse about a decade ago with the Standard and Custom Shop series without Murphy Lab. The standards were still good at that point and there wasn’t such a vast difference in quality and aesthetic between them and the CS. Nowadays the Standards look like toys in comparison to the ‘real thing’ of the Customs and Murphys and seem to be marketed as such .
Agreed, they just keep moving further and further away. The Murphy lab stuff is honestly ridiculous.
@@danieljdtaylor Those yellowed tuners..🤮. Just so try hard.
is this supposed to be serious?
You tell me 🤷♂️
I don’t quite understand this response/question.
Gibson has the largest marketshare for any manufacturer in the US for 2023 as reported by NAMM but they're for collectors? Okay....It's interesting the narratives that people create.
unpack that claim for me please. Biggest marketshare for any manufacturer in the US: does that mean the Gibson company overall including all the brands (so Epiphone and Kramer) and in contrast to Fender (including squier) - or does that mean they have the biggest share in "made in US" guitars?
Gibson: 34%
Fender: 30%
Ibanez: 12%
Yamaha: 7%
Epiphone: 4%
Other (includes Ovation, PRS, Charvel, ESP, Jackson, Dean, Washburn): 9%
Results from over 2,000 US music stores.
Those figures would make sense though because collectors would buy and buy and buy Gibson all throughout the year with all the different high end “collector” models there are.
I have no doubt those stats would be correct, but I’d be interested to see how much of that 34% buying Gibson are collectors buying multiple guitars a year, and how much of it is working musicians buying a Gibson to use as a tool, that’s the stat that really matters in the context of this video.
I think you could safely say that almost all of the 30% that bought fender bought them to play them and use them as a musician’s working tool. Same with the 12% who bought Ibanez. But I’m willing to bet that a decent amount of the 34% that bought Gibson guitars were collectors who buy it for historical value and significance, and were not gigging/working musicians looking for a tool for the job.
I’m not saying this is a bad thing either, but it doesn’t create longevity because it means that not many modern day guitar heroes are playing Gibson and therefore not inspiring young people to buy Gibson.
Don’t go changing at all, Gibson. (Just give away more guitars to young and upcoming bands…easy promotion.)
Sarcasm or not, this is probably the answer to marketing to a young audience! Young people playing them = young people who listen to them wanting Gibson guitars.
I’m a Gibson guy. You can see my avatar. You don’t need to buy the collector editions. Most Les Pauls and SGs are at the 2-3 thousand mark. No need to buy the higher end stuff if you don’t want.
I think 2-3 thousand is still a high price considering how competitive the market is. I know Gibson can always claim to be American made but I don’t think that matters to young people as much anymore.
I appreciate your opinion. But plug 8nto a Marshall w a LP none bettrr
I wayched the R&R HOF inductions the other night. What I saw was a stage full of Gibsons. Maybe not just for collectors?
Good point, as the point was made in my previous video on the topic though, I don’t know any young people who was watching it, heck I didn’t even know it was on. Not saying ALL young people aren’t interested in it, but I think a lot of young people have moved on from that world.
It’s the nature of the world though right? The younger generations want to be antiestablishment against what their parents like (R&R HOF for example) and create their own thing that will then, in turn, be rebelled against lol!
My main takeaway from an otherwise excellent video deep dive is it sucks to buy in Australia. Over here we got what yall wanted. I'm sorry for that, but its awesome over here.
Yeah it’s pretty average here!
Playing a Gibson means you have actual balls !! Big rocking balls
Fair opinion, very boomer way to say it though lol.
Never had a problem with Gibson, I have 6 of them, 4 fenders, the fenders give me more issues than Gibson ever did.
I bought a gibson 339 with figure top in 2400 US. I love that guitar. I play professionally. But is true they are overpriced
Thanks for the comment mate, great to hear from a professional musicians point of view. If you feel it’s justified, then it’s justified 🤷♂️
Gibsons way too expensive they need to be like PRS and schecter if they can do one for like $500 or 600 or 700 that would be fine and they would have more young players to play these guitars but the way Gibson is taking it right now. They’re making these things like expensive cars, and also only for celebrities too to buy them too.
PRS SE guitars are seriously winning at the moment in that market. You get a pretty consistent high quality guitar ready to gig consistently. You can’t say the same for Gibson/Epiphone in that price.
Dude, Randy Rhoads…
He’s a great player, but I don’t think I ever heard a young person in my years of teaching kids and gigging with fellow young people mention him once.
This is a socioeconomic thing. Period. I play Gibson because I can. What they cost really doesn't matter to me as much as it would have 20 years ago when I couldn't afford them. I think this is true of a lot of things.
I think there is definitely an element of socioeconomic status influencing it, young people in general have less money, but I think the difference is young people no longer dream of a Gibson when they eventually do have money.
I didn't either. Until I had money. I think that is the point. @@danieljdtaylor
There are no guitar snobs, but there are tons of broke cry babies out there.
I don’t know what guitar communities you get involved with because there a guitar snobs everywhere lol.
Have you heard of Jimmy Page??
Yes and I love Jimmy Page, but that doesn’t change the fact that no new modern artist is playing Gibson which means not a lot of young people are seeing Gibson on stage. See my previous video on this topic for elaboration, but as good as Jimmy Page is, he just isn’t the super hero rock god he was to the older generations. Nothing against him or his music because it’s great, but that’s just what I’ve observed across a vast cross section of young musicians.
@@danieljdtaylorYou are correct in your observation. I would add that the cost of a Les Paul is typically more than many young musician may be able to afford. Gibson LP price is steep so for a first or second or even third guitar out of reach for many. For younger musicians add Slash, Duane Betts, Dave Grohl to the list. A LP tone is still hard to beat.
@@rjb7260 I think slash and Dave grohl are genuine champions for Gibson guitars for a young audience. Slash in particular seems to never die down in popularity and was often what a lot of young kids wanted to learn back when I was teaching, if they were into rock music. The problem with Gibson’s pricing is that, most young people don’t care a whole lot about branding, so if they want a Les Paul guitar they’ll go to Epiphone, ESP, Harley Benton, or any of the other great affordable brands making clones. Sire is another brand kicking goals in that area. Because brand loyalty or brand recognition exists less with younger people, they won’t bother saving up for a Gibson when they can get a similar guitar at a high quality for much, much cheaper. This is where Epiphone makes sense as a brand but they need to make sure the price is right and the specs and finishes appeal to young people still.
You get what you pay for. Gibson makes the best sounding, most iconic guitars ever made. There are Gibsons and then everything else. Fenders suck.
"You get what you pay for" yes, you pay thousands of dollars for shitty overpriced pieces of museum for boomers disguised as guitars.
@@gabrielramos5338 you get the best sounding guitars played by the greatest, most talented and iconic players in musical history. It's a shame this autotune generation doesn't care about such things but their music certainly shows it.
Obvious troll is obvious.
@@davidsotomayor8713 stating facts is not trolling. I must have struck a nerve.
Not in the case of Gibson.