# Epiphone v Gibson



## ezcomes (Jul 28, 2008)

the differences that matter...

Gibson vs. Epiphone: The Differences That Matter

Seems to be a decent article...even the comments section is, behaved...

What is the GC community thoughts?


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

There’s nothing really new in that, but it’s summarizes things well.


----------



## Distortion (Sep 16, 2015)

At a glance why are they calling a "Les Paul Standard Traditional". Last time I looked at them they were two different models. Did that change when I was not looking ?


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

ezcomes said:


> What is the GC community thoughts?


my thoughts are generally the same. nothing new contained. but i would add also, no real stance was taken by the author. lastly, this was posted in the wrong section.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

I'll speed this up.


Gibson is better.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

vadsy said:


> I'll speed this up.
> 
> 
> Gibson is better.


Oh boy. Steadly’s gonna want a word with you!


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2017)

I would not be seen in public with an Epiphone. So embarrassing.


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

And what of these?

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Maestro-by-Gibson-MESGBKCH-Double-Cutaway-Electric-Guitar-Kit/35151662


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Player99 said:


> I would not be seen in public with an Epiphone. So embarrassing.


What about an Elitist? They are pretty nice


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Scotty said:


> What about an Elitist? They are pretty nice


They are nice indeed. But most cant spot an Elitist instead of a standard on stage. I definitely cant.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Budda said:


> They are nice indeed. But most cant spot an Elitist instead of a standard on stage. I definitely cant.


Different headstock than the regular Epi, or at least in the Les Paul or SG models


----------



## LanceT (Mar 7, 2014)

ronmac said:


> And what of these?
> 
> https://www.walmart.com/ip/Maestro-by-Gibson-MESGBKCH-Double-Cutaway-Electric-Guitar-Kit/35151662


"Research shows that children trained in a musical program tend to develop superior social skills and manage their time more effectively."

For sure the researchers had this guitar in mind - along with it's included instructional CD - when they did the study.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Scotty said:


> Different headstock than the regular Epi, or at least in the Les Paul or SG models


But you have to know epi elitists to know that, and what the difference is. I would wager most guitarists dont.


----------



## Ricktoberfest (Jun 22, 2014)

LanceT said:


> "Research shows that children trained in a musical program tend to develop superior social skills and manage their time more effectively."


Unless they end up in a rock band. Then they can’t ever be on time and all social skills revolve around their most recent shred solo. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Budda said:


> But you have to know epi elitists to know that, and what the difference is. I would wager most guitarists dont.


 This could probably be a discussion all on its own. I'm a basement player, or hobbyist whatever you want to call it. I'm not up on stage trying to make a living, so I don't understand that part. But what I can't help but wonder is what does the audience in general care? Only aspiring guitar players or musicians in the crowd are going to look for that. 

So how many people is that? 1%? 10%? With the fact that Epi has some premium lines that are nearing or in professional grade, what does it really matter to the player? 

I know there is resale value and those who believe in mojo (Though I will argue Mojo is in the hands ), but in all reality is it that much of a deal to have the name brand? 

For instance everybody assumes Snap on is the be-all to end all in the mechanics world yet I know mechanics who swear they are junk with Mac Tools in the likes being better stuff. But some of these guys feel that they need to have the snap on your to be regarded as good mechanics. 

I don't get me wrong, a tradesman with good tools can do his job better or easier, then a tradesman compensating for substandard stuff, but tools don't make the tradesman. Skills make the tradesman. 

So it's primarily self image? I don't see playing an Epi on stage being akin to the contractor showing up at your house in a brush painted 1978 Bell telephone window van or K car wagon or converted ambulance... or am I in the minority here?


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Image matters.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

It depends what stage. Im not saying epi makes bad guitars - i have a buddy who gigs his all over the world. 

Whether we like it or not, rock is a lot to do with image. Non players know the name fender and gibson. If they dont see that name, and the guitar looks cheap, they may assume you dont take it seriously enough to buy good gear. And if you dont take it that seriously, surely you arent getting paid much (if at all). And since this is for fun, why shouldnt i talk to my friends and ignore the band all night (or until they play my song)?. Im not saying all patrons are like that, but I also dont know what percentage are. I have been reading about gear long before I could go into a bar or cared about alcohol.

If you dont look like some rock badass up there, why should they pay attention to you? How much image matters will vary between amateur and pro bar band, amateur and pro touring band, etc. But image will always matter. It's called the music business because its a business haha.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

if you're up there doing worn out covers like some bands do, no one in your audience will care what you're playing. those people have no idea about any of the stuff you and i care about. the band is there to sell beer to drunks. 
bands doing original music in certain genres and sub-genres attract people who actually came to hear your music. s certain percentage of those know the labels, and appreciate tone and other nuances.
maybe just my opinion, but i think 80% if the time, the reason certain brands are seen on more stages is because it gives the artist enough confidence to do their thing. if warren haynes dropped gibson for epiphone tomorrow, most of his fans wouldn't care. he could secretly play them in the studio on every album and none of us would have any clue, admit it or don't.


----------



## cdntac (Oct 11, 2017)

First post here but I'll add my two cents as I've been lurking for a while and this subject drew me out...

Excluding physical appearances, the biggest differences I've experienced is tuning stability, fretwork and playability. 

Tuning ability: Obviously means staying in tune but I'll also include how easily the neck flexes. I'm no wood worker (tho for about the the past five years I've been looking after the guitar collection of an old rocker who still tours in the summer, so I consider myself knowledgable enough about guitars) so I'm not sure if using the term "stiff" is applicable when describing the wood a neck is made of but I find with Epis the neck flexes much easier than most Gibsons (barring their lower priced guitars) even with the truss rod set correctly. 

Fretwork: My experience has shown that the frets are crowned better on Gibsons.

Playability: The action can be lower on most Gibsons (again, excluding some of their lower priced guitars) and the neck can be made straighter than Epis without incurring buzzing near the nut. 

Granted, I've seen great playing Epis but as a general rule, the things I listed above are my experiences when comparing Gibson to Epi.


----------



## Distortion (Sep 16, 2015)

Scotty the elitist and the elite are better guitars period. Made in Japan with better components. They play better ,sound better ,look better etc. That is why people buy them instead of the made in China Epi's that have flooded the market.


----------



## djmarcelca (Aug 2, 2012)

My big dislike for Gibson is the poor quality for exaggerated prices. 

I've never been a fan of the Breakable headstocks, the String catching Nibs on the binding drive me insane
For many many years the lack of humbucker splitting drove me insane, and the body/neck joint limiting the upper frets really bugged me as well. 

All of these issues were corrected with Ibanez models, ESP models, and even the Dean Cadillac. 

There's better made alternatives to Gibson models out there. 

For me, Your likes and dislikes are your own.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

I though the article was pretty non-committal - like most reviews.

Personally, I set my own standard on the instruments I play. Aside from my 82' Tokai and a 74' Yamaki, I will always choose an American "Standard" guitar. There are great guitars at all price points but I no longer consider them - just as I don't get into Custom Shop or Relics. Same for amps- no cheapies - and no Dumbles either. I want my stuff to work day in and day out and if it breaks I want it to be fixable or replaceable.

For the record, the last Epiphone I owned was a Wildcat and it was a lot of fun and built pretty well - but I wouldn't have relied on it.


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

Player99 said:


> I would not be seen in public with an Epiphone. So embarrassing.


I honestly don't know if you are being serious or sarcastic. Nobody is really that insecure are they?


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2017)

traynor_garnet said:


> I honestly don't know if you are being serious or sarcastic. Nobody is really that insecure are they?


Sadistic.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

traynor_garnet said:


> I honestly don't know if you are being serious or sarcastic. Nobody is really that insecure are they?


some big-name artists are extremely cautious/superstitious about their gear. without confidence, one will have a hard time delivering their best work, even if the instrument is up to the task.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

cheezyridr said:


> some big-name artists are extremely cautious/superstitious about their gear. without confidence, one will have a hard time delivering their best work, even if the instrument is up to the task.


I'm still waiting for someone to build an instrument that will deliver my best work - so far they all make me sound awful


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

allthumbs56 said:


> I'm still waiting for someone to build an instrument that will deliver my best work - so far they all make me sound awful


I have the distinction of making even the nicest guitars sound like crap. My PRS is proof of that.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Distortion said:


> Scotty the elitist and the elite are better guitars period. Made in Japan with better components. They play better ,sound better ,look better etc. That is why people buy them instead of the made in China Epi's that have flooded the market.


Well agreed, which is why I bought one but, there are other Chinese made models that are quite good. I think we have all seen Chinese quality go from absolute junk to quite good in the last few decades. Korea is becoming the new Japan. Give it another two decades and China will be the Pacific Rim Mfg. leader, if they aren't already.

Are Gibson's superior? We all know that there's differences in materials, hardware and finishes but the quality gap is closing.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that we have all been guilty of looking down our noses at something we consider to be substandard, but I really do think we should give them a fair shake and respect where they are now. These aren't Kay's or Harmony's of the 50's

I suppose this topic is no difference than MIC/K/M vs US Fenders.


----------



## Distortion (Sep 16, 2015)

Without getting political for me it comes down to what economy I want to support with my purchase.


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

cheezyridr said:


> some big-name artists are extremely cautious/superstitious about their gear. without confidence, one will have a hard time delivering their best work, even if the instrument is up to the task.


Of course most people would prefer to play _their _guitar (the one they are used to playing) , but to specifically tie that comfort to a corporate logo or to lack confidence without the psychological comfort of that logo it quite another phenomena. The psychological research on those who 'need' brand names is quite telling and clear. It doesn't matter if it is big name star or joe basement.


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

Distortion said:


> Without getting political for me it comes down to what economy I want to support with my purchase.


I wish there was a middle ground where I didn't have to choose between a.) paying a high price so that workers could make an ok wage but the CEO nonetheless grabs the lion's share of the profit or b.) paying less money so that workers get crappy wages and the CEO still grabs the lion's share of the profit. In either scenario, it's the same person who comes out on top and I am tired of playing the shell game.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

traynor_garnet said:


> I wish there was a middle ground where I didn't have to choose between a.) paying a high price so that workers could make an ok wage but the CEO nonetheless grabs the lion's share of the profit or b.) paying less money so that workers get crappy wages and the CEO still grabs the lion's share of the profit. In either scenario, it's the same person who comes out on top and I am tired of playing the shell game.


THIS


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

traynor_garnet said:


> Of course most people would prefer to play _their _guitar (the one they are used to playing) , but to specifically tie that comfort to a corporate logo or to lack confidence without the psychological comfort of that logo it quite another phenomena. The psychological research on those who 'need' brand names is quite telling and clear. It doesn't matter if it is big name star or joe basement.


no argument from me. i wasn't endorsing it, just pointing out that it's a known thing, and not at all uncommon.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

jdto said:


> I have the distinction of making even the nicest guitars sound like crap. My PRS is proof of that.


Bullshit! Not bloody likely. 

You're a way too self critical.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

Sorry but I am a guitar snob and prefer Gibson over any Epi any day! I am being 100% truthful as I type!

I prefer the quality and reliability that my 95 Gibson SG standard has provided me with!

I have had the chance to play two Epi dots and I just think that they are inferior and I just don't like playing them. 

Maybe it's psychological. Idk.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

traynor_garnet said:


> Of course most people would prefer to play _their _guitar (the one they are used to playing) , but to specifically tie that comfort to a corporate logo or to lack confidence without the psychological comfort of that logo it quite another phenomena. The psychological research on those who 'need' brand names is quite telling and clear. It doesn't matter if it is big name star or joe basement.


I would assume you would make the same judgments when you see someone driving an expensive German car? A lot of wealthy people seem to requires psychological comfort. There can't be any other reason for choosing a car that really doesn't do anything different than many cars that are 1/4 the price.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

High/Deaf said:


> I would assume you would make the same judgments when you see someone driving an expensive German car? A lot of wealthy people seem to requires psychological comfort. There can't be any other reason for choosing a car that really doesn't do anything different than many cars that are 1/4 the price.



People who can afford quality over quantity do so. Compare the quality of a new BMW to a Volkswagen. There really is no comparison. 

I would agree about the psychological aspect as well.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2017)

I wouldn't be caught dead driving a Volkswagen with an Epiphone guitar to a gig.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

Player99 said:


> I wouldn't be caught dead driving a Volkswagen with an Epiphone guitar to a gig.


Sure as shit, me neither!


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

High/Deaf said:


> I would assume you would make the same judgments when you see someone driving an expensive German car? A lot of wealthy people seem to requires psychological comfort. There can't be any other reason for choosing a car that really doesn't do anything different than many cars that are 1/4 the price.


Expense/cost was irrelevant to my point. The need to be 'branded' is not exclusive to any particular price point. If the driver of an expensive care would feel insecure, embarrassed, or lack confidence because of the logo on the front of their car then yes, it would be the same as the guitar player that _needs _a particular corpoarate logo stuck on piece of a wood.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> some big-name artists are extremely cautious/superstitious about their gear. without confidence, one will have a hard time delivering their best work, even if the instrument is up to the task.


I'd be interested in knowing the endorsements budgets between Epiphone and Gibson. I'm dubious that artists are faithfully always using products they pour their heart into and aren't chasing the buck by using whatever their being paid the most to use.
Many years ago, I knew someone who knew Patrick Roy ..the question came up of why he used his brand of goalie pads so faithfully....he said he would continue to do so "as long as they kept bringing dump trucks of money for him to do so". He was blowing a little smoke, the 6- figures he was getting paid wasn't a lot of money for a guy like him, but....everyone likes money. There are few " bad" goalie equipment makers, or ones that won't make a star what they want. I'd suggest the same applies to guitar companies....so money is the difference.
I think EVH has proven this on more than 1 occasion.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

High/Deaf said:


> There can't be any other reason for choosing a car that really doesn't do anything different than many cars that are 1/4 the price.


Comfort and features, really. Yeah they all have 4 wheels an engine and body, but it makes sense to want to be comfortable. I completely understand paying more for a better ride - i commute in a car that isnt a great ride haha.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2017)

Cars are the biggest waste of money.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Player99 said:


> Cars are the biggest waste of money.


unless it's an El Camino


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Player99 said:


> Cars are the biggest waste of money.


Birds are able to fly thousands of kilometers of their own ability. We think we're so evolved haha.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

Diablo said:


> I'd be interested in knowing the endorsements budgets between Epiphone and Gibson. I'm dubious that artists are faithfully always using products they pour their heart into and aren't chasing the buck by using whatever their being paid the most to use.
> Many years ago, I knew someone who knew Patrick Roy ..the question came up of why he used his brand of goalie pads so faithfully....he said he would continue to do so "as long as they kept bringing dump trucks of money for him to do so". He was blowing a little smoke, the 6- figures he was getting paid wasn't a lot of money for a guy like him, but....everyone likes money. There are few " bad" goalie equipment makers, or ones that won't make a star what they want. I'd suggest the same applies to guitar companies....so money is the difference.
> I think EVH has proven this on more than 1 occasion.



i have seen several artists who show off some old worn out pedal they have had repaired a billion times, rather than spend $100 on a new one. a few times i have seen them mention things like "i used this guitar on that album, i've had it since forever, it's not the nicest guitar i have, but it's been with me so long...." sure, alot of artists feel like you say when it comes to endorsements, and i have no issue with that at all. i make and install duct for a living, and i want to make as much as i can doing it. i have tools i've owned since i was an apprentice. they aren't the nicest ones i have, but sometimes, they're just the thing. they make awesome music, nothing wrong with wanting to get paid well for their craft. most of them have dedicated as much (or more) to theirs as i have to mine. 

also, evh doesn't count. it's like allowing clark kent to enter a weight lifting contest.


----------



## cdntac (Oct 11, 2017)

Diablo said:


> I'd be interested in knowing the endorsements budgets between Epiphone and Gibson. I'm dubious that artists are faithfully always using products they pour their heart into and aren't chasing the buck by using whatever their being paid the most to use.


My experience has shown that artists will sometimes use many different guitars for recording but rely on a few of their reliable favourites for live work. 

Then there are guys like Joe Perry who switch guitars and amps (check out his back line!) almost every song. 

Also, I've seen it where an artist sounds like himself no matter what brand of guitar is in his hands.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

traynor_garnet said:


> Expense/cost was irrelevant to my point. The need to be 'branded' is not exclusive to any particular price point. If the driver of an expensive care would feel insecure, embarrassed, or lack confidence because of the logo on the front of their car then yes, it would be the same as the guitar player that _needs _a particular corpoarate logo stuck on piece of a wood.


You may have intended it to be irrelevant, but it comes hand in hand with the prestige brand. If prestige brands were the same price as all those pedestrian brands, they wouldn't be prestige.

I just don't know how you can, from a distance and not knowing the person, judge whether he is driving/playing something because of the brand on the hood/headstock smf needs the psychological crutches the brand provides or if he really appreciates the quality. We all know he paid more for it, with hugely diminishing returns, but at what point do we decide he doesn't really appreciate those slight improvements in quality.

I say this as a person who both chooses to buy 'prestige' items and doesn't, depending on the items in question. I believe I am willing to take the hit in price for some things, but can't justify it for others. I like to give others the same benefit of the doubt - at least until I talk to them and get to know their motivations.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> i have seen several artists who show off some old worn out pedal they have had repaired a billion times, rather than spend $100 on a new one. a few times i have seen them mention things like "i used this guitar on that album, i've had it since forever, it's not the nicest guitar i have, but it's been with me so long...." sure, alot of artists feel like you say when it comes to endorsements, and i have no issue with that at all. i make and install duct for a living, and i want to make as much as i can doing it. i have tools i've owned since i was an apprentice. they aren't the nicest ones i have, but sometimes, they're just the thing. they make awesome music, nothing wrong with wanting to get paid well for their craft. most of them have dedicated as much (or more) to theirs as i have to mine.
> 
> also, evh doesn't count. it's like allowing clark kent to enter a weight lifting contest.


Sure some musicians are purists....others, less finicky. How to tell one from the other? I think my point still stands....that endorsements may not be the most reliable way for consumers to judge merits of a product/ brand. Heck Jimmy Page is an LP icon...maybe more than anyone but Lester himself....but even he recorded lots with Fenders.
Amazing to think Ron Wood got to where he is while slumming it with Fenders, instead of the ESPs he's paid to play now. 
Or Metallica, for that matter.
Maybe I'm cynical....or maybe I'm just aware of the business aspects that happens behind the curtains of our beloved artists.

I'm living it right now....my kid is finally showing some interest in trying guitar. But she would have you believe that Martins Ed Sheeran model and Taylor's Taylor swift models are the best in the store, because she likes those artists. I know both those brands make non- sig models at least as good as those and with better resale. But I don't dare buy one, for fear she loses enthusiasm with a plain old guitar old dad would play, instead of one of those magic hit makers from Ed and Tay-Tay. While a 7 yr old cant comprehend this, I'd like to think as adults we're less susceptible to endorsement marketing.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Player99 said:


> Cars are the biggest waste of money.


For me, it's expensive furniture. I know ppl that will spend 5 figures for a room. My wife did that once. Ever try to sell used furniture? Pennies on the dollar. A close second is jewellery....what a scam.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

Diablo said:


> Sure some musicians....


agreed. i didn't mean to suggest ALL (or even most) are like that. just some



Diablo said:


> For me, it's expensive furniture. I know ppl that will spend 5 figures for a room. My wife did that once. Ever try to sell used furniture? Pennies on the dollar. A close second is jewellery....what a scam.


the only scam i know of that comes close to the scam of diamonds, is auto insurance. i can't complain about used furniture prices though. the only new furniture i ever buy is mattresses and couches. every thing else i only buy used. mattresses and couches i keep until they are so worn out that whatever woman i'm with forces me to replace them.


----------



## Distortion (Sep 16, 2015)

Diablo said:


> For me, it's expensive furniture. I know ppl that will spend 5 figures for a room. My wife did that once. Ever try to sell used furniture? Pennies on the dollar. A close second is jewellery....what a scam.


Yes guitars are not all that bad as a hobby if you pick right you won't lose a bunch of money. Buy a $40,000 car and lose $10,000 at least soon as you drive it off the lot.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Distortion said:


> Yes guitars are not all that bad as a hobby if you pick right you won't lose a bunch of money. Buy a $40,000 car and lose $10,000 at least soon as you drive it off the lot.


Ahh yes, but for most of us, a car is pretty much a necessity for life and delivers tremendous value in standard of living. I can live without a guitar, it's a hobby for me, it doesn't contribute to my ability to earn an income and put a roof over my head. Unlike a car.
Comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges, "Hobby cars" can have as good an ROI as guitars.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2017)

Diablo said:


> Ahh yes, but for most of us, a car is pretty much a necessity for life and delivers tremendous value in standard of living. I can live without a guitar, it's a hobby for me, it doesn't contribute to my ability to earn an income and put a roof over my head. Unlike a car.
> Comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges, "Hobby cars" can have as good an ROI as guitars.


But you can buy a $45000 car used a few years for $15000. You have to really watch for some time. If you find you need a new car today, then there may be some difficulty.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

cdntac said:


> Playability: The action can be lower on most Gibsons (again, excluding some of their lower priced guitars) and the neck can be made straighter than Epis without incurring buzzing near the nut.


ANY guitar .... almost ... can be made to have the lowest action you've seen, if the tech that worked on it knows what he's doing. It could be that the Epiphone owners you know are not good enough players to see the difference between a perfectly set-upped LP and a poorly set-upped one. 

Didn't Joe Bonamassa praise the Epiphone Firebird made under his name ?



High/Deaf said:


> If prestige brands were the same price as all those *pedestrian* brands, they wouldn't be prestige.


Wow ... there's a North American thinking right there. Pedestrains are low lifes ...


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Player99 said:


> But you can buy a $45000 car used a few years for $15000. You have to really watch for some time. If you find you need a new car today, then there may be some difficulty.


Ya but that car didn't just sit in a case under a bed for years...it got someone to work, to weddings, funerals, veterinarians, school, whatever. It doesn't really owe you anything.
By the same token, if you bought a 63 corvette and a 63 Gretsch something-o-matic , put them both away and didnt touch them, the value delta is closer than you'd think.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

BGood said:


> Wow ... there's a North American thinking right there. Pedestrains are low lifes ...


Really? From dictionary.com:

noun
1. a person who goes or travels on foot; walker.

adjective
2. going or performed on foot; walking.
3. of or relating to walking.
*4. lacking in vitality, imagination, distinction, etc.; commonplace; prosaic or dull: 
'a pedestrian commencement speech.'*


Perhaps you need to spend a little more time around people with broader vocabularies?


----------



## isoneedacoffee (Oct 31, 2014)

Diablo said:


> Sure some musicians are purists....others, less finicky. How to tell one from the other? I think my point still stands....that endorsements may not be the most reliable way for consumers to judge merits of a product/ brand. Heck Jimmy Page is an LP icon...maybe more than anyone but Lester himself....but even he recorded lots with Fenders.
> Amazing to think Ron Wood got to where he is while slumming it with Fenders, instead of the ESPs he's paid to play now.
> Or Metallica, for that matter.
> Maybe I'm cynical....or maybe I'm just aware of the business aspects that happens behind the curtains of our beloved artists.
> ...


You're getting a 7 year old a Martin or a Taylor?
Forget the spruce vs cedar top debate. I'd go for the special chalkboard top edition.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

High/Deaf said:


> Really? From dictionary.com:
> 
> noun
> 1. a person who goes or travels on foot; walker.
> ...


Well sorry, if my native language had been English, I might have known about #4 definition. Now I do.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

BGood said:


> if my native language had been English,


time to get with the program, France


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

vadsy said:


> time to get with the program, France


What ?


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

vadsy said:


> time to get with the program, France


Stop being a GOOF


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Scotty said:


> Stop being a GOOF


sorry


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

For your cultural education, if you haven't noticed by now, Québec is in Canada, not in France.
You could have said speak white, it would have been the same ...


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

BGood said:


> For your cultural education, if you haven't noticed by now, Québec is in Canada, not in France.


at least 50.58% of it is


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)




----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

the sad thing is, Epiphone used to build high quality, handmade instruments in New York

CMI/Gibson/Norlin bought them and has been dragging their name thru the mud for years

Epiphone - Wikipedia


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

isoneedacoffee said:


> You're getting a 7 year old a Martin or a Taylor?
> Forget the spruce vs cedar top debate. I'd go for the special chalkboard top edition.


lol....Sure...id rather buy a guitar she'll be excited about and want to play, as well as feels and sounds good enough that I will want to play it too plus those entry level kids gits are worth nothing when you go to sell them.
Shes a good kid, she wont smash it or write with crayons all over it etc.


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

There are lots of cases where the status/image of the brand exceeds the cost of the commodity (Coke for example). Of course many brands support their prestigious aura with a high price, but it is not universal or necessary. The danger in equating sign and exchange value is that it can quickly turn into a 'you just say that because you cannot afford it' vs. 'you are just trying to justify your crazy purchase' argument.

For me the 'branding' need comes down to this; does somebody always need a branded item, does he take criticism of a brand as a personal attack (a big tell in many Gibson threads), does she feel superior for having a branded item, does he make rationalizations/excuses for one brand but point out these same traits as 'flaws' in others?

FWIW, you don't strike me as this type of person and my posts were not targeting you. Getting back to the original article, I thought it was pretty fair: some of the lower end Gibson stuff is a joke and you are simply paying for the logo but Gibson's generally use better materials and parts on their guitars in comparison to Epiphones.

TG



High/Deaf said:


> You may have intended it to be irrelevant, but it comes hand in hand with the prestige brand. If prestige brands were the same price as all those pedestrian brands, they wouldn't be prestige.
> 
> I just don't know how you can, from a distance and not knowing the person, judge whether he is driving/playing something because of the brand on the hood/headstock smf needs the psychological crutches the brand provides or if he really appreciates the quality. We all know he paid more for it, with hugely diminishing returns, but at what point do we decide he doesn't really appreciate those slight improvements in quality.
> 
> I say this as a person who both chooses to buy 'prestige' items and doesn't, depending on the items in question. I believe I am willing to take the hit in price for some things, but can't justify it for others. I like to give others the same benefit of the doubt - at least until I talk to them and get to know their motivations.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

I just bought my first Gibson a couple months back. The box it came in is awesome. The guitar.....not so much, but it was a cheapie SG, and as always, you get what you pay for. 

Since acquiring the Gibson SG, I've been playing Epiphone SG Pro's when ever I see one hanging on a wall someplace. They feel way better in the hands, seem to be way better build, and come with a way better setup from the factory. For less money than what I paid for the Gibson SG. Maybe that's part of the problem, you can only ride on your name for so long before you start running out of road.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

BGood said:


> Well sorry, if my native language had been English, I might have known about #4 definition. Now I do.


Oooops, my apologies, sir. Your Engish is so good, I had no idea it wasn't your native tongue. GF^%@


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

traynor_garnet said:


> FWIW, you don't strike me as this type of person and my posts were not targeting you. Getting back to the original article, I thought it was pretty fair: some of the lower end Gibson stuff is a joke and you are simply paying for the logo but Gibson's generally use better materials and parts on their guitars in comparison to Epiphones.
> 
> TG


The other thing I think you are getting with that brand name (and perhaps other perceived luxury brands) is higher resale value. While that has historically been the case for Gibson v Epi, it is less so in the car market. A 10 year old luxury brand car is worth very little compared to it's selling price because of the cost of spare parts and repairs. Guitars haven't hit that stage - I guess because repairs are all pretty much after-market parts and Gibson can't hold you ransom for a new bridge or set of pickups like Mercedes or BMW can.


----------



## hammerstein (Oct 17, 2017)

I researched this topic extensively before picking one a few months ago. I have pretty much been a fender player my whole life, having a long series of MIM strats and one toronado GT, I had never paid much attention to any other brands. 

I read reviews, I watched demos, even side by side comparisons.. and I was convinced surely at my ability level an Epiphone was just fine for me. Surely I’m not a good enough player to notice the “hard to pinpoint” difference most reviewers spoke of that made them prefer the Gibson.

Anyway because of GAS I have one of each now 

So for my Epiphone LP Standard vs my Gibson LP Studio 
My personal experience is.. both feel great to play, my Gibson maybe a little bit better.. 
The Epiphone stays in tune better
The Epiphone overall appears to have been better finished.
While the Epiphone sounds good, the Gibson blows it out of the water there..
And I found myself having the same feeling a lot of the reviewers did with the Gibson, there’s just something extra to it.. the notes ring forever, I can feel them better, and I find it a more inspiring instrument... the Epiphone is no chore to play but sometimes I feel like the Gibson plays itself. Oh, it smells better too 

I still really like my Epiphone.. but now I need to find a different use for it ..


----------

