# GAWKER on Gibson Guitars...



## ezcomes (Jul 28, 2008)

http://gawker.com/gibson-guitar-is-a-remarkably-unpopular-company-1713072808

while i admit...it seems like perhaps the first person might not have been the best person to hire...but the rest is kind of bad...

as for quality...its funny that sometime you hear about it, sometimes you don't ($hitty or flawless is what i'm gettin at)

thoughts?


----------



## garrettdavis275 (May 30, 2014)

I only needed to read half of that to know my next guitar will be a PRS. You can't treat your people like that.


----------



## GWN! (Nov 2, 2014)

I was surprised to read that the electronics are now board mounted on the Gibson LP.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

I like that the article was mostly input from various people who've dealt with the current Gibson company rather than one guy reporting on how terrible it all is. As for the electronics, one of the many things changing for the worse, just last year it turned me off from buying a newer Les Paul. I've never bought a new Gibson and I probably wouldn't since plenty exist on the used market.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lord-Humongous (Jun 5, 2014)

GWN! said:


> I was surprised to read that the electronics are now board mounted on the Gibson LP.


They are on my LPJ, I believe same on the Tribute models. These are the entry level models in the range though, so I'm not sure if same applies when you move up the line.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

I was looking at a fancy top LP Standard and it still had the PCB in the cavity. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2015)

I clicked a few links to absorb what I could.
This. Sums it up.

The first sign that something might be wrong with the way Gibson is run is that not one but _two _of our tipsters 
said that their experiences at Gibson were so bad that they are planning to write a book about them. One woman 
who had traveled from the UK in order to interview for a job at Gibson earlier this year sent us a brief excerpt about 
the Gibson hiring process, complete with a cameo by the CEO himself:

_I just got a glimpse [of] what felt like the world’s most baffling hiring process. ‘The psychometric test takes approximately 
three hours to complete. If you have any questions in this process or problems with the testing, please let me know,’ said 
the email when it plopped into my inbox yesterday. I promptly responded: ‘I don’t really have three hours spare to take tests 
before tomorrow. Also, please can I have a job description because you haven’t actually sent me anything about the role, and 
I’d really rather know exactly what you expect before I succumb to being tested for THREE WHOLE HOURS.’ Or something to 
that effect. It wasn’t quite as stroppy. But seriously, I had other admin to attend to, like answering my Tinder messages.

Anyway, what happened was, HR invited me to meet with three different people in the company in one day (all of whom would 
explain more), and in the time between these meetings she suggested I take these tests at their headquarters. I hadn’t really 
planned to spend the majority of a day in a corporate cellblock ...

I’ll admit, I forgot about the test when the CEO stepped into the gigantic conference room, if only because he was even more 
baffling. It was all I could do to sustain eye contact. The silver-haired, seventy-ish-year-old man looked as though he was having 
some sort of epileptic fit in front of me as he blathered on and on and on about his history in and before he started with the 
company. His eyes were rolling around the room, landing everywhere but on me. I wasn’t entirely sure he was sober.

‘So, do you have a social media strategy already?’ I asked him.
‘Oh yes,’ he said, sitting back and smiling knowingly.
‘I’d like to know what it is.’
‘I bet you would,’ he smirked.
‘Well, it would help,’ I replied, trying to meet his eyes, and failing.
‘I’m sure it would,’ he answered.
‘Well... what do you want to be, as a brand, that you think you’re not already?’
‘Even more awesome. We’re already awesome. We just want to be more awesome.’
‘Right.’
As he spoke, the words I read on Glassdoor.com rushed back to me: ‘Run, don’t walk away from even considering working here. 
The CEO is HORRIBLE - mean, nasty, uber-controlling. If anyone in the company dares to have a different idea than his, you can 
pretty much guarantee that they will be fired - on the spot.’_​


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Actually, Gibson is not the only employer to require extensive testing without providing a sense of what the job is. Indeed, that's precisely what applying to the government consists of. If you've never completed tests like that, then you simply haven't applied to a large employer.

I won't make excuses for Henry Juszkiewicz. I know when I had lunch with George Gruhn, the kindest thing he could say about Juszkiewicz was that at least he played guitar, which is more than Gruhn could say about some other guitar company presidents. In general, few seem to have anything especially nice to say about him. Maybe that's because they saw a Dusk Tiger or Zoot Suit SG before they were asked for their opinion.

Gibson is a BIG company. Perhaps a bit too big. It's certainly not the little building on Parsons St. anymore. But maybe that's the problem: people _expect_ it to be this down-home place where people work on bodies and necks with chisels and spoke-shaves, instead of CNC machines.

Certainly, the glut of Les Pauls on the market, at any of a wide array of price-points, has made for a thriving 2nd hand market, which the company itself makes no money from; only from the original sale. Maybe they should start a leasing program like car companies do. Lease a $4000 guitar for 2-3 years, after which they get it back, to lease out again, or make money on the leaseback sale.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with mounting guitar electronics on a PCB. Indeed, many hobby or small-time builders will keep a cardboard mounting template around for setting up the pots and trimming leads to exactly the right length. The pots are mounted to the cardboard, such that the pots and board could be easily iserted into the control cavity. Once soldered, everything comes off the board. But what the hell is so wrong about mounting pots to a PCB? If the PCB is double-sided, then one side can serve as your ground plane so you don't have to install shielding in the cavity. Where's the sin in that?


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

mhammer said:


> There is absolutely nothing wrong with mounting guitar electronics on a PCB. Indeed, many hobby or small-time builders will keep a cardboard mounting template around for setting up the pots and trimming leads to exactly the right length. The pots are mounted to the cardboard, such that the pots and board could be easily iserted into the control cavity. Once soldered, everything comes off the board. But what the hell is so wrong about mounting pots to a PCB? If the PCB is double-sided, then one side can serve as your ground plane so you don't have to install shielding in the cavity. *Where's the sin in that?*


Exactly what I was wondering also!

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Here's the comment that likely sums up Gibson in the last 10-15 years.

"Gibson feels like the classic American story:An excellent product corrupted by marketing."

Of course, most of us realize this. The decision to buy is do you want one bad enough to fork out the dough and forget about the rest of the garbage that goes with Gibson and most other large companies, whether it's guitars or something else.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

mhammer said:


> There is absolutely nothing wrong with mounting guitar electronics on a PCB. Indeed, many hobby or small-time builders will keep a cardboard mounting template around for setting up the pots and trimming leads to exactly the right length. The pots are mounted to the cardboard, such that the pots and board could be easily iserted into the control cavity. Once soldered, everything comes off the board. But what the hell is so wrong about mounting pots to a PCB? If the PCB is double-sided, then one side can serve as your ground plane so you don't have to install shielding in the cavity. Where's the sin in that?


Nothing wrong at all, unless it isn't what I'm looking for. I like a traditional LP setup. The PCB just doesn't jive with me. This is all a matter of taste and what the individual wants of course.


----------



## Tarbender (Apr 7, 2006)

The last Gibson I bought new was a Tribute Les Paul and I'm happy to say it has quality electronics in it. Wouldn't want any guitar with a PCB in it.


----------



## J-75 (Jul 29, 2010)

L&M and Gibson together guarantee your purchase. If there is something wrong, they will fix or replace.

The comments re: PC board in the cavity. Sorry, but this is what runs the world these days - TV's, medical instrumentation, avionics, etc.
Assuming it's done right, what's the beef, no nostalgic cloth-covered wires? You can't live in 1960 forever.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

I think I can get over the board and cavity guts. The point of the article is Gibson is turning to be a shitty company to deal with and buy from, I'm sure even the mighty L&M/Yorkville could tell stories. The leadership is lacking and the product is suffering.


----------



## J-75 (Jul 29, 2010)

vadsy said:


> I think I can get over the board and cavity guts. The point of the article is Gibson is turning to be a shitty company to deal with and buy from, I'm sure even the mighty L&M/Yorkville could tell stories. The leadership is lacking and the product is suffering.


I bought a 339 from L&M a few years ago. It was a rental so it had some light wear, mostly on the pick guard, so I got a good price.
After about ten months, it developed a slight neck bow, so rather than mess around with it, I used the L&M one year free setup service to deal with it.
A few days later I got a call from their service dept. telling me that the truss rod adjustment was already maxed out and couldn't be adjusted further.
L&M and Gibson replaced the guitar with a brand-new 339 - no charge. I was impressed and happy.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

That 50s tribute SG I and a few others here bought has a PCB in the cavity (I didn't do a cavity search first, as I bought it on line. Probably wouldn't have made any difference....).

I think the issue with PCB is its harder to modify. You may have to cut or jumper traces, components may not fit where they would work best, etc. Other than that, there is absolutely no sonic down side to it. More upside really, as it allows for more repeatable manufacturing. Same as amps.

Regarding Gibson, I'm sure its not the place to work at that it was in the 50s, 60s, even 70s. They are facing massive off-shore competition AND the ruthless requirement to build what they did 50 years ago exactly like they did 50 years ago, for alot less money. Add to that an environment where people think they don't have to support their own industry, jobs just happen and all that matters is how cheap you can buy something. Ya, I bet Gibson is about as fun to work at as GM or John Deere.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

gibson makes an easy target. and so does henry. i'm not saying they didn't put themselves there. but in my mind that article may as well have been penned by capt. obvious. it doesn't really tell you much that you couldn't know from an internet search. even though they're not wrong per say, it still smells funny to me. there are plenty of satisfied customers out there too, and they offer no evidence of that. if i was standing around with a bunch of guys and someone said those things as if he had news, my first suppressed thought would be _no shit, sherlock. _


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

As far as the PCB goes, I think that is a good thing. Innovation is a good thing in many cases. If it cuts down on costs, it may save some jobs in N. America for a few more years. Perhaps the rest of the industry will see this as an advantage and move in the same direction. Most other industries have gone this route and it's time the music instrument business started catching up.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Steadfastly said:


> As far as the PCB goes, I think that is a good thing. Innovation is a good thing in many cases. If it cuts down on costs, it may save some jobs in N. America for a few more years. Perhaps the rest of the industry will see this as an advantage and move in the same direction. Most other industries have gone this route and it's time the music instrument business started catching up.


I think the circuit boards will have exactly the opposite effect on jobs in NA. I'm sure those things are made overseas and are being used to turn out guitars quicker by anyone who can plug a wiring harness in rather than someone with just slightly more know how in regards to soldering something together. 

Again, I have nothing against innovation or PCB's but when I'm looking for a historic guitar I do think of Gibson and I do want it to be true to the classic image, tone and feel. It's a romance of sorts. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Not to be flippant here but does the 'meh' attitude toward circuit boards in the control cavity make anyone who spends big bucks for a vintage style wiring harness look a bit foolish?


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

There are things that are important about "vintage specs", and things that are unimportant. If a body looks like vintage, but weighs a pound more or a pound less, then it ain't vintage spec. If the pickup bobbin or the polepiece radius have different measurements, leading toa slightly different pickup geometry, then it ain't vintage spec. If the fret height or width is different, it ain't vintage spec. But if the back cover of the control cavity is_ this _kind of plastic, and they originally used _that_ kind of plastic, or if the control cavity cover used 5 screws to secure it and the reissue used 4 screws, who gives a rat's ass? As for the control cavity, I'm wondering who among us would turn their nose up at an instrument that had the cavity shielded, just because the original wasn't, or had a ground plane on the underside of the pickguard when the original didn't? There are things that are relevant to the tone the original produced, or to its playability, and things that add value without taking anything away from the original.

If Gibson used a PCB with the "wrong" pot values or taper, or unmojofied caps, fine, make a stink. But if one is buying a contemporary reissue (which won't actually BE vintage for another 20 years, by which time we'll treat PCB-mounted controls as a modern innovation that we've grown nostalgic for) then why the fuss over something you can't see, and doesn't alter the tonal quality of the instrument?

In general, Gibson's (Juszkiewicz's) sin is that they waited for too damn long to enforce their trademark, and decided to respond to the glut of low-cost import models on the market by aiming for every conceivable price-point, thereby eroding their brand as a purveyor of quality-only instruments. Fender did the same stupid thing, so now everyone and their cousin makes a Strat clone, and kids can't really tell the difference between a $99 Strat, a $300 one, or a $900 one. Rickenbacker worked hard to preserve their brand, ruthlessly quashing any attempt to make a look-alike. And the result is that we respect Rickenbacker. Until fairly recently, when Fender bought them, we respected Gretsch for the same reasons. BUt now they have budget instruments too, and fewer people think of a Gretsch as something they would happily save up for.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

bluzfish said:


> Not to be flippant here but does the 'meh' attitude toward circuit boards in the control cavity make anyone who spends big bucks for a vintage style wiring harness look a bit foolish?


It seems only the vintage and the dyed in the wool Gibson people complain about these things. Take for example when Gibson tried to fix the problem with their easily broken necks. This clearly was an upgrade to their guitars but their was so much whining about the change that Gibson felt forced to go back to the old design. 

It's like saying I don't want fuel injection, I want the old carb system that doesn't work as well and not as efficient but I don't care; I'm stuck on the old ways.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

When it comes to Gibson;

I want this...









Not this...










If it doesn't matter tone wise, fine, but I still won't be able to sleep at night knowing I'm one step closer to having a Line 6 POD inside my guitar. That could just be me.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

I think the glassdoor.com info tells what we need to know.

Being miserable at work shouldnt be a prerequisite for working for a large company.

I like my Gibson. I spent more than a third of what the guitar cost me to get it where I wanted it. Now it's all good without any drawbacks.

But no way would I buy a new one without having a luthier friend with me.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

As a proponent for PCB's in general, I find it strange to find fault here. But they do make it a pain in the arse if you want to use that isolated volumes scheme on an LP instead of the standard layout. Or perhaps change a 3 position switch to a 4 position switch in a tele if it had a PCB. These are simple mods, done for decades. Now the components are hardwired and harder to make simple changes or reconfigure components. Other than that, there is no downside I can see.



Budda said:


> Being miserable at work shouldnt be a prerequisite for working for a large company.


Shouldn't be a prerequisite? It is the definition of working for a large company, IMO.

I worked for a decade in small mom-n-pop type companies. And the last 25 for a couple large corps. Large corps, by nature, are misery-generators, unless you are one of the bean counters, I spose. Who knows what the fvck makes those robots tick or what they find joy in......

I like what I do, but I absolutely despise the beancounters and spineless yesmen I have to do it for. I stay for the money, the security and the pension. Other than that, I would be much happier working for someone who a) grew their own business b) care about the widgets they make more than the empire they make.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Budda said:


> But no way would I buy a new one without having a luthier friend with me.


That is really a sad state of affairs when one feels that the products has gotten to that level. For the concern for the employees, I hope they can turn things around.


----------



## Guest (Jun 24, 2015)

High/Deaf said:


> Large corps, by nature, are misery-generators..
> 
> .. I absolutely despise the beancounters and spineless yesmen..


Our last facility manager climbed up the ladder by kissing ass. At which point,
he fired/chased away all the high caliber talent we had, so as not to have anyone
become a threat to his position. Consequently, everyone in management who 
reported to him, followed suit. Only yes(wo)men being considered for possitions
of authority. There was/is no leadership. Only glorified clerks who cracked whips.
This has been going on over a period of 11 years. He was then promoted to head 
office where he was shortly fired himself when they realized that he had no qualifications.
Because of the sloppy logistics and waste that he created, our warehouse will be
closing at the beginning of 2017.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Sorry to hear


----------



## Guest (Jun 24, 2015)

Oh well. A change of scenery is always nice.
I still have my class AZ (tractor trailer) to back up on.
Or, I may get my bus license and drive little old ladies to the casino. lol.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

laristotle said:


> Our last facility manager climbed up the ladder by kissing ass. At which point,
> he fired/chased away all the high caliber talent we had, so as not to have anyone
> become a threat to his position. Consequently, everyone in management who
> reported to him, followed suit. Only yes(wo)men being considered for possitions
> ...


That's too bad. Unfortunately, that type of thing goes on in many work places. Sometimes it leads only to a very bad place to work. Unfortunately, it can also lead to a situation like yours.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

It sure seems like Gibson is the favourite whipping boy among guitarists.

I suppose that comes with being the biggest and best for decades.

Fortunately when I buy a Gibson I'm not buying shares in the company or applying for a job. I buy based on the individual guitar.

Having said that, were I to be in the market for a Les Paul now, I simply could not afford the one I bought in 2013.

It seems to have almost doubled in price. I saw prices for R7s on the L & M site for almost $7000 and I was told that these new ones are NOT made to the same specs as the 13 VOS R7 I have.

But hey, lots and lots of beautiful used Gibbies out there.

I hope they're still around if I decide to buy another new one, but unless they have a paradigm shift in their pricing department or I win the lottery.........

- - - Updated - - -



Steadfastly said:


> It seems only the vintage and the dyed in the wool Gibson people complain about these things. Take for example when Gibson tried to fix the problem with their easily broken necks. This clearly was an upgrade to their guitars but their was so much whining about the change that Gibson felt forced to go back to the old design.
> 
> It's like saying I don't want fuel injection, I want the old carb system that doesn't work as well and not as efficient but I don't care; I'm stuck on the old ways.


Sounds like Harley Davidson lovers.

But, I do like P2P wiring in my Les Pauls. If that fails, I can fix it.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i have seen posts on forums where guys are sooo proud of their paper and oil caps. they SWEAR it's the only way to get teh vinnn-tej tonez. i have read articles i think in premier guitar where they say if you unwrap that paper its just a modern type cap underneath it all. i think my lp has the pc board in the cavity, but i haven't looked. i don't want to take the cover off because someday, way in the future, it will need to be opened. and i'll feel just like geraldo rivera at al capone's vault. wondering what mysteries may be contained inside, untouched for decades?


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> Mmmmmm....


That's a nice guitar ^^^ and just the way it should be. 

The Firebird X was an attempt to innovate(?) when no one was asking for it, terrible all around and a great big disaster for Gibson. I truly believe that companies like Gibson and Harley are meant to make the same "classic" thing over and over, people will buy it if they keep up the small things like quality and a nostalgic image. Heck, people will buy it even if they turn out shit! It takes decent leadership to either keep the ship on the same steady course or great leadership to switch gears and provide new exciting ideas, Gibson is currently showing us it can't do either. Harley did it years ago with the V-rod and many said no but some embraced it and it's taken off, still, the classic models are far more popular. Fairly safe bet that kids and adults alike will continue look and want a Gibson or a Harley, depending what they're shopping for.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

THIS;

_I’d rather buy a knock off and modify it to my liking (which I have) than spend $4,000-5,000 on a robot made les paul. They are worth maybe $400 at most. If ever a company should disband itself since it sunk into the gutter in the late 70’s it’s Gibson. Over-rated hack company. Try playing one in the store, the frets look like they were put in by chimps, the QA team must drink on the job. Their quality has been a joke since 1975, don’t they get it?_


----------



## Guest (Jun 25, 2015)

why does this ..

make me think of this?


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

At least the car has cup holders. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wile I share the face palm horror of _looking _at the Firebird X, I wonder how many of us have actually played one.

If it looked more traditional I suspect it would have received a better response.

It may have still been a failure as the typical Gibson lovers just aren't looking for innovation when they buy one, but man it's almost like they set out to make the fugliest guitar they could.


----------



## djmarcelca (Aug 2, 2012)

I don't find the firebird X all that ugly. 
Really it's just a reverse firebird with a maple neck. Nothing too radical there. 

The finish could use some work. The red flame pearl is not that great. 
But the effects units inside the body, gotta go. The auto tuners gotta go. 

If they offered a stripped down version I would think that opinions would be different.

i didn't play one at L&M but looked it over, the body was very very thick and the neck was a boat back contour.


----------

