Gibson suck

[ianx]

I bought an LP Trad last fall. The nut was cut pretty tight and the frets were a little high, so the shop tech replaced the nut and filed the frets. The guitar seemed to have tuning issue, I could tune the guitar, put it on a stand, return 15-20 min later and it would be flat, the tuning would go sharp after being played. Gibson sent replacement tuners, that didn't fix the problem. I noticed that when fretting the 3rd string at the second fret with minimal pressure, the guitar would go 4-6 cents sharp. I contacted Gibson and got a RA#. I shipped the guitar in early April, Gibson received the guitar on April 15th. I contacted Gibson in early May To get an update and customer service read the notes to me, "The strings were not properly stretched, I stretched the strings and played for approximately 15 minutes with heavy bends and the guitar stayed in tune". I told customer service that the strings had 3 gigs on them, but I had loosened the strings to clean the guitar before sending for service, then re-tuned the guitar. I managed to get a hold of the tech working on the guitar and and explained why the strings may have seemed to need stretching. I also told him about the guitar going abnormally sharp when fretting, he told me he was going to do a full set-up and check it again. After several subsequent calls customer service has no further info.
Going on 90 days since Gibson received the guitar and no indication of an eta. Customer service claims that the guitar is still in the custody of repair. Since Gibson has no information other than the initial notes from early May, I'm considering reporting the guitar stolen and letting the police and insurance company deal with Gibson.

 

[Highcastle_of_Tone]

Wow, a lot of Gibson hate on here, and I'm not questioning whether it's justified by the people posting these examples, I have no reason to doubt you. For what it's worth, I've had two Les Pauls. The first was a standard, and while it was a good guitar (no mechanical problems, sounded fine) I never gelled with it and eventually replaced it with a Les Paul Custom which I absolutely love and is probably my favorite guitar. Sorry so many people have had these bad experiences.

 

[BBN]

Gibson claims lacquer increases the sustain on a thick slab of wood? Have they empirically measured this? If so, where are the results?

I don't think they claim it increases sustain, I think the claim is that it 'allows' the guitar to sustain where as other paints may cause a decrease in the sustain.
I'm not saying it's true....but that is the thought behind why people like using Nitro Lacquer....it allows the wood to breath more.

OP: do you have any pics of your friends Les Paul that has cracks? Just curious to see how bad it is.
I have lots of old gibsons that have nitro cracking. A quick change in temperature can cause the cracking to happen.

 

[Tonemeister]

OP, pics or it didn't happen. Your buddy might find that he can sell his guitar for more because of the checking. Gibson's finish policy is total B.S. IMO. I guess their thinking is that once it leaves the factory it is no longer their responsibility as far as how the guitar is cared for. What typically causes this on Nitro finishes is rapid changes in temperature. So if it was really cold when it was shipped and then it got to his house and he opened it immediately and started playing it and his flat's temp was much,, much warmer, that could cause it. If Gibson said "green" wood was to blame then shame on them. It should come to no one's surprise that these issues exist with Gibson. They are notorious for QC issues and cutting corners. It is totally mind boggling that they can fetch the prices that they do without a proper nut and fret level and dress from the factory. They claim to use the PLEK system which doesn't really seem to have helped in QC for neck issues. All of my LP's , save one, are custom shop models. I pretty much stay away from standard production models. For what it's worth the nuts still suck on all the Gibsons I have ever owned.

 

[BBN]

I have a bunch of Gibson RD's (from the 70's-80's) and a bunch of old Les Pauls as well.
I love the 70's and 80's Les Pauls (and one from the 90's that is actually excellent as well), but I have yet to find a 'newer' Les Paul that plays/sounds great.
They seem to be falling apart as a guitar maker.

I have a 2000-something Les Paul VooDoo. Short run of these guitars made, they're like a Studio but with a cool black/cherry stain on them that allows the wood grain to be felt. I got it brand new directly from the Gibson factory. It never went to a music store.....just directly to me.
Well, one day.....while being an idiot in our rehearsal room.....I decide to try the old 80's metal - throw the guitar over my shoulder, and have it swing back around the other side. But my strap got caught and the guitar got stuck half way around. The only damage was that the rear strap button ripped out.
The disappointing thing (other than me looking like a clown) was that when I looked at where the strap button pulled out, it didn't pull out because the screw ripped out of the wood.....it ripped out because the screw was held in with a plastic wall ancor (same kind you use for hanging a picture on a wall).
I thought that was a very cheesy solution that Gibson used to fix what was probably a hole that was drilled too large.

 

[pneil2]

Check out the Tom Anderson Bulldog. LP vibe, better tone, less weight, much better quality, and unbelievable customer support.

 

[tommyco10]

I have a bunch of Gibson RD's (from the 70's-80's) and a bunch of old Les Pauls as well.
I love the 70's and 80's Les Pauls (and one from the 90's that is actually excellent as well), but I have yet to find a 'newer' Les Paul that plays/sounds great.
They seem to be falling apart as a guitar maker.

I have a 2000-something Les Paul VooDoo. Short run of these guitars made, they're like a Studio but with a cool black/cherry stain on them that allows the wood grain to be felt. I got it brand new directly from the Gibson factory. It never went to a music store.....just directly to me.
Well, one day.....while being an idiot in our rehearsal room.....I decide to try the old 80's metal - throw the guitar over my shoulder, and have it swing back around the other side. But my strap got caught and the guitar got stuck half way around. The only damage was that the rear strap button ripped out.
The disappointing thing (other than me looking like a clown) was that when I looked at where the strap button pulled out, it didn't pull out because the screw ripped out of the wood.....it ripped out because the screw was held in with a plastic wall ancor (same kind you use for hanging a picture on a wall).
I thought that was a very cheesy solution that Gibson used to fix what was probably a hole that was drilled too large.

Sorry to hear about the guitar crash! I have an old 78 RD Artist which is an awesome player. Ebony fingerboard, super thin neck and fender scalelength!

I also used to have the Les Paul Gothic, brought out around the same time as your voodoo. Great sounding guitar, however I never gelled with the playability. To be honest it probably needed a bit of fretwork, that I didn't have the skills to do at the time. I wish I hadn't sold it in the end!

 

[Sixstring]

I don't think they claim it increases sustain, I think the claim is that it 'allows' the guitar to sustain where as other paints may cause a decrease in the sustain.
I'm not saying it's true....but that is the thought behind why people like using Nitro Lacquer....it allows the wood to breath more.

OP: do you have any pics of your friends Les Paul that has cracks? Just curious to see how bad it is.
I have lots of old gibsons that have nitro cracking. A quick change in temperature can cause the cracking to happen.

I've never been up on the whole laquer paint deal but if what your saying is true and it let's the wood breath then that would explain why the finnish will crack.

On the green wood explanation... I can't believe what I'm reading, ether someone at gibson doesn't know what he is talking about or Gibson is building guitars with total disregard to craftsmanship.

 

[tommyco10]

True, my Epiphone ES-175 blew away the 'new" Gibson ES-175 in terms of build quality, finishing, feel, and even pickup tonality.

Henry J. should truly be ashamed for what Gibson is producing at such inflated price points. The valuation at some point for Gibsons of this era will take a dive and probably push up the Norlin era Gibsons, which, for all the trashing, were good playable guitars that aged well.

Actually really impressed with what epiphone put out at the price.

The big standard sunburst casino (of which there is no direct Gibson equivalent) is a really great guitar.

 

[steadystate]

I don't think they claim it increases sustain, I think the claim is that it 'allows' the guitar to sustain where as other paints may cause a decrease in the sustain.
I'm not saying it's true....but that is the thought behind why people like using Nitro Lacquer....it allows the wood to breath more.

OP: do you have any pics of your friends Les Paul that has cracks? Just curious to see how bad it is.
I have lots of old gibsons that have nitro cracking. A quick change in temperature can cause the cracking to happen.

Nitro initially looks good. On a Les Paul, I have to believe that's all there is to it. I'd love to do a real test between poly, nitro, and no finish on a Les Paul and see (hear) the results. On a fine acoustic instrument, I could conceive a tonal difference if poly was really laid on thick. On a Les Paul? I hate poly and prefer lacquer. But I think Gibson's claims are a bit hyped concerning sustain.

 

[AlbertA]

I got a 60's tribute goldtop, which I got for $650...Ironically, the quality was pretty good compared to some of the horror stories you hear in this thread or elsewhere.

 

[Robboman]

It's an interesting thing. I'll paraphrase my past reading, it goes something like this;

Classic vintage guitars from the 50's / 60's had nitrocellulose lacquer finish, because that's what they had. Not because anyone thought it sounded better, or breathed, or resonated. It's just what was most commonly used. But the stuff was fragile, it scratched and checked easily. Retailers would have to discount scratched guitars in-store, which happened way more often when they were all nitro. Tougher finish was needed, so sometime between late 60's and early 80's virtually all mass-produced electrics switched to poly (-ester, and then urethane finish). Compared to nitro, poly is really hard to scratch, and won't crack/check just from temperature swings, etc.

Everyone was happy until the 'vintage' concept emerged in the 90's. Suddenly lots of guys wanted 'vintage' look and feel, and for the first time, old beat-up guitars became cool. People noticed that poly guitars don't wear out the way the old nitro did, and they wanted that worn vintage look. Then, on top of that, some guys became convinced that vintage nitro also sounds better. Pretty soon, with vintage guitar prices going through the roof, nitro finish options on new guitars became 'a thing' that a significant number of people want. Nitro is mandatory for any 'reliced' guitar, but it's also available on lots of shiny perfect new guitars for the supposed tone enhancement reasons.

So looking back at the OP, there is no mention of poly VS nitro, just that a nice new guitar now has a cracked finish. I'm wondering if the buyer was even aware of the fragile downside to nitro, and aware of poly finished guitars. This is information retailers should be offering.

Bottom line.. if you don't know/don't care about nitro, and you just want a good durable finish that will look new a long time, you should buy guitars with polyurethane finishes.

 

[malenko]

Ok, I'm trying to upload the pics my mate text me into a post but it's not letting me. It's saying the files are invalid when they are .jpeg files.
I shall continue to try unless somebody can tell me how to upload correctly

 

[Fabio KTG]

I'm surprised that Clive hasn't piped up yet.

 

[RDeraz]

I come from the frame of mind that as long as the damn thing plays and sounds as it should, all else is secondary.I have never owned a Les Paul, But for that much money you shouldn't have to adjust anything. maybe action and strings.Finish should be flawless. Definitely not fret work or nut filing and such. Poly,Nitro whatever. I don't know, but wouldn't a harder finish make the instrument more dense, therefore adding to sustain?

 

[malenko]

Okay I think I figured it, hope this works



I still think this is exceptionally poor quality from Gibson and saying it looks aged is not the answer. If you want it aged, you buy aged, you want new, you buy (or think you buy) new. And no Robboman, my mate (nor myself), was ever aware of the different finishes and their pitfalls. It is something that Gibson is certainly keeping from it's customers.

 

[malenko]

Please ignore the other attached photo, not sure what happened there

 

[Funeral]

My first real guitar was a Gibson Explorer 76 reissue. Loved it and still have it.
My first custom shop guitar was a Gibson Explorer. Loved it and still have it.
I've yet to find another Gibson of the same quality's though.
These days I only pick up 6 sting guitars for specific task and have basically moved on from them.
So Ive switched brands and never looked back. I occasionally pick a Gibson LP up at a guitar store to only be offended by the lack of quality and outrageous pricing.
Gibson seems to be having an 80's Harley Davidson type issues and will likely bounce back to their former glory, but you see now, I like BMW, Ducati, Triumph, Honda, Suzuki, Aprilia etc etc....a LOT more.
Shame. :twisted

 

[UnsungHeroGuitars]

I'm surprised that Clive hasn't piped up yet.

And here we go...

Well, there is a way to save yourself a MASSIVE bundle of cash and hassle you know...

Just sayin'...

 

[Fabio KTG]

The UK's authority on all things Epiphone, people ^^^^