https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-01/gibson-files-for-bankruptcy-with-deal-to-renew-guitar-business
In a surprise to no one, Gibson (or rather, "Gibson Brands Inc.", bleh) is in serious financial trouble, to the tune of 500 million in debt. So they have filed a chapter 11 restructuring. Means the CEO will get the boot and the board a shuffle. They'll probably dump some of their side businesses as well.
What do you think, can they come back from the past decade(s) of mess? Can they recover from trying to be a "lifestyle" brand rather than a guitar manufacturer? Guitar sales are in a slump across the board, and Gibson's name hasn't exactly been popular in years. IMO, if they can up the QA a bit and maybe offer some decent rigs in the sub-1k range they stand a chance. Get back to competing with Fender for the "workhorse" market rather than trying to sell on name recognition alone.
As a note, I have no idea how, if at all, this will affect Epiphone. I've always liked Epi's, though granted I mostly missed the cheapo-chinese years so perhaps my opinion is skewed. My first "real" guitar was a 2001 Epi LP Studio and I loved that thing, and their hollowbodies are still amazing for their price bracket.
Considering its the one thing seeming to keep Gibson afloat these days I'm hoping they don't muck about with the brand too badly.
I wouldn't expect much of any change to Epiphone unless they push the Gibson name to all of their tiers. The changes they look to be making so far seem to be more about dropping the ill thought out side businesses that they acquired and were unable to do anything with.
Ultimately, I'd be inclined to see them sticking more with the higher sticker price items as they have better margins and they can trade on the name. Not unlike a company like Harley Davidson where they don't cater to the deep-in-the-know crowd, rather the peripheral folks that don't know anything but a name.
The more ideal scenario would be that they get real guitar geeks at the top that understand their audience AND can run an efficient business and they become a model guitar company. I won't hold my breath on that one.
I love this part:
QuoteCourt papers call for a one-year consulting deal and compensation package for Juszkiewicz.
The rich get richer. Man, I wish I could get a job as CEO of some big company and mess things up so bad they pay me millions to go away. That would rule! ;D
I suspect the outcome will be a more grounded Gibson that just sells guitars and related accessories. You know, like a normal guitar company. And I hope that they will focus a lot more on reasonably priced product lines and not just Collector's Choice $7k scuffed up guitars. I think there is a huge market for Gibson guitars in the $500 - $800 range. They could easily make a Les Paul Standard in Asia and retail it for $750, and I'd be lined up to buy a couple (even though I need another one like I need another hole in my head). And they could keep the USA and Custom Shop line at ridiculous price points for those that want to pay more.
Yeah its that price range they really need to shoot for, higher end than the entry level Epi, competition for Fender's Mexico stuff.
And its the QA side they need to work on as much as anything. A 3k$ Gibson should feel damn near bulletproof and professionally set up, but they feel like they're tossed together by some tech just reading an instructional manual these days. My Mexican telecaster needed some intonation work and had a bad volume pot, but I could buy 8 of them for the price of a standard LP. Build guitars to be played, not displayed on a wall hanging over your Gibson brand bar stools in your Gibson brand Man Cave (TM).
I think Somnif hit it on the nose, cheap guitars are so good these days compared to 10-20 years ago that it's hard to make a strong argument to drop 2-3k on something. Sure a 3 grand Gibson might be better but is it $2500 better?
Ironically their production was up significantly between 2017 and 2016. Getting rid of their goofball CEO would likely be a good start, but as pointed out he gets to scoop out a wad of cash on his way out the door. In interviews I've read even HE has admitted that their strategic planning over the past 5 or 6 years has been flat out stupid.
Can they come back from this? Well, I reckon there is still some life in the brand. And a lot of loyalty still. Even if the factories closed down completely, got dismantled, all the workers scattered to the wind, someone will probably still come along, snag the name and restart production somewhere else. It happened to others too, Vox I think. Maybe it will be made completely in China, maybe still in the US.
Will it regain its former status? I reckon not. But that applies for everyone in the guitar business. Guitar is dead. Hiphop, urban and dance have supplanted rock, and rock is now where all the genres used to be after rock supplanted them. It will become more of a niche. And so will guitar manufacturers. Unless a miracle happens guys copy/pasting loops and samples in their bedrooms and guys playing a CD being called a concert is now the future. I'd love to be proven wrong but I don't see it happen.
That's interesting you say that about someone else snagging the name. I doubt that will happen but would be AWESOME to see the Heritage guys come full circle and move it back to Kalamazoo.
My guess is that in the long run, they'll end up as just another name in someone else's line.
Quote from: Muadzin on May 02, 2018, 05:05:28 AM
Can they come back from this? Well, I reckon there is still some life in the brand. And a lot of loyalty still. Even if the factories closed down completely, got dismantled, all the workers scattered to the wind, someone will probably still come along, snag the name and restart production somewhere else. It happened to others too, Vox I think. Maybe it will be made completely in China, maybe still in the US.
Will it regain its former status? I reckon not. But that applies for everyone in the guitar business. Guitar is dead. Hiphop, urban and dance have supplanted rock, and rock is now where all the genres used to be after rock supplanted them. It will become more of a niche. And so will guitar manufacturers. Unless a miracle happens guys copy/pasting loops and samples in their bedrooms and guys playing a CD being called a concert is now the future. I'd love to be proven wrong but I don't see it happen.
I doubt that guitar will be a niche. As far as music instruments go, I think guitar is still a front runner in sales. Guitar is sill popular with teenagers getting into cover bands (I think!) and let's face it: 99% of guitarists suffer from GAS and want more than one guitar.
While you're right that Pop, Rap and other genres might have the upper hand right now (main reason I stopped listening to radio), I think that the classic combo Guitar-Bass-Drums-Singer is far from over and will surpass us all.
just my 2 cents, ymmv.
Quote from: m-Kresol on May 02, 2018, 01:42:22 PM
Guitar is sill popular with teenagers getting into cover bands (I think!)
It is around here (northeast US). My wife is a high school teacher, and she's got several kids in her classes that are in bands. And it's that way every year since she started teaching back in 2003.
I think the demise of guitar is great exaggerated.
Wasn't everyone saying guitar was dead in the early 80's when everything was keyboards and synths? How'd that turn out?
It's certainly not as predominant, but it is still present, even in pop stuff.
I am not a guitar knowledge guru so, maybe someone can explain this to me.
Why in the hell does it cost $3K+ for a good named Gibson guitar just because it is "made in the U.S.A? Where is the cost justified? Same with PRS guitars. Hell, if I want a lefty PRS it will cost me $4K new and around $2500 used!!! Ridiculous!!!
There's definitely a good amount of markup for the name no doubt. From what I can tell with other boutique makers, Wood choice is going to be a significant factor in the cost. Some kind of spray painted basswood won't be too pricy, but a fancy finished highly figured wood body/top will drive the cost up.
Of course, labor wise it's all fairly close to the same as most/all use CNC machines and finish from there.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 02, 2018, 07:15:16 PM
Why in the hell does it cost $3K+ for a good named Gibson guitar just because it is "made in the U.S.A?
It's simple: because enough people keep paying the asking price.
Quote from: culturejam on May 02, 2018, 08:17:28 PM
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 02, 2018, 07:15:16 PM
Why in the hell does it cost $3K+ for a good named Gibson guitar just because it is "made in the U.S.A?
It's simple: because enough people keep paying the asking price.
Or not enough people based on the bankruptcy....
Quote from: slacker775 on May 02, 2018, 08:19:29 PM
Quote from: culturejam on May 02, 2018, 08:17:28 PM
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 02, 2018, 07:15:16 PM
Why in the hell does it cost $3K+ for a good named Gibson guitar just because it is "made in the U.S.A?
It's simple: because enough people keep paying the asking price.
Or not enough people based on the bankruptcy....
Based on the bankruptcy documents, the guitars are selling well. It's the bullshit "lifestyle" brands they bought that are tanking.
Quote from: Muadzin on May 02, 2018, 05:05:28 AM
Will it regain its former status? I reckon not. But that applies for everyone in the guitar business. Guitar is dead. Hiphop, urban and dance have supplanted rock, and rock is now where all the genres used to be after rock supplanted them. It will become more of a niche. And so will guitar manufacturers. Unless a miracle happens guys copy/pasting loops and samples in their bedrooms and guys playing a CD being called a concert is now the future. I'd love to be proven wrong but I don't see it happen.
I agree with this for the most part. The guitar is the archetypal boomer instrument, and it's boomers with money that drove the overwhelming majority of the explosion in the market in the 90s and 00s. And they're starting to, well, die. It was totemic for them, a symbol of youth, freedom, excitement, etc. So many of them bought guitars and they can't even play. At all. That was Gibson's core market. I'm sure I wasn't the only guy shaking his head as he saw these guys buy $5000 wallhangers at the shop.
The guitar is still reasonably popular for younger people, particularly people born in the 70s and 80s, but for anyone young it's just not the same. I grew up listen to guitar driven music. They didn't and they aren't. Napster and the mp3 revolution is a huge part of it, too. A generation of young guitar based bands was basically killed because of the changing economics of the music industry. I'm not hugely optimistic that it'll ever really recover, but I guess it always has before so who knows.
There was a pretty fair article about this in the Washington Post about a year ago. I think it was this one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/lifestyle/the-slow-secret-death-of-the-electric-guitar/?utm_term=.77fe16f14b17 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/lifestyle/the-slow-secret-death-of-the-electric-guitar/?utm_term=.77fe16f14b17)
Gibson (and the other big companies--there's plenty of talk that Fender isn't doing so great atm either) will get paired down to its essentials and survive. Hopefully it'll be for the best, Epi won't suffer, and they get their quality and price issues sorted.
Quote from: m-Kresol on May 02, 2018, 01:42:22 PM
Quote from: Muadzin on May 02, 2018, 05:05:28 AM
Can they come back from this? Well, I reckon there is still some life in the brand. And a lot of loyalty still. Even if the factories closed down completely, got dismantled, all the workers scattered to the wind, someone will probably still come along, snag the name and restart production somewhere else. It happened to others too, Vox I think. Maybe it will be made completely in China, maybe still in the US.
Will it regain its former status? I reckon not. But that applies for everyone in the guitar business. Guitar is dead. Hiphop, urban and dance have supplanted rock, and rock is now where all the genres used to be after rock supplanted them. It will become more of a niche. And so will guitar manufacturers. Unless a miracle happens guys copy/pasting loops and samples in their bedrooms and guys playing a CD being called a concert is now the future. I'd love to be proven wrong but I don't see it happen.
I doubt that guitar will be a niche. As far as music instruments go, I think guitar is still a front runner in sales. Guitar is sill popular with teenagers getting into cover bands (I think!) and let's face it: 99% of guitarists suffer from GAS and want more than one guitar.
While you're right that Pop, Rap and other genres might have the upper hand right now (main reason I stopped listening to radio), I think that the classic combo Guitar-Bass-Drums-Singer is far from over and will surpass us all.
just my 2 cents, ymmv.
I've read that across the board guitar sales have gone down by 35%. DJ's are now the new guitar gods. Guys who play records or CD's or USB sticks for god sakes! I'd love for rock to make a comeback, but I'm struggling to make a greatests rock hits list that includes any modern artists. For years I've played bars for next to no one and seen other rock band play for two and a half men as well. The number of venues that still play rock bands goes down, rappers and DJ's get booked more and more. Successful rock bars and their attendence go down, bars that play modern day pop or dance are so crowded that you can literally crowdsurf over the heads. Here in Nijmegen there's probably more bars where you can salsa dance then watch rock bands. The war has been lost, and I don't see the trend going the other way.
Yes, there will always still be rock bands, there will probably still be a rock niche, and those guitar players will probably suffer massively from GAS. But it will not be enough to maintain guitar production at its current output. There's too many guitar manufacturers, too many (cheap) guitars being produced and too many guitars available on the 2nd hand market. Methinks that even if Gibson had had proper quality control, and had not done some of its crazy antics, sales would still have gone down. Maybe even still fatally. Again too many cheap yet decent guitars out there, plenty of clone makers copying their designs and a declining market means it business model of selling high end expensive guitars would still prove fatal in the long run. If I had been in charge of Gibson I would have massively curtailed US production and switched to cheaper Chinese production instead. Cheap guitars for the masses, and a smaller production of high end guitars for those afflicted with GAS and too much cash. With excellent quality control of course to warrant those higher prices.
Quote from: culturejam on May 02, 2018, 04:21:29 PM
Quote from: m-Kresol on May 02, 2018, 01:42:22 PM
Guitar is sill popular with teenagers getting into cover bands (I think!)
It is around here (northeast US). My wife is a high school teacher, and she's got several kids in her classes that are in bands. And it's that way every year since she started teaching back in 2003.
Just because a genre is still popular with musicians doesn't mean its popular with the general audience. New rock bands are not getting the same airplay as modern electronic pop, they're not being signed by labels, they're not being booked by major clubs. When I look at my local scene what draws the biggest crowds its dance, urban, hip hop and cover bands (who basically only rehash old famous songs). Rock bands meanwhile play small bars mostly. Often just for friends and family. Or even worse, fellow musicians. In general new rock bands are struggling. Even the most successful local rock band here in Nijmegen, De Staat, which plays major festivals, gets to play on national TV shows and which was an opener to Muse during their last tour, they're still not able to live off their music.
QuoteI think the demise of guitar is great exaggerated.
I used to think like that too. But generally those who are heavily emotionally invested into something, are always loath to see the writing on the wall. Wars were fought to the bitter end by people, years after they effectively lost the war already. Just prior to the rise of rock 'n' roll the accordion was the predominant instrument. I daresay that when rock 'n' roll stormed onto the scene accordion players didn't think that the popularity of their instrument was going to take a nosedive.
Quote from: slacker775 on May 02, 2018, 07:02:51 PM
Wasn't everyone saying guitar was dead in the early 80's when everything was keyboards and synths? How'd that turn out?
And they were right, as guys pressing play on a CD player and waving their arms about are now booked to play in huge arenas and stadiums, with most artists now having a backing band that consists of dancers, while the music comes from a CD player and with real bands now relegated to bars and small clubs. There are still some major rock bands, but most of them are old. A dying breed.
I reckon occasionally there will come a brief revival. Just like occasionally other older genres have enjoyed their brief revival. And there will be niches. But mainstream dominance? We lost it.
QuoteIt's certainly not as predominant, but it is still present, even in pop stuff.
It's barely present in pop stuff. Take your average modern pop song. Electronic drums, check, electronic bass line, check, which together is most of the song, some additional sounds to round out the song, usually a simple repetitive synth melody, over that vocals, there, your basic modern pop stuff. Hardly a guitar to be heard.
Quote from: slacker775 on May 02, 2018, 07:18:58 PM
From what I can tell with other boutique makers...
BUT... Gibson is NOT a boutique builder. They are a major guitar manufacturer.
QuoteOf course, labor wise it's all fairly close to the same as most/all use CNC machines and finish from there.
Exactly!!
Quote from: slacker775 on May 02, 2018, 07:18:58 PM
There's definitely a good amount of markup for the name no doubt. From what I can tell with other boutique makers, Wood choice is going to be a significant factor in the cost. Some kind of spray painted basswood won't be too pricy, but a fancy finished highly figured wood body/top will drive the cost up.
Of course, labor wise it's all fairly close to the same as most/all use CNC machines and finish from there.
Well, a Standard cost $375 in 1959, which is about $3250 in today's money - which is the current price for a standard (it is in Europe at least). One could argue on the quality of the end product - but taking all the "vintagery" and mojo arguments on one side - you get the same instrument for basically the same money.
Popular music moves in cycles (or fads). Meaning the electric guitar may never be as dominant as it was in the music of the 1960s and 70s, but that EDM, hip-hop, DJing and sampling will also change and evolve and not necessarily always be the king. Maybe they'll be replaced by K-pop-style boy bands and those will be replaced by CGI'ed artificial intelligence and then a new human-punk movement will arise up against that, hopefully carrying guitars.
Also, country music. Currently wildly popular and lots of guitar. Personally, I like classic country music and find much of modern country music sterile or cliched, but it's a steady market for acoustic guitars and Telecasters at least. That may not help Gibson as much.
That Washington Post article is good and everyone interested should read it. I thought the guy from Fender seemed to have a grasp of the issue, if not a solution. It was interesting what he said about Taylor Swift being the #1 influence on kids picking up a guitar now. Grumpy old guys on guitar forums may not approve of that direction, but it's an important fact for a guitar company CEO to understand.
Quote from: reddesert on May 03, 2018, 01:31:55 PM
Also, country music. Currently wildly popular and lots of guitar. Personally, I like classic country music and find much of modern country music sterile or cliched, but it's a steady market for acoustic guitars and Telecasters at least. That may not help Gibson as much.
That's a really great point. I never thought of that, even though in retrospect it seems obvious. I guess we're all prisoners to our own interests. Country music is really popular where I live, though I wholeheartedly agree with your "sterile or cliched" take on its modern variety.
Maybe country music will save the instrument.
I think new guitar sales have mainly declined because of the used market. There has been 60 + years of full blown new guitar production which has exponentially increased as time has gone on. They didn't all just disappear. Way back when, it was only garage sales and pawn shops for used stuff, not so anymore. It's hard to walk into Guitar Center and buy new junk from them at full price plus tax when there is so much high quality used stuff to choose from. The only reason I go in is to look at the used gear.
I know one place they could cut some costs... They are well known for having an army of retained IP attorneys whose job is to prowl for potential trademark violations (and Gibson owns tons of commercially-defunct trademarks, including Maestro) and send C&D takedown notices.
It's gotten to the point where some people have called them an IP holding company who also has a guitar manufacturing department. But in any case, they are extremely fixated on making sure no one dilutes any of their trademarks for any reason, presumably because owning all these trademarks adds a lot of value to their company. How's that working out for them, I wonder? They also don't have any interest in licensing their trademarks, so all of that IP isn't even a source of revenue for them, just a continual drain on cash as they pay their attorneys to aggressively monitor the trademarks.
Now, I wouldn't know anything personally about this mind you, since none of my circuits are based on any of Gibson's trademarks (ahem (https://aionelectronics.com/project/l5-preamp/)). But I've heard on good authority that they will make claims that certain trademarks are actively planned to be used in a commercial capacity even though they really have no true intention of using them, presumably just to satisfy the §2.34(a)2 rules (https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/r-e8786759-4013-4958-beb8-52f8477670f5.html) requiring a "bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce". Call me cynical, but it seems that there are certain trademarks that they've had bona fide intention to use some of them for nearly 40 years now, and they don't seem to ever get around to it.
I think we are far from seeing guitar music die. Just in the punk rock/post rock scene alone there are thousands of great guitarists making amazing music. There is also a very healthy jammy/festival band audience as well. Country is booming also. These bands just don't get played on the radio for the most part and don't reach the stardom that rock stars of old did. Rock musicians have to live well within their means (taco bell, sleeping in the van, etc). That being said, I see lots of younger players wanting vintage, boutique, and easily modifiable equipment. The DIY community is going strong, at least among players I know. And, like Aentons said, there is a massive market for used equipment due to a half a century of baby boomers buying up everything.
Quote from: gordo on May 02, 2018, 08:43:49 AM
That's interesting you say that about someone else snagging the name. I doubt that will happen but would be AWESOME to see the Heritage guys come full circle and move it back to Kalamazoo.
That would be cool. But Gibson has a lot of blue sky worth. Heritage probably couldn't afford it. I think Gibson needs to go smaller scale with their high end and up the quality. Make the guitars more scarce and worth the money. I hate to say it but my Epi les paul is so good I don't see how I could justify buying a Gibson they're sorta shooting themselves in the food.
Also need to market research not rely on blow hard ego inflated people that rely on the brand and don't move the brand forward.
Just had to throw that out there now that we all get to play "President of Gibson"!
There are a lot of really, really good LP copies these days. My "Vintage" brand LP100 is bloody amazing.
The only thing going for real Gibson LPs is the name on the headstock.
I had this same type discussion with my buddy who owns a local music store, and I think this type thread 6 or 8 most ago here. Guitar sales follow music trends. Right now, they're selling acoustics and Ukes of all things. I told to the other local music store owner in town whom said the exact same thing. The guitar isn't dead, guitar music is currently not top 40. I'd love to see / hear Bonamassa or the likes on the charts. That being said, I haven't listened to the "radio" in a good 20 years. I listen to my iPod or iPhone only. The kids at work listen to "beats" and the lyrics don't matter.
As far as radio goes, I'm quite happy to never again listen to any of the stations in town that seem to be proud of autotune.
Cher is the only person who gets away with autotune. Everyone else, it's, "Shame I can't sing, but that's okay, the computer will fix that!"
Quote from: reddesert on May 03, 2018, 01:31:55 PM
Popular music moves in cycles (or fads). Meaning the electric guitar may never be as dominant as it was in the music of the 1960s and 70s, but that EDM, hip-hop, DJing and sampling will also change and evolve and not necessarily always be the king. Maybe they'll be replaced by K-pop-style boy bands and those will be replaced by CGI'ed artificial intelligence and then a new human-punk movement will arise up against that, hopefully carrying guitars.
I'm sure the guys who made the kind of music that was popular before rock 'n' roll dethroned them said the same thing.
QuoteAlso, country music. Currently wildly popular and lots of guitar. Personally, I like classic country music and find much of modern country music sterile or cliched, but it's a steady market for acoustic guitars and Telecasters at least. That may not help Gibson as much.
Maybe in America its popular, rest of the world not much.
QuoteThat Washington Post article is good and everyone interested should read it. I thought the guy from Fender seemed to have a grasp of the issue, if not a solution. It was interesting what he said about Taylor Swift being the #1 influence on kids picking up a guitar now. Grumpy old guys on guitar forums may not approve of that direction, but it's an important fact for a guitar company CEO to understand.
But with Taylor Swift the guitar is more an accessory. Hardly OMG here is the new David Gilmour/Eddie Van Halen!
Quote from: trailer on May 04, 2018, 11:02:46 AM
I think we are far from seeing guitar music die. Just in the punk rock/post rock scene alone there are thousands of great guitarists making amazing music. There is also a very healthy jammy/festival band audience as well. Country is booming also. These bands just don't get played on the radio for the most part and don't reach the stardom that rock stars of old did. Rock musicians have to live well within their means (taco bell, sleeping in the van, etc). That being said, I see lots of younger players wanting vintage, boutique, and easily modifiable equipment. The DIY community is going strong, at least among players I know. And, like Aentons said, there is a massive market for used equipment due to a half a century of baby boomers buying up everything.
That kind of stardom is key though in regaining mainstream dominance. The fact that no modern rockband has joined the ranks of U2 and the Rolling Stones who can go anywhere in the world and sell out an arena or stadium proves that rock is dying. What you're describing is a local niche. 'Yeah, but in my area.......' That doesn't matter. If anything it goes to show that even we have forgotten how utterly dominant rock used to be world wide and that we have been living in the decline for so long we're used to it.
Quote from: jimilee on May 04, 2018, 07:57:44 PM
I had this same type discussion with my buddy who owns a local music store, and I think this type thread 6 or 8 most ago here. Guitar sales follow music trends. Right now, they're selling acoustics and Ukes of all things. I told to the other local music store owner in town whom said the exact same thing. The guitar isn't dead, guitar music is currently not top 40. I'd love to see / hear Bonamassa or the likes on the charts. That being said, I haven't listened to the "radio" in a good 20 years. I listen to my iPod or iPhone only. The kids at work listen to "beats" and the lyrics don't matter.
I haven't listened to the radio since the late 90's either. Which proves that utter shite music has been dethroning rock for decades now and that we have been living in the decline for a very long time now. We are like soldiers in a losing war, kidding ourselves that we can still turn things around, just because here and there we still win a battle. The general trend has been against for a long time.
There is something deeply alluring to the concept of the rock band. Which is why its still inspiring people to take up playing. Only for the most of them to discover that there is just no audience for it. Occasionally one band still manages to find some audience and enjoy some success. But it pales in comparison to the success that pop and electronic music artists manage to find. Some scenes are more tenacious then others, and bands in that scene manage to do better then others. But I wouldn't call it signs of an upward trend.
As long as there are high school students thinking a talent will give them some purpose in life (or at the very least get them laid) there will be a market for guitars.
A market for 3k$ guitars though.... that is questionable.
I just saw an email ad for Wild West guitars and they're selling Charvel (Fender custom shop) San Dimas quilt tops for $6k. Six f**king thousand!!! My Chevy Volt isn't worth that much.
I was at a Rush show a while back with a buddy of mine that's about 20yrs my junior and was explaining that even with only 3 guys all the sounds were being made live and by human controlled computers as opposed to just playing pre-recorded backing tracks.
He replied "I don't really care how it's done, I just want to be entertained". That single sentence pretty much defines the current perception of the music industry.
^^^^^what he said. I am just as interested in how they're doing it as the entertainment value.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Muadzin on May 05, 2018, 01:38:24 AM
That kind of stardom is key though in regaining mainstream dominance. The fact that no modern rockband has joined the ranks of U2 and the Rolling Stones who can go anywhere in the world and sell out an arena or stadium proves that rock is dying.
In the US at least, IMHO that kind of stardom was mostly marketing facilitated by a stranglehold on the distribution channels from the 1960's up through the era of Napster.
Perhaps I'm far too cynical, but I think that the music industry is being very deliberate in which artists get prime airtime and mass-media broadcasting.
Rock stars, almost by definition (Keith Richards, Liam Gallagher, Keith Moon, the list goes on) are very hard to control. They are charismatic, have loyal fans, and tend to speak their mind about whatever they damn well please. They write songs about doing drugs (Champagne Supernova) and slave rape (Brown Sugar), and get away with it. Even if, after they become troublesome to PR, the record industry tries to bury them, the fans keep them alive and in the public eye for quite awhile.
Pop stars, on the other hand, are micromanaged and airbrushed to within an inch of their lives. All their lyrics are carefully crafted, anodyne, to appeal to as broad a base as possible while offending as few as possible. Any passion is of the usual love story kind, whether unrequited love, or whatever. But never the Hey Joe type, she-done-me-wrong-so-I-sorted-her type, as that could be problematic. And if they do become an issue, then they can be safely dropped and replaced with the next airbrushed hopeful with nary a beat dropped. Any fans of their unobjectionable music is unlikely to be particularly loyal to the artist, as much as they are to the general sound (oh what a lovely love song!)
And the easiest way to control that lack of PR problem is to make sure that, as step one of the filtering process for who gets airtime, is to remove as many rebellious symbols as possible. And rock and roll is
with it's electric guitars is punk as hell, middle fingers flying.
Maybe, though, I really am being too cynical.
Quote from: alanp on May 05, 2018, 06:47:47 PM
Perhaps I'm far too cynical, but I think that the music industry is being very deliberate in which artists get prime airtime and mass-media broadcasting.
Rock stars, almost by definition (Keith Richards, Liam Gallagher, Keith Moon, the list goes on) are very hard to control. They are charismatic, have loyal fans, and tend to speak their mind about whatever they damn well please. They write songs about doing drugs (Champagne Supernova) and slave rape (Brown Sugar), and get away with it. Even if, after they become troublesome to PR, the record industry tries to bury them, the fans keep them alive and in the public eye for quite awhile.
Pop stars, on the other hand, are micromanaged and airbrushed to within an inch of their lives. All their lyrics are carefully crafted, anodyne, to appeal to as broad a base as possible while offending as few as possible. Any passion is of the usual love story kind, whether unrequited love, or whatever. But never the Hey Joe type, she-done-me-wrong-so-I-sorted-her type, as that could be problematic. And if they do become an issue, then they can be safely dropped and replaced with the next airbrushed hopeful with nary a beat dropped. Any fans of their unobjectionable music is unlikely to be particularly loyal to the artist, as much as they are to the general sound (oh what a lovely love song!)
And the easiest way to control that lack of PR problem is to make sure that, as step one of the filtering process for who gets airtime, is to remove as many rebellious symbols as possible. And rock and roll is
with it's electric guitars is punk as hell, middle fingers flying.
Maybe, though, I really am being too cynical.
I like this! Bring on the conspiracy theories! alanp for truth! Show me Taylor Swift's birth certificate!
True "Gibson" guitars are still manufactured at 225 Parsons Street, Kalamazoo, Michagan under the brand name Heritage. If you want a "Gibson", that is what you will buy, a Heritage guitar. The pathetic corporate knock-offs that have been carrying the Gibson name for the last 33 years are not true Gibsons. None of those guitars have shared a workbench that once held a '58 Burst, but Heritage guitars do. No, there will be no comeback for Gibson. It's been gone since 1984.
1993 Heritage H150 Quilted Burst...$1,700...(they don't get the credit they deserve; how much would Gibson charge for a guitar like this??).
(https://s26.postimg.cc/sn1nygf0p/quilt_burst.jpg)
Popular music (including rock) is culture. It isn't a war.
The idea that Taylor Swift is not a "real" guitar player while (longhaired guitar hero's name) is a real guitar player, is a little foolhardy, because it's also about fixed ideas of what a guitar player should look like or play like. I mean, yes, Taylor Swift doesn't actually have to play a guitar in her music videos now, but she did start off that way. In the Washington Post article, the CEO of Fender is talking about how Taylor Swift is the major influence getting people to pick up guitars, and the CEO of Gibson is lamenting the decline of stadium-filling guitar heros. That's not why Gibson is bankrupt (it's the bad investment in consumer electronics), but only one of those people is showing the flexibility needed to survive in a world of evolving musical trends.
Quote from: reddesert on May 06, 2018, 12:58:59 AM
In the Washington Post article, the CEO of Fender is talking about how Taylor Swift is the major influence getting people to pick up guitars,
And it's true. My daughter (3.5 years) loves Taylor Swift and watches some of the older videos. She plays her ukulele and her mini Squier Strat (pink, of course) and pretends to be Taylor. Of course, she also plays guitar because she sees me playing guitar, but when she's putting on a show in the living room, she's not pretending to be me. ;D :'(
Reverb speculates about how this filing will impact the used Gibson market:
https://reverb.com/news/how-will-the-gibsons-bankruptcy-affect-used-gibson-prices
I actually see a lot of nice developments in guitar, looking at youtube. Granted, there's a small group of really good channels about guitar and they are quickly getting intertwined which runs the risk of getting boring. But these channels have spawned affordable guitar brands that tap directly into their market, like Chapman and Solar and there's a few others. The guitar facilities in the east have so much capacity that basically anyone can start a guitar brand now. You design a model, have a pre=sale for your YT following and then order the batch. I see these guitar batches sell out before they are actually build. Gibson is so big that it can't do this 'grass roots' thing in a credible way, but it's a much bigger development than robot tuners.
As another side note, I think Gibson's current line up is very weak. The HPs aren't my thing, but there is a gazillion variations of Les Pauls to choose from. They are just ridiculously expensive to get into. But look at other models. The outing is just weak if I compare it with Epiphone (!). Take Flying Vs: want a Korina? Epiphone. Want binding on it? Epiphone. Trem? Epiphone.
Quote from: Rockhorst on May 06, 2018, 10:32:54 AM
As another side note, I think Gibson's current line up is very weak. The HPs aren't my thing, but there is a gazillion variations of Les Pauls to choose from. They are just ridiculously expensive to get into. But look at other models. The outing is just weak if I compare it with Epiphone (!). Take Flying Vs: want a Korina? Epiphone. Want binding on it? Epiphone. Trem? Epiphone.
There is an affordable les Paul studio line up, about what you'd pay for an mim Strat. I'd love an affordable V or explorer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let's also not forget about companies like Warmoth. Why spend around $3k for a stock Gibson when I can spend around $3.5-4k for a totally custom build? As far as buying options go for the guitar, there's not much Gibson can so to remain a power without significantly adjusting their process - whether its up the quality, lower the price, etc. Something needs to be done.
As far as rock and guitar music dying, that is extremely far from true. Yes, it is no longer mainstream, and we can only guess as to what could bring it back to that level, but at the same time, 'mainstream' music fans make up a much smaller portion of all music fans than ever simply because technology allows us to find and enjoy whatever we choose. In addition, I think metal is much more mainstream than has been given credit so far in this discussion. Lots of boys pick up the guitar wanting to be a shredder rather than a rocker.
If mainstream is your concern, then you have to find a way to create sex and/or danger icons in rock because, females aged 14-28ish rule the industry. Let's face it, boys of that age who aren't willing to do their own thing are always going to follow the where the girls are. Anyone younger doesn't have the money to spend on music and musicians, and anyone older tends to be 'smarter' with their money, however you wish to define that. And as Alanp stated, solo artists are vastly easier to control, letting them come off as sexy or dangerous, but disposing of them when they become an actual problem.
Overall, I think the idea that guitar is dying is vastly blown out of proportion. Will rock ever get back to its heyday? Unlikely, but I don't know if that's the worst thing. I think what's note important is that it finds, and continues longevity as a popular genre, despite not being THE most popular. Disco is dead as a doornail, but rockers are still rollin along, no longer the tops of the tops, but certainly not out of the peripherals. And that's just fine. As long as teens are still forming bands and new rock is still being pumped out, I think the genre has a long future left ahead of it.
Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
Quote from: TheDude on May 08, 2018, 01:26:21 PM
Why spend around $3k for a stock Gibson when I can spend around $3.5-4k for a totally custom build?
Here are a few reasons I can think of right now:
1) I can get the Gibson on 0% credit and pay it off over 4 years (if that long is needed), which is ~ $62 / month.
2) The Gibson is already completely assembled. If I'm gonna fork over $3k - $4k, I don't want a kit, I want a guitar put together by somebody who knows a lot more about luthiery than me.
3) No set necks available with Warmoth. At least not that I've seen, although I'll admit it's been a while since I checked out their site.
I understand where you're coming from, but it's not really an apples:apples comparison. At least not in my opinion.
Quote from: culturejam on May 09, 2018, 01:35:54 PM
I understand where you're coming from, but it's not really an apples:apples comparison. At least not in my opinion.
Oh I fully agree its not an apples to apples comparison, and those are all good points you make there.
I guess to me, its just that if I'm going to spend at least $3k+ on a guitar, I much rather save up another few hundred and have it customized to my specs rather than something stock. The benefits just seem to outweigh the cost increase at that point, though I admit that's a completely subjective opinion. I don't mind a cheaper guitar that I have to battle a little bit with, but if I'm going to go for something that's supposed to be better, I'd prefer it to be better in my own image. Again, a fully subjective opinion though.
Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
Quote from: TheDude on May 09, 2018, 01:50:43 PM
Again, a fully subjective opinion though.
Totally agree, and I respect your view.
And frankly, I wouldn't spend $3k+ on a brand new Gibson either. If buying new again, i'd probably look for a previous year new old-stock for several hundred less. The only Gibson I've bought new was exactly that (closeout from the year before).
Quote from: culturejam on May 09, 2018, 05:52:12 PM
Quote from: TheDude on May 09, 2018, 01:50:43 PM
Again, a fully subjective opinion though.
Totally agree, and I respect your view.
And frankly, I wouldn't spend $3k+ on a brand new Gibson either. If buying new again, i'd probably look for a previous year new old-stock for several hundred less. The only Gibson I've bought new was exactly that (closeout from the year before).
Agreed. I'm not sure that if I did spend 3k on a les Paul, I should be playing for money, and I know I wouldn't take a 3k les Paul to a bar gig. So that begs the question, where are you playing your 3k les Paul?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: jimilee on May 09, 2018, 06:58:51 PM
So that begs the question, where are you playing your 3k les Paul?
Madison Square Bedroom! ;D ;D
The main reason I wouldn't buy a $3k guitar is that I am old enough to realize it won't make me sound any better than a $500 guitar. ;D
Quote from: EeBRAddict on May 09, 2018, 07:37:25 PM
The main reason I prefer these weight loss pills for men (https://www.muscleandfitness.com/supplements/best-weight-loss-pills-for-men/) and wouldn't buy a $3k guitar is that I am old enough to realize it won't make me sound any better than a $500 guitar. ;D
Man, that's some hard truth right there, EBRAddict. Logic tends to be a party pooper doesn't it lol? Anyway, I was shocked to hear that they filed for Chapter 11. Were they burning the money over there at Gibson or something?
Quote from: culturejam on May 09, 2018, 01:35:54 PM
3) No set necks available with Warmoth. At least not that I've seen, although I'll admit it's been a while since I checked out their site.
That's just Warmoth though. Check out Precision Guitar kits (https://precisionguitarkits.com/product/59-carved-top-custom-guitars). Even if you go nuts with stuff like 3A Flame, you'll be at 50% - 70% of the price of a top of the line standard. But then you do need to be a bit confident you can do assembly and setup of course.
Personally I have guitars on both end of the spectrum. When I was 15 years younger I spent a heap on a PRS and later used this as trade in on a Gibson R8. Happy to have it, but it rarily exits its case. I will probably never spend that much on a guitar ever again. I'm also very surprised at how much prices have increased both at Fender and Gibson over the past 4 or 5 years. Fender Am Std has gone up about $500 in 5 years time. At the same time, at least here in the Netherlands, the 2nd hand market is pretty dead. It's very hard to sell (could be because of the crisis), which means as a buyer you can get some crazy deals.
And it's definitely true: a 5k USA guitar won't make you a better player compared to a $500 guitar from Korea with maybe a pickup swap.
Quote from: culturejam on May 06, 2018, 08:20:04 AM
Reverb speculates about how this filing will impact the used Gibson market:
https://reverb.com/news/how-will-the-gibsons-bankruptcy-affect-used-gibson-prices
Unless I missed it, they skipped over the main reason why Gibson used prices may decline: Gibson has been very popular with an aging demographic that is slowly exiting the guitar buying market. This may affect the high dollar reissues more than their standard line, but they've sold an awful lot of Les Pauls to aging boomers whose idols played them. I'm not convinced the younger generation is going to abandon guitar (like some pundits), but I'm curious if they'll throw big dollars at accurate replicas.
Quote from: TheDude on May 08, 2018, 01:26:21 PM
Let's also not forget about companies like Warmoth. Why spend around $3k for a stock Gibson when I can spend around $3.5-4k for a totally custom build? As far as buying options go for the guitar, there's not much Gibson can so to remain a power without significantly adjusting their process - whether its up the quality, lower the price, etc. Something needs to be done.
As somebody who owns a handful of partscasters with really good parts, I'm a huge fan of this approach. I also don't think it's a comparable substitution for buying a set neck Gibson. Warmoth/Musikraft/Guitar Mill/USACG/BGP are really going after the buyer who wants the customization of a Fender custom shop bolt-on but wants to pay closer to an American Strat/Tele price.
The other thing that pushes people off about partscasters is that the resale value is simply awful. I love all of my partscasters, but they are worth more as parts than as a completed instrument. Most branded instruments hold their value much better, which is appealing to those who like to buy and sell. I still think it's worth doing partscaster builds, but they aren't for everybody.
Btw, how are you spec'ing your Warmoth builds so they cost $3k+? That's gotta be a hell of a build.
Quote from: lars on May 05, 2018, 11:20:03 PM
True "Gibson" guitars are still manufactured at 225 Parsons Street, Kalamazoo, Michagan under the brand name Heritage. If you want a "Gibson", that is what you will buy, a Heritage guitar. The pathetic corporate knock-offs that have been carrying the Gibson name for the last 33 years are not true Gibsons. None of those guitars have shared a workbench that once held a '58 Burst, but Heritage guitars do. No, there will be no comeback for Gibson. It's been gone since 1984.
1993 Heritage H150 Quilted Burst...$1,700...(they don't get the credit they deserve; how much would Gibson charge for a guitar like this??).
(https://s26.postimg.cc/sn1nygf0p/quilt_burst.jpg)
Heritage makes some nice guitars, but I don't think they are particularly better than what's going out of Gibson these days. A few of my friends are Heritage fans and I have a local dealer, so I've played a lot of them. They are nice, but simply another choice.
Heritage is also going through massive changes right now that may prove more significant than the Gibson transition, although time will tell. They just fired a good portion of their old luthiers (and others quit out of protest). The have gotten rid of most of the customization (at least for now) and many of the model offerings. The owners are clearly trying to streamline and optimize their line in an attempt to improve profitability.
https://bluegrasstoday.com/changes-at-heritage-guitar-roils-staff-luthiers/
Quote from: pickdropper on May 11, 2018, 04:14:58 AM
The other thing that pushes people off about partscasters is that the resale value is simply awful. I love all of my partscasters, but they are worth more as parts than as a completed instrument. Most branded instruments hold their value much better, which is appealing to those who like to buy and sell. I still think it's worth doing partscaster builds, but they aren't for everybody.
I truly don't understand the whole buy, sell, buy, sell, buy cycle. I know some people do, and that's fine, but I cringe at the idea of having to find a buyer for something I paid over $500 for simply because I don't want that thing anymore. Like damn, I really screwed the pooch if I find myself in that spot.
Quote from: pickdropper on May 11, 2018, 04:14:58 AM
Btw, how are you spec'ing your Warmoth builds so they cost $3k+? That's gotta be a hell of a build.
I haven't done this to date, but then I haven't spent over $1200 on a guitar yet, even after upgrades, so I guess that makes me cheap to some, haha. But if I am gonna spend $3k I'm going all out! Mahogany chambered Tele with a Koa top, clear coat, koa neck with a ziricote fretboard, turquoise dot inlays.... To me $3k is too much of an investment into an instrument to not make it MINE.
Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
Quote from: pickdropper on May 11, 2018, 04:22:11 AM
Heritage makes some nice guitars, but I don't think they are particularly better than what's going out of Gibson these days. A few of my friends are Heritage fans and I have a local dealer, so I've played a lot of them. They are nice, but simply another choice.
Heritage is also going through massive changes right now that may prove more significant than the Gibson transition, although time will tell. They just fired a good portion of their old luthiers (and others quit out of protest). The have gotten rid of most of the customization (at least for now) and many of the model offerings. The owners are clearly trying to streamline and optimize their line in an attempt to improve profitability.
https://bluegrasstoday.com/changes-at-heritage-guitar-roils-staff-luthiers/
Thanks for the info. It looks like overall, any of the higher-priced old school brands are gonna go the way of the dinosaur fairly soon. And yes, one of the big reasons is that the devotion and support for USA made Fenders and Gibsons, etc, is getting old and dying out. I think as far as a brand to watch that really has a pulse on the market is Eastwood Guitars. They've focused in on the more oddball, unique, vintage-inspired guitars that are very popular today, especially with the next generation of players. Eastwood also hits a lower price point that is above "entry-level", but not "status symbol", which is the hot market right now. If I had 3K to spend on new guitars, I would much rather buy 4 different models of Eastwood guitars to cover a lot of ground, rather than dump it all on one Les Paul or 335.
If I had 3k, I'd get a nice fender offset (Jazzmaster or Jaguar, haven't decided which), a higher end Epiphone hollow body, and something like a baritone or a Bass VI for some fun.
And with the 1000 I had left over, I'd pay rent for a couple months.
Quote from: somnif on May 11, 2018, 05:42:38 PM
If I had 3k, I'd get a nice fender offset (Jazzmaster or Jaguar, haven't decided which), a higher end Epiphone hollow body, and something like a baritone or a Bass VI for some fun.
And with the 1000 I had left over, I'd pay rent for a couple months.
This man gets it.
And brings me back the the original point a lot of us all concur on, that, while there will always be a market for 3k les pauls, it is not large enough to support a 'lifestyle' brand. I hope they do survive. I hope the 3k lp's return to a higher quality they used to be synonymous with, and that their 'lifestyle' brands get bought out by others who have different intentions with them, and that this all turns from a shitshow into a end positive result for everyone involved. It would be a shame to lose the Gibson brand with it's history. Now only time will tell.
Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
Quote from: TheDude on May 11, 2018, 01:06:51 PM
Quote from: pickdropper on May 11, 2018, 04:14:58 AM
The other thing that pushes people off about partscasters is that the resale value is simply awful. I love all of my partscasters, but they are worth more as parts than as a completed instrument. Most branded instruments hold their value much better, which is appealing to those who like to buy and sell. I still think it's worth doing partscaster builds, but they aren't for everybody.
I truly don't understand the whole buy, sell, buy, sell, buy cycle. I know some people do, and that's fine, but I cringe at the idea of having to find a buyer for something I paid over $500 for simply because I don't want that thing anymore. Like damn, I really screwed the pooch if I find myself in that spot.
Quote from: pickdropper on May 11, 2018, 04:14:58 AM
Btw, how are you spec'ing your Warmoth builds so they cost $3k+? That's gotta be a hell of a build.
I haven't done this to date, but then I haven't spent over $1200 on a guitar yet, even after upgrades, so I guess that makes me cheap to some, haha. But if I am gonna spend $3k I'm going all out! Mahogany chambered Tele with a Koa top, clear coat, koa neck with a ziricote fretboard, turquoise dot inlays.... To me $3k is too much of an investment into an instrument to not make it MINE.
Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
Yeah, I get not enjoying selling instruments. I tend to keep more than I sell as well because the process of selling is a hassle. Plus, there's usually something about an individual guitar that prevents me from want to sell it.
As I said before, I am a huge fan of partscasters. I'd rather put one of those together than buy a Fender style guitar these days. The ability to put the options on that I care about is wonderful. The only thing about them is that you don't know exactly what it is until you buy the parts and put it together. I can run the racks on production guitars until I get the one that really speaks to me. With a partscaster build (or any custom build, really), you kind of hope that it actually turns out to be exactly as you wanted. I've certainly gotten a handful of necks over the years that weren't exactly what I thought they were going to be, and I ended up swapping them out. Sometimes, the feel is right, but the sound isn't exactly what you want, so you either reconfigure the parts, sell the guitar, or break it up and sell the parts. Even with careful choosing, the success rate isn't 100%.
Quote from: lars on May 11, 2018, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: pickdropper on May 11, 2018, 04:22:11 AM
Heritage makes some nice guitars, but I don't think they are particularly better than what's going out of Gibson these days. A few of my friends are Heritage fans and I have a local dealer, so I've played a lot of them. They are nice, but simply another choice.
Heritage is also going through massive changes right now that may prove more significant than the Gibson transition, although time will tell. They just fired a good portion of their old luthiers (and others quit out of protest). The have gotten rid of most of the customization (at least for now) and many of the model offerings. The owners are clearly trying to streamline and optimize their line in an attempt to improve profitability.
https://bluegrasstoday.com/changes-at-heritage-guitar-roils-staff-luthiers/
Thanks for the info. It looks like overall, any of the higher-priced old school brands are gonna go the way of the dinosaur fairly soon. And yes, one of the big reasons is that the devotion and support for USA made Fenders and Gibsons, etc, is getting old and dying out. I think as far as a brand to watch that really has a pulse on the market is Eastwood Guitars. They've focused in on the more oddball, unique, vintage-inspired guitars that are very popular today, especially with the next generation of players. Eastwood also hits a lower price point that is above "entry-level", but not "status symbol", which is the hot market right now. If I had 3K to spend on new guitars, I would much rather buy 4 different models of Eastwood guitars to cover a lot of ground, rather than dump it all on one Les Paul or 335.
Eastman is indeed an interesting company. There's certainly no reason guitars out of China can't be high grade if they use good materials.
I'm curious what Eastman's long term goals are. They seem to be inching a bit towards higher cost offerings. For example, their T184MX guitar, which is a nitro finished hollowbody and has decent pickups (SD '59s) is $2300, which is getting close to the Gibson USA price range (and in the Heritage range). It'll be interesting to see how far they pursue this and how the market reacts to it.
https://www.eastmanguitars.com/t184mx
Quote from: TheDude on May 11, 2018, 07:42:11 PM
Quote from: somnif on May 11, 2018, 05:42:38 PM
If I had 3k, I'd get a nice fender offset (Jazzmaster or Jaguar, haven't decided which), a higher end Epiphone hollow body, and something like a baritone or a Bass VI for some fun.
And with the 1000 I had left over, I'd pay rent for a couple months.
This man gets it.
And brings me back the the original point a lot of us all concur on, that, while there will always be a market for 3k les pauls, it is not large enough to support a 'lifestyle' brand. I hope they do survive. I hope the 3k lp's return to a higher quality they used to be synonymous with, and that their 'lifestyle' brands get bought out by others who have different intentions with them, and that this all turns from a shitshow into a end positive result for everyone involved. It would be a shame to lose the Gibson brand with it's history. Now only time will tell.
Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
Yep, I hope that Gibson can sort out their issues. While Henry did save Gibson from death back in the 80's (Norlin had it almost buried), his lifestyle brand concept is clearly not going to work. I think Gibson is going to have their issues as their base is aging and their guitars are more expensive to produce in the U.S. than most Fenders are.
I'd like to see them drastically scale down the line. Long term, I'd like to see them improve the quality coming off their standard line and bring the features of their custom LPs to the standard line (which really shouldn't be impossible). Yeah, they may have to drop historical things like hide glue, but they could keep the long tenons, better pickups and things like that for very little difference in actual production cost. If they wanted higher price offerings, they could grade out the tops like PRS does so that they fancier options for lawyers/dentists and plainer options for buyers who wanted a more cost effective choice. They could keep the custom shop alive for actual custom instruments if folks want to pay for a modified spec guitar. As far as their semi-hollowbodies, the Memphis plant (since sold and likely to be relocated) has been producing the best 335's I've seen in years. I've played them from all eras and I think the newer ones are great. The standard production line rivals their custom shop quality; although I think they are going to have to work the MSRP down a bit.
And I'd like them to bring the Gibson headstock to Epiphones. They can still put the Epiphone name on them; folks are smart enough not to get confused. Fender keeps their brand identity via headstock on their Squires and folks can keep things straight. Part of keeping the brand healthy is capturing buyers at all price levels.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 03, 2018, 05:46:28 AM
Quote from: slacker775 on May 02, 2018, 07:18:58 PM
From what I can tell with other boutique makers...
BUT... Gibson is NOT a boutique builder. They are a major guitar manufacturer.
QuoteOf course, labor wise it's all fairly close to the same as most/all use CNC machines and finish from there.
Exactly!!
I actually work for a boutique guitar maker and you'd be shocked to know how much it costs to make a non-fancy guitar/bass. The margins are a lot slimmer than you would think.
Quote from: thesameage on May 12, 2018, 11:28:18 AM
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 03, 2018, 05:46:28 AM
Quote from: slacker775 on May 02, 2018, 07:18:58 PM
From what I can tell with other boutique makers...
BUT... Gibson is NOT a boutique builder. They are a major guitar manufacturer.
QuoteOf course, labor wise it's all fairly close to the same as most/all use CNC machines and finish from there.
Exactly!!
I actually work for a boutique guitar maker and you'd be shocked to know how much it costs to make a non-fancy guitar/bass. The margins are a lot slimmer than you would think.
Indeed. The cost of producing a guitar is more than just raw materials and machine time.
Exactly. And just because you use a CNC, it's not like the pieces are ready to go when you get them. And with things like necks, there's a lot of room for error and a lot of bad necks that we throw away. The quality control eats up a lot...and hat cost has to be factored in. Wood is not a perfect thing and there is a lot of variation—and that's before you get into the pretty/master grade stuff.
Quote from: thesameage on May 12, 2018, 12:23:31 PM
Exactly. And just because you use a CNC, it's not like the pieces are ready to go when you get them. And with things like necks, there's a lot of room for error and a lot of bad necks that we throw away. The quality control eats up a lot...and hat cost has to be factored in. Wood is not a perfect thing and there is a lot of variation—and that's before you get into the pretty/master grade stuff.
There's also the cost of running a business (which extends beyond labor).
We've found that out with Function F(x). Even with ordering higher quantities of parts, once you actually factor in the cost of labor and running the business, a pedal is significantly more expensive than a DIY build. Particularly if you use better grade parts.
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 12:29:32 PM
Quote from: thesameage on May 12, 2018, 12:23:31 PM
Exactly. And just because you use a CNC, it's not like the pieces are ready to go when you get them. And with things like necks, there's a lot of room for error and a lot of bad necks that we throw away. The quality control eats up a lot...and hat cost has to be factored in. Wood is not a perfect thing and there is a lot of variation—and that's before you get into the pretty/master grade stuff.
There's also the cost of running a business (which extends beyond labor).
We've found that out with Function F(x). Even with ordering higher quantities of parts, once you actually factor in the cost of labor and running the business, a pedal is significantly more expensive than a DIY build. Particularly if you use better grade parts.
Exactly. There are a lot of associated costs.
That said, it doesn't sound like Gibson was running a tight and efficient shop.
Quote from: thesameage on May 12, 2018, 12:32:07 PM
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 12:29:32 PM
Quote from: thesameage on May 12, 2018, 12:23:31 PM
Exactly. And just because you use a CNC, it's not like the pieces are ready to go when you get them. And with things like necks, there's a lot of room for error and a lot of bad necks that we throw away. The quality control eats up a lot...and hat cost has to be factored in. Wood is not a perfect thing and there is a lot of variation—and that's before you get into the pretty/master grade stuff.
There's also the cost of running a business (which extends beyond labor).
We've found that out with Function F(x). Even with ordering higher quantities of parts, once you actually factor in the cost of labor and running the business, a pedal is significantly more expensive than a DIY build. Particularly if you use better grade parts.
Exactly. There are a lot of associated costs.
That said, it doesn't sound like Gibson was running a tight and efficient shop.
No, and morale has supposedly been poor at Gibson for a while (if you're bored, read the employee reviews at Glassdoor.com).
AFAIK, the guitar business is still profitable for Gibson. What was bringing them down were all the past-their-prime electronics companies that Henry purchased. The debt load from all of those companies he bought is ultimately what brought them to where they are now. In the end, it's going to cost him his ownership percentage.
From Anonymous Gibson Employee @ Glassdoor
Cons:
Upper management sometimes I question there sanity, it's hard to work with incompetence but we get by anyway.
Quote from: blearyeyes on May 12, 2018, 12:59:21 PM
From Anonymous Gibson Employee @ Glassdoor
Cons:
Upper management sometimes I question there sanity, it's hard to work with incompetence but we get by anyway.
Yeah, there are a bunch of scathing reviews. I hope the new management can improve the culture there.
Quote from: blearyeyes on May 12, 2018, 12:59:21 PM
From Anonymous Gibson Employee @ Glassdoor
Cons:
Upper management sometimes I question there sanity, it's hard to work with incompetence but we get by anyway.
I guess I am just old fashioned but, when I read a negative review by someone who doesn't even take the time to ensure that they use proper wording (using there instead of their) it makes me devalue the opinion.
I guess I just feel that companies like Gibson, Fender, PRS, etc. trade too much on their name when figuring costs. It was aided by the explosion in use of these named instruments by popular musicians however, I just wonder...
If they are indeed hurting in the profit margin then perhaps lowering the pricing of the product to increase sales would be an obvious idea.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 12, 2018, 02:20:17 PM
Quote from: blearyeyes on May 12, 2018, 12:59:21 PM
From Anonymous Gibson Employee @ Glassdoor
Cons:
Upper management sometimes I question there sanity, it's hard to work with incompetence but we get by anyway.
I guess I am just old fashioned but, when I read a negative review by someone who doesn't even take the time to ensure that they use proper wording (using there instead of their) it makes me devalue the opinion.
I guess I just feel that companies like Gibson, Fender, PRS, etc. trade too much on their name when figuring costs. It was aided by the explosion in use of these named instruments by popular musicians however, I just wonder...
If they are indeed hurting in the profit margin then perhaps lowering the pricing of the product to increase sales would be an obvious idea.
PRS doesn't seem to be hurting at all. Last I heard, they are 6-9 months behind in fulfilling orders. They've done a good job of balancing lower cost and higher cost options. They released their S2 line to specifically address the segment of the market that the core market is too expensive for. The S2 models are built in the US with a simplified top carve and imported hardware (there may be exceptions to this). So now they have import offerings, lower cost US offerings, high cost US offerings and even higher cost US offerings. Just curious, if you were PRS, how would you figure costs differently?
I'm really curious about Fender. They've done a better job of appealing to the various age groups, but I don't have a clear picture of how healthy they are. I believe Guitar Center owes them a truckload of money, and things could get ugly for FMIC if they close shop.
What guitar companies do you feel do a good job of pricing without trading excessively on their name? Are any of them US built guitars?
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 02:27:34 PM
What guitar companies do you feel do a good job of pricing without trading excessively on their name? Are any of them US built guitars?
I want to say Martin. They have a broad spectrum of product ranges with prices that seem to be very closely tied to materials, functional design features, and ornamentation. Nearly all of their stuff is made in the US. One exception that springs to mind is their backpacker guitars, which just bear the name but are made in Malaysia, I think....
Quote from: EBK on May 12, 2018, 02:56:53 PM
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 02:27:34 PM
What guitar companies do you feel do a good job of pricing without trading excessively on their name? Are any of them US built guitars?
I want to say Martin. They have a broad spectrum of product ranges with prices that seem to be very closely tied to materials, functional design features, and ornamentation. Nearly all of their stuff is made in the US. One exception that springs to mind is their backpacker guitars, which just bear the name but are made in Malaysia, I think....
I quite like Martin, but their pricing is Gibson. There really isn't a huge difference in pricing between a D18 and a J-45. I generally prefer Martin to Gibson acoustics, but the higher end Martins and Gibsons are both very expensive. I guess I'm unclear what makes the Martin pricing better than Gibson's. It's totally possible there's something I'm missing.
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 02:27:34 PM
What guitar companies do you feel do a good job of pricing without trading excessively on their name? Are any of them US built guitars?
Schecter and Ibanez come to mind immediately.
With regards to PRS. I suppose my opinion is influenced by the fact that they do not make lefty axes in their "reasonably priced" lines. Hopefully, that will change soon. If I want a new PRS, it is $3-4K minimum :o
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 12, 2018, 04:59:52 PM
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 02:27:34 PM
What guitar companies do you feel do a good job of pricing without trading excessively on their name? Are any of them US built guitars?
Schecter and Ibanez come to mind immediately.
With regards to PRS. I suppose my opinion is influenced by the fact that they do not make lefty axes in their "reasonably priced" lines. Hopefully, that will change soon. If I want a new PRS, it is $3-4K minimum :o
Schecter and Ibanez both make very nice guitars, but very little of it (if any these days) is produced in the US, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison, is it?
And Ibanez has been moving a lot of production to Indonesia to keep costs down. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but they are offshoring to reduce pricing whereas companies that are trying to build in America are raising prices. I have zero issue with import guitars that are made well, but if one cares about USA made guitars, it's tough to keep the price really low. Both Gibson and Fender have had some low cost USA made offerings that are likely much lower margin than what Ibanez and Schecter are running at, although that is speculation on my part.
As far as PRS, I get that. I've never understood why they've paid so little attention to lefties.
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 07:07:56 PM
Schecter and Ibanez both make very nice guitars, but very little of it (if any these days) is produced in the US, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison, is it?
My answer was focused more on the name trading question.
That being said, I still do not get the vast difference in pricing. Quality guitar makers can offer comparable guitars for 1/4 to 1/3 of the price. Is it really that much more expensive to have the "Made in the USA" label?
Not trying to be obtuse. Just trying to understand the huge pricing differences.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on May 12, 2018, 11:30:05 PM
Quote from: pickdropper on May 12, 2018, 07:07:56 PM
Schecter and Ibanez both make very nice guitars, but very little of it (if any these days) is produced in the US, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison, is it?
My answer was focused more on the name trading question.
That being said, I still do not get the vast difference in pricing. Quality guitar makers can offer comparable guitars for 1/4 to 1/3 of the price. Is it really that much more expensive to have the "Made in the USA" label?
Not trying to be obtuse. Just trying to understand the huge pricing differences.
It's a really good question, actually. I don't think you're being obtuse at all. I don't claim to be an expert on guitar manufacturing overseas, although I do have experience setting up production in various countries (US and Asia included).
Unfortunately, I think it's more complicated than simply labor X here vs. labor Y there. There are multiple factors at play:
1.) Labor cost
2.) Material cost
3.) Construction style
4.) Regulatory costs
A lot of China and Indonesia built guitars not only have cheaper labor cost, but the materials are different and the construction is different as well. For example, if you compare an Epiphone Les Paul vs. a Gibson Les Paul (or a PRS SE vs. a Core PRS) you'll find that the top is veneered instead of a two-piece slab of maple. Often the body wood uses a cheaper alternative to Mahogany. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it's different and less expensive. The hardware is often different as well. In some cases (like Gibson), they shoot Nitro in the US, but I believe they shoot Poly overseas (at least for some models).
The interesting thing is when somebody attempts to build something in China (or other country) with a reduced labor rate. Eastman, who was brought up earlier in the thread, is doing some of this, although they are getting increasingly expensive as the labor rates in China increase. The model I linked to earlier used higher end materials and was $2300, which is getting closer to American made set-neck pricing.
An interesting comparison is actually Ibanez, if you look at their John Schofield semi-hollowbody signature guitars. The Japan-made JS100 clocks in at $2799, while the China version is $1099. Quite a significant difference for two guitars that are fundamentally quiet similar. The Japan one has different pickups, bridge, nut, fretboard radius and a one-piece neck (instead of 3). The labor is also significantly higher in Japan than China. Does that make it worth $1700 more? Folks that love them feel the attention to detail is better out of Japan, but others are OK with the cheaper model. In the end, it really depends on what's important to the buyer. I do think Ibanez has generally very good quality control regardless of where they are built and their overall success reflects that.
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/compare.php?items=(JSM100VT,JSM10VYS)
Most of the Asian made guitars have a combination of cheaper labor, less expensive materials and less expensive parts simply because that is what the market will bear. It'll be interesting to see what happens as more guitars are built in China with top-shelf parts. There's really no reason China can't have equivalently good luthiers, but some company is going to have to decide that it's worth doing it that way. They are also likely going to have to pay a higher labor cost to retain workers, which is a significant problem in the coastal cities of China, where employee turnover is significant. There's a lot more to this discussion, but this is already an incredibly long-winded response.
Bean....................you left the door open and some bots got in ;D
Quote from: Bio77 on December 06, 2021, 02:40:35 PM
Bean....................you left the door open and some bots got in ;D
THX, deleted
QuoteI'm really curious about Fender. They've done a better job of appealing to the various age groups, but I don't have a clear picture of how healthy they are.
Fender are weird, man. While they do have guitars at every price point:
- They absolutely refuse to try and replicate the value for money you can get from other brands for less money.
- The MIM Player Plus is close to US Performer prices but is better spec'd but lack the classic colour options.
- Top line Squiers are getting close to MIM Player prices
- They refuse to do anything innovative with the core Fender line until you get to the more expensive models (and even then, it's taken how long for them to do a contoured heel?) and leave the interesting/modern stuff to either Squier or their acquisitioned off Fender brands (historically - Heartfield, Squier, HM, and now Charvel and Jackson). I know they've done some wackier stuff in the past, but clearly they didn't last.
Anyway, I got my Fender because I wanted a FENDER. You don't buy one for the bang for buck...
Quote from: madbean on December 06, 2021, 02:41:50 PM
Quote from: Bio77 on December 06, 2021, 02:40:35 PM
Bean....................you left the door open and some bots got in ;D
THX, deleted
I came after the deletions. For a second there, I thought he was talking about me.
(https://media4.giphy.com/media/IntCEdOCoB1Pa/giphy.gif)
Quote from: pickdropper on December 07, 2021, 05:10:39 AM
Quote from: madbean on December 06, 2021, 02:41:50 PM
Quote from: Bio77 on December 06, 2021, 02:40:35 PM
Bean....................you left the door open and some bots got in ;D
THX, deleted
I came after the deletions. For a second there, I thought he was talking about me.
(https://media4.giphy.com/media/IntCEdOCoB1Pa/giphy.gif)
Lol. Well, your builds are rather precise....
No, they were pro-China bots. Advance artificial intelligence that can provide balance to negative sentiment on internet forums in a mere 3 years time ;D