# Gibson 2015, what's all the hubub?



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

I have been off the forums for some time until recently. I've been hearing grumblings about Gibson's 2015 models, but not the gist of the issue. Whats the scoop?


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Min-etune on every model as opposed to an option, and a 29% price hike are the major ones.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

ah...I'd have issue with those things too...thanks


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

Aside from the aforementioned G-Force auto tuner (previously named Min-etune) the brass nut seems to be hit and miss. Initially I thought it would be a good idea for setting the action and for those wanting an easy way to set up a guitar for slide....BUT.... I tried a few and my observations were shared by the staff at my fave music emporium...the brass nut creates a brighter tone and one that some may not want. One thing that was pointed out to me on a couple of guitars was the sliding of the string across the leading brass zero fret...makes hella noise on high gain amps. Now it's true that in most situations if you're not listening for it you won't hear it ..but once you do...it can't be unheard. On the Lesters...the holographic image of Les looks like Mr Spock going "live long and prosper"...they could have picked a better image. As well...there's the Les Paul signature on the headstock...they could have at least picked a signature from his early early days that had a little more flair..but this one is pretty plain and looks like a child with a crayon.


----------



## pattste (Dec 30, 2007)

Apart from the double-digit price increase, G-Force tuners, wierd wide neck profile, brass nut / zero-fret, ugly headstock signature and hologram and the cheap molded Fender-style case, not much as changed really.

Don't buy one. They'll get the message.


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

pattste said:


> Apart from the double-digit price increase, G-Force tuners, wierd wide neck profile, brass nut / zero-fret, ugly headstock signature and hologram and the cheap molded Fender-style case, not much as changed really.
> 
> Don't buy one. They'll get the message.


Oh right...the wide neck...that was something I found unsettling. String spacing is the same, but the neck is wider and supposedly easier to play, hell my bends aren't that extreme that they'd go off the edge of the neck


----------



## dcole (Oct 8, 2008)

That Zero Fret Adjustable Nut does look pretty damn cool. Relieves some of the issues with standard nuts but that is unfortunate if it makes the tone to bright. Maybe this can coincide with the thread on replacing your strings? No need to do so if the brass nut makes the guitar bright anyways. I think the minitune system is stupid though. No need for that.


----------



## boyscout (Feb 14, 2009)

pattste said:


> Apart from the double-digit price increase, G-Force tuners, wierd wide neck profile, brass nut / zero-fret, ugly headstock signature and hologram and the cheap molded Fender-style case, not much as changed really. Don't buy one. They'll get the message.


Similarly-unpopular 2014 changes were also carried over into 2015, including no neck binding. (The 120th Anniversary inlay is gone, if not forgotten.) It's as though managers who understood what made the Gibson Les Paul the world's favorite premium guitar were allowed to run herd in 2013 (resulting in one of the biggest years in Gibson's history) and then pushed aside so Norlin-like cost-cutters and efficiency experts could maximize profit on the accelerated production after 2013.


----------



## Stonehead (Nov 12, 2013)

pattste said:


> Don't buy one. They'll get the message.


This is the only power a consumer has.


----------



## Toogy (Apr 16, 2009)

There is neck binding still, just no "nibs"


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

as much as i like the look of the nibs, they're not practical


----------



## Rollin Hand (Jul 12, 2012)

I noodled on one on Monday -- liked it fine. The e-tuning is a gimmick, and one can remove it, I am sure.

I am thinking that many dislike these because they are different, and not what they are used to.

The price, however....that's going to be unpopular regardless of your actual guitar preference.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Rollin Hand said:


> The e-tuning is a gimmick, and one can remove it, I am sure.
> 
> I am thinking that many dislike these because they are different, and not what they are used to.
> 
> The price, however....that's going to be unpopular regardless of your actual guitar preference.


I've been vocal in the past about their pricing, but I won't beat on that drum again. I think many people would take issue to having to pay extra for that gimmick they decide to remove on anything they purchase.
They do have some droolworthy colours though, whether new for 2015 or not.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i think it's pretty amazing that you folks think the pricing has _anything at all_ to do with the tuners and zero fret, wider neck, etc. not that you're alone in that misconception. i mean, the cost of doing the changes they've implemented don't add up to $900. even if by some weird ripple in the fabric of space-time it actually did cost that much, it would still be stupid to make standard what no one (well, maybe a few here and there, but not the shit tons of people who would normally be considering a 2015 gibson guitar) seems to want. 
i go by what i see. henry j, much as i don't like alot of his decisions, is definitely a smart businessman. he knows how to make money. so when i see something like this that seems to go upstream on purpose, i think there's more than what meets the eye, currently. i just find it hard to imagine that he would be stupid enough to try ignoring his customers. i'm waiting for the other shoe to fall.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Rich people still "need" to impress other rich people, so they will sell. They always sell...


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

cheezyridr said:


> i think it's pretty amazing that you folks think the pricing has _anything at all_ to do with the tuners and zero fret, wider neck, etc. not that you're alone in that misconception. i mean, the cost of doing the changes they've implemented don't add up to $900. even if by some weird ripple in the fabric of space-time it actually did cost that much, it would still be stupid to make standard what no one (well, maybe a few here and there, but not the shit tons of people who would normally be considering a 2015 gibson guitar) seems to want.
> i go by what i see. henry j, much as i don't like alot of his decisions, is definitely a smart businessman. he knows how to make money. so when i see something like this that seems to go upstream on purpose, i think there's more than what meets the eye, currently. i just find it hard to imagine that he would be stupid enough to try ignoring his customers. i'm waiting for the other shoe to fall.


As you noted the price increase has nothing to do with new "features", in fact the new features cost Gibson less, not more; no nibs = savings, new nut = savings, e tuner cost 12 cents extra.

I don't know what make Gibson think people want cartoon holograms and chicken scratch signatures, or plastic tuning systems, some may but I'd bet most do not.


----------



## pattste (Dec 30, 2007)

Budda said:


> Rich people still "need" to impress other rich people, so they will sell. They always sell...


I don't think anyone is impressed with the mere name Gibson on the headstock these days, not when you can find one for $500 at Best Buy or Futureshop. They have devalued / cheapened the brand, although I respect the fact that unlike almost all of its competitors Gibson has resisted moving the production to Asia.

Also, rich people can buy a PRS or any number of other beautiful and expensive guitars.


----------



## notjoeaverage (Oct 6, 2008)

Fret height has also been reduced by 27%


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i would call that an improvement in playability, at the increments we're talking about, that's quite a bit. however, i have read a few techie blogs that claim the plek system isn't the be-all/end-all that they claim. i have to say though, the 2014 i bought was set up really well when i rec'd it. i don't know if it was tweaked by L&M first or not, but if i took a guitar out of the box in the shape it was in when i rec'd it, i wouldn't have changed anything.


----------



## boyscout (Feb 14, 2009)

Budda said:


> Rich people still "need" to impress other rich people, so they will sell. They always sell...


1) We'll see. I'd say the chances of Gibson having another sales year like 2013-2014 in 2014-2015 range from zero to none.

2) Gibson owners are not rich, because they spend so much on their guitars (experience speaking!)


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> as much as i like the look of the nibs, they're not practical


true, but so is a lot of higher priced features in guitars. flamed maple isn't really "practical" either. it just looks nice.
Its one of many things that I think helped somewhat to justify the cost of the instrument as well as to distinguish itself from lower costing guitars or even counterfeits.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

The Robbie Krieger LA Woman Les Paul Custom looks amazing. Probably way too expensive, but definitely interesting.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

pattste said:


> I don't think anyone is impressed with the mere name Gibson on the headstock these days, not when you can find one for $500 at Best Buy or Futureshop. They have devalued / cheapened the brand, although I respect the fact that unlike almost all of its competitors Gibson has resisted moving the production to Asia.
> 
> Also, rich people can buy a PRS or any number of other beautiful and expensive guitars.


there were always other alternatives.

I don't think Gib has devalued their brand through box stores yet. no more than fender or anyone else has with their entry level models. and just because you sell a Cobalt, doesn't mean you wont sell any Corvettes. different lines within the same brand.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Did they stop making LP Customs? I was on their site and couldn't find them.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

As regards the hubub, you could go back to 2014, 13, 12, 11 and many more years and ask the same thing. There has not been anything really new of any consequence for a long time.


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

Diablo said:


> Did they stop making LP Customs? I was on their site and couldn't find them.


According to the website... no. At least not currently. They probably had to send out for some more digits for the price!

http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-Custom.aspx?ModelYear=2015


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Well as I don't really care for the new design features and price increases, I suppose it's a good thing Gibson made so many great guitars over the past decades.

There are still lots of them out there on the used market.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Hamstrung said:


> According to the website... no. At least not currently. They probably had to send out for some more digits for the price!
> 
> http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-Custom.aspx?ModelYear=2015


Thanks for confirming. 
I was curious, as it seems like the LPC would be harder for them to screw up with their new "details".


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Jimmy_D said:


> I don't know what make Gibson think people want cartoon holograms...


I'm thinking that the purpose of hologram is to get a leg up on counterfeiting, similar to hologram implementation on currency.


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

Well I've been holding off on posting anything...but I did pick up a 2015 Les Paul Special in vintage burst. I wanted to have one 2015 model with all the changes including the brass nut, wider neck, Gforce Tuners etc. but it had to be one that I liked...and one I could revert back to a regular guitar with manual tuners and Tusq nut if I didn't like the changes and still feel like I got a heck of a guitar. I still think the hologram looks like Mr Spock giving the Live Long and Prosper sign. Oh, and the ultra cool Jetson's gold glittery guitar case was pretty cool too.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

That does look like a real beauty. P90s, nice unbound solid wood body - the kind of guitar I personally like. It will be interesting to hear your opinion of the robo-tuners after living with them for awhile.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dradlin said:


> I'm thinking that the purpose of hologram is to get a leg up on counterfeiting, similar to hologram implementation on currency.


It still could have been done in a more appealing way.
i think gibson were better off with anti counterfeiting measures that were incorporated into the guitar itself, like fret nibs, that also had an esthetic value, rather than some 3rd party manufactured sticker, that likely will appear for sale by the box load on ebay within a year.
as if someone cloning Gibsons in China couldnt get a hookup with someone at the factory that makes reflective stickers for Dollarama or CrackerJack box toys. It doesn't have to be authentic, it just has to look more or less authentic at a glance.
i don't really understand this concept of anti counterfeiting. If you can fake the guitar reasonably well, how much harder is it to fake a COA, sticker, etc?


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Diablo said:


> It still could have been done in a more appealing way.


Do you mean the use of a hologram, or do you mean the use of an entirely different anti-counterfeiting measure?

The hologram is just one feature. In fact all the 2015 design changes will deter counterfeiting the 2015 models specifically.

Fret nibs are easy to duplicate, control cavity wiring is easy to duplicate, 2 screw truss rod covers are easy to duplicate, but counterfeiters don't take the time or incur the expense.

If Gibson changes the hologram every year then the counterfeiters would be behind and having to play catch-up.

I'd rather see the auto-tune system gone and the hologram located further up the back of the headstock.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dradlin said:


> Do you mean the use of a hologram, or do you mean the use of an entirely different anti-counterfeiting measure?
> 
> The hologram is just one feature. In fact all the 2015 design changes will deter counterfeiting the 2015 models specifically.
> 
> ...


See I don't think that will do any good, because the general public won't be able to keep up, nor will they be sophisticated enough to distinguish between real anti counterfeiting measures or copies.
conterfeiters won't mind being a year behind.
after a certain point, what good are those measures if they detract from the overall esthetic of th object? I have no use for an uncopiable, but ugly item.


----------



## boyscout (Feb 14, 2009)

Gibson (Jim DeCola) explains/answers the 2014/2015 changes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfZs8Ig4iSw

Some models have an easy snap-on/snap-off pickguard... I didn't know that. No more debate, guitar forum message volume plunges!


----------



## Morkolo (Dec 9, 2010)

boyscout said:


> Some models have an easy snap-on/snap-off pickguard... I didn't know that. No more debate, guitar forum message volume plunges!


I don't know, I'll have to see that one in person. I could be dead wrong but it looks like something that would be easy to break. I hope I'm wrong though as I have a Gibson Fireburst Studio that I'd love to put a cream pick guard on only thing is it doesn't have the holes in it and I don't want to put them there just in case I change my mind down the road.


----------



## Megalon (Jan 18, 2015)

I just couldn't own a guitar that had that pathetic garbled 'Les Paul 100' on the headstock. The original script is so classy and lean. To have that terrible sig just ruins the guitar. The robot tuners make the guitar look like a toy. The '15 Gibsons will go down as the worst blunder in Gibson's history. I don't know about the other features like the nut,adjustable pickguard or wider neck-but even if there is some benefit,they just don't look right. The look is very important and I don't care what anybody says. If the guitar looks clunky or deformed in some way, the majority of guitarists will not buy it.


----------



## finboy (Jun 13, 2006)

Played one, hated the new thin/wide neck, hated the other changes, put it back on the shelf and didn't buy. Gibson really fucked up on these changes, and I haven't seen many "new 2015 gibson day!" Threads on any forums. There have been a few here and there, but the changes haven't been well received from what I have seen.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I can see these being blown out by the end of the year for 29% off!


----------

