A real Gibson or a Replica?

[Damien]

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't general consensus: World Renowned Master Luthier's Hand Built Les Paul > Gibson > Really Good Luthier With 15+ Years Experience > Epiphone > Inexpensive Copies From Varying Parts of Asia > First Act > Toilet Seat With Strings?

I have no problem believing that you could have an equal or better LP built privately. I mean, Gibson employs skilled tradesmen, not a factory of conjurers. But I think to get something equaling Gibson's quality you'd have to pay a lot more.

 

[-=[Shifty]=-]

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't general consensus: World Renowned Master Luthier's Hand Built Les Paul > Gibson Custom Shop = high end MIJ = Really Good Luthier With 15+ Years Experience > mid level MIJ >= Gibson USA > Epiphone (non MIJ) > Inexpensive Copies From Varying Parts of Asia > First Act > Toilet Seat With Strings?

Fixed

 

[Jessenoah]

if the builder knows what he is doing, a replica can be a guitar that is miles ahead of any gibson in tone, action, finish, I think people are afraid because they wont have anywhere to go if they dont like it....

 

[jsadctnfn1]

I'll take a wild stretch here and say - 90% of buyers, if offered the 'Gibson' over the 'homemade' , would take the 'Gibson'. I'm just wondering what is the buyers perception of what makes a Gibson better. Do they feel more secure, and how many people buy based on 'hearsay, reputation, etc' rather than really looking at the guitar purely for what it is? Its kind of odd/funny that Slash chose a replica when he could have picked an off-the-wall Gibson, and still apparently uses the replicas.

Slash was given that Replica by then G'N'R manager Alan Niven because he didn't have any other guitar at the time. He had sold the only guitar he had (a B.C. Rich or Jackson, can't remember) for drugs! G'N'R were so poor that when they recorded Appetite, their manager had to rent the Amps he played through! LOL! But Slash did like the look and sound of the replica with Seymour Duncan 59's.

 

[rockstar232007]

But you're correct that the Gibson headstock has a lot to do with buyer's perception of what makes the guitar. Rockstar232007 obviously has a lot of that going in his response to your question. His "Only a Gibson is Good Enough" is simplistic and ignores a wide selection of guitars that are not only good enough but quite a bit better. He's not alone; there's a whole herd out there that believes the same thing.

My comment was tongue in cheek, but after I went back and re-read the OP, I understood what he was saying.

But as far as it's context? I stand by it. I've played a "wide selection of guitars", and I've always found myself going back to Gibsons, and NOT just because of the name on the HS. Hell, I have a '95 Hamer Slammer Pacer that sounds and feels WAY better than most Gibson LPs I've played over my 27 years on this planet! Do I think Gibson are balls out, THE best guitars in the world? NO, but there's something about them (Brand name aside), that draws me to them.

Maybe the inlays are made from crack-cocain or something, IDK? (again, tongue in cheek)

Anyway, back on topic.

 

[Exluthier]

I have no problem believing that you could have an equal or better LP built privately. I mean, Gibson employs skilled tradesmen, not a factory of conjurers. But I think to get something equaling Gibson's quality you'd have to pay a lot more.

Gibson doesn't, for the most part, employ skilled tradesmen. Even the Custom Shop employs people off the street and has a rather high turn around. Are there people with a background in guitar building? Yes, but probably only a handful.

 

[rockstar232007]

Gibson doesn't, for the most part, employ skilled tradesmen. Even the Custom Shop employs people off the street and has a rather high turn around. Are there people with a background in guitar building? Yes, but probably only a handful.

Too true!

 

[dspelman]

My comment was tongue in cheek, but after I went back and re-read the OP, I understood what he was saying.

Whether YOUR comment was tongue in cheek or not, there ARE a whole lot of people who feel exactly that way -- that only gibson is good enough. That's fine, of course, and a valid opinion. You just have to wonder, sometimes, how that opinion is formed; is it a result of having played enough instruments to know the difference, or is it just a regurgitation of heavy marketing.

 

[Cookie-boy]

If they were made by the same person with the same materials (as i said in OP), then the 'lesser company' would only be considered a replica by people that care more about a price-tag and telling their friends. I am not familiar with 'Ratners', being Australian, but I'm assuming it is a 'Toyota to a Rolls Royce' type of comparison. Think you missed the point.

I may have been drinking.........

 

[rockstar232007]

Whether YOUR comment was tongue in cheek or not, there ARE a whole lot of people who feel exactly that way -- that only gibson is good enough. That's fine, of course, and a valid opinion. You just have to wonder, sometimes, how that opinion is formed; is it a result of having played enough instruments to know the difference, or is it just a regurgitation of heavy marketing.

What marketing? I have never seen Gibson ads outside of music stores, internet sites, or guitar magazines...unless you count the numerous [Gibson endorsed] musicians from the past to the present, minus the Jonas bros of course.

I've never bought ANY guitar (or any piece of gear for that matter) because of the fact that someone else (famous, or not) had one. It just so happened that the first guitar I ever saw, touched, and played was my uncle's '74 Gibson LP Deluxe at the age of 5, and I've been hooked ever since.

I've also played/owned many Fenders, Epis, Hamers, Alverezs, Jacksons, etc plus a few custom orders/one-offs (not mine), but I've always had a thing for Gibsons and it had little or nothing to do with "marketing".

P.S. I'm not arguing your point, cause' I do agree to some extent, but I believe that marketing is only a very small percentage (if any) of the reason people buy Gibsons. Hype? maybe, but not marketing.

 

[tnvol]

I really love my Gibsons and they are all "real" Gibsons but for the most part, I like "real" guitars. So that pretty much means that if it's a nice guitar, I will play it no matter what is on the headstock.

 

[rockstar232007]

I really love my Gibsons and they are all "real" Gibsons but for the most part, I like "real" guitars. So that pretty much means that if it's a nice guitar, I will play it no matter what is on the headstock.

 

[shaun]

if a guy at the Gibson factory built 2 guitars on the same day, and took one of them home without the 'Gibson' logo on the headstock, most people would say "but it isnt a Gibson"...
its more of a mental hurdle.
some players dont care who made their guitar, but some will only play a brand they know or have grown up with.. reguardless of quality.

personally speaking, if i could have the guitar that i wanted, made to the specs that i wanted, for the price that i found acceptable, then i wouldnt care if the headstock was blank.

 

[BrianGT]

if the builder knows what he is doing, a replica can be a guitar that is miles ahead of any gibson in tone, action, finish, I think people are afraid because they wont have anywhere to go if they dont like it....
__________________

That's a really good point!

We all know that Gibson has some QC issues but if you try enough Les Pauls you will eventually find one in the right colour, neck shape, spec and sound quality. You can then buy that guitar knowing what you have in your hands....that's worth a lot.
Getting a Luthier to make you one can be a risk. It might be exactly what you want appearance wise and spec level but that doesn't guarantee it will sound great. You will only know that when you get it in your hands.

I have a replica made by a guy who has made me 3 other guitars and a number of necks plus a couple of refinishes so I know his work but it still doesn't give you a cast iron guarantee.
Luckily it came out fabulous, especially soundwise with OTPG's fitted and I can't play any other of my guitars anymore! I have bonded so much with the replica.
Then again, if it didn't do it for me it would be under the bed gathering dust.
Life is too short to play something you don't like.....

 

[dcmey]

What marketing? I have never seen Gibson ads outside of music stores, internet sites, or guitar magazines...unless you count the numerous [Gibson endorsed] musicians from the past to the present, minus the Jonas bros of course.

I've never bought ANY guitar (or any piece of gear for that matter) because of the fact that someone else (famous, or not) had one. It just so happened that the first guitar I ever saw, touched, and played was my uncle's '74 Gibson LP Deluxe at the age of 5, and I've been hooked ever since.

I've also played/owned many Fenders, Epis, Hamers, Alverezs, Jacksons, etc plus a few custom orders/one-offs (not mine), but I've always had a thing for Gibsons and it had little or nothing to do with "marketing".

P.S. I'm not arguing your point, cause' I do agree to some extent, but I believe that marketing is only a very small percentage (if any) of the reason people buy Gibsons. Hype? maybe, but not marketing.

dspellman is a troll, and bashes Gibson every chance he can. Maybe we should just start calling him "ED"

 

[dcmey]

I think first of all that you need to know the luthier who is doing the build and know their quality of work. Gibsons are going to be more consistant, but it doesn't always mean that they will every time be the better guitar.

 

[jsadctnfn1]

+1

 

[dspelman]

What marketing? I have never seen Gibson ads outside of music stores, internet sites, or guitar magazines...unless you count the numerous [Gibson endorsed] musicians from the past to the present, minus the Jonas bros of course.

I've never bought ANY guitar (or any piece of gear for that matter) because of the fact that someone else (famous, or not) had one. It just so happened that the first guitar I ever saw, touched, and played was my uncle's '74 Gibson LP Deluxe at the age of 5, and I've been hooked ever since.

I've also played/owned many Fenders, Epis, Hamers, Alverezs, Jacksons, etc plus a few custom orders/one-offs (not mine), but I've always had a thing for Gibsons and it had little or nothing to do with "marketing".

P.S. I'm not arguing your point, cause' I do agree to some extent, but I believe that marketing is only a very small percentage (if any) of the reason people buy Gibsons. Hype? maybe, but not marketing.

My first guitar was/is a Gibson. And so were the next four or five, all of which have stayed with me over the years. But when I bought, I'd already been a professional musician (keyboards) for years and had worked with guitar players who bought for quality and utility. And, too, in those days, the choices were far more limited than they are now.

Marketing includes the endorsers and the ads and the product placement on the wall at Guitar Center and its appearance in movies and the promotion in internet forums and all the bits that add up to brand recognition and a purchase decision. Gibson has built up a huge marketing presence, to the point where it and Fender have established themselves, leastways in the minds of anyone who first walks into a guitar store, as the primary names in guitars. Generally, those top two positions are the bailiwick of the "conversation stoppers" -- the two best brands beyond which there's really not a lot of further conversation. Nikon and Canon were those in 35mm photography, Ferrari and Lamborghini are those in sports cars. But further investigation usually shows that this is a bit simplistic view, that there are better outright cars/cameras/guitars or "better for the bucks" in each category.

It's just good to maintain an open enough mind to be able to find and acknowledge those products that are either better or better deals. Doing that requires breaking through whatever marketing and hype and peer acceptance there is.

 

[dspelman]

dspellman is a troll, and bashes Gibson every chance he can. Maybe we should just start calling him "ED"

Thank you for your contribution to this forum. That was helpful and insightful.

 

[standard man]

Thank you for your contribution to this forum. That was helpful and insightful.