Gibsons and copies

[DeanEVO_Dude]

Well, this isn't TGP, so maybe this discussion will remain kind of civilized...

I like cheaper electric guitars, and I generally adhere to the idea that electrics are just wood and metal -- the sum of their parts. I just can't get behind the idea that the big boys have some extra something that is undefinable.

The lowdown on a lot of the imports from China and Korea is that they tend to be a bit cheaper on the pickups, etc. I do think there's something to what ZMAN says about electronics.

IMO, you have to look at whether the name on the headstock matters to you. If it does, it does -- there's no getting around that.

A guitar is a guitar is a guitar like Spudman said. Yes necks, bridge placement, tuners, frets, and all of that stuff matters, but once you have that, the name itself is moot.

Look at it this way: if you had four guitars handed to you, could you tell the difference between 1) A Gibby, 2) A good clone like a Greco, 3) A Heritage, and 4) Some high-end custom boutique LP copy, provided they were all set up well? I know I couldn't. If you could, more power to you, but I think people have a pretty powerful ability to convince themselves things exist when they really don't. Just look at tone...

FWIW, I don't own any expensive or name-brand guits, so I'm not exactly the authority on how copies stack up to the name-brand ones, because I haven't A/B'd them. I just have my opinions.

IMHO, I agree with what Eric says on this one. My personal preference is for the Korean made guitars over the Chinese made, they seem to be made better. There are three botom lines:
1. Price (I list this first due to my limited budget and ability to play)
2. Sound/Tone (almost as important as the first, but, again, limited ability...)
3. Name (does it really mean that much? To some, YES!)

So, for me, it is the "cheap coppies" that I get. I enjoy playing (or trying to play), but with the limited ability that I have (not to mention budget), just can't justify a $2k or $3k guitar purchase (though with all the stuff I have bought in the past couple of years, I probably could have afforded one in that price range ).

Kinda on the same subject (but not exactly), I have been to GC and looked at some of the guitars by Gibson and Epiphone. Can someone that knows, explain why the Epi's have (seemingly) better fit and finish? I mean, I looked at the finish on some Gibsons (SGs, 335s, Les Pauls, etc.) along the side of the neck and it is not smooth, rough fret edges, cracks in the binding at each fret, etc... I know I live in Colorado, so humidity and altitude play a part, but I don't, for the most part find this on the Epi's.
What gives? Is it the nitro-laquer? Has Gibson lost its QC? Sometimes I think I am just too darn picky? Anyway, seeing this also makes me think twice about spending $2000 on a guitar.

[markb]

When you bring QC into the equation we shouldn't underestimate sample variation. A particular Epiphone might just be better than a particular Gibson hanging next to it in a particular shop. This does not mean that all Epiphones are better than all Gibsons, just that you got lucky

[Eric***]

When you bring QC into the equation we shouldn't underestimate sample variation. A particular Epiphone might just be better than a particular Gibson hanging next to it in a particular shop. This does not mean that all Epiphones are better than all Gibsons, just that you got lucky

Good point. Oddly enough (since it was a reply to a tangent), I think your point is actually somewhat related to the original question.

What's your impression of NWB's original question about clones vs. Gibsons? Can an imitator ultimately make a product as good or better than the original, or is it an asymptotic pursuit?

[markb]

Good point. Oddly enough (since it was a reply to a tangent), I think your point is actually somewhat related to the original question.

What's your impression of NWB's original question about clones vs. Gibsons? Can an imitator ultimately make a product as good or better than the original, or is it an asymptotic pursuit?

While a copy could be made just as well as or better than the original, it will never be the "real thing". A Sid Poole (UK custom builder, no longer with us) "Les Paul" easily outranks a factory Gibson but, deep down you'd still think of it as a "copy".
We are very sensitive to the value of brands these days, mostly because marketing people have sold us the concept of "authenticity". Hence all the reissues, relics, "'59", tribute and signature models not to mention licensed copies like Squier or Epiphone. They are all striving to be what they are most definitely not.

So, yes, I think you can make a better Les Paul than Gibson and cheaper. The question then becomes "can you sell it?".

[deeaa*]

Yes, I've noted some real bad Gibson finish flaws & better made/finished Epis here too, for a long while now. When I bought me an Explorer, in all honesty, the Epi I finally bought was indeed superior to the Gibson contender in EVERY detail except electric sound, and that was easy to correct with better pickups - after which it swept the floor with the Gibson one in the store.

Not to say all gibsons are worse, my LP Standard was a terrific guitar in all respects, but I do see some very badly made gibbys now and zen.

[NWBasser]

Yes, I've noted some real bad Gibson finish flaws & better made/finished Epis here too, for a long while now. When I bought me an Explorer, in all honesty, the Epi I finally bought was indeed superior to the Gibson contender in EVERY detail except electric sound, and that was easy to correct with better pickups - after which it swept the floor with the Gibson one in the store.

Not to say all gibsons are worse, my LP Standard was a terrific guitar in all respects, but I do see some very badly made gibbys now and zen.

This raises an important point of consistency of quality. This is something that I've seen a lot in bass manufacturers, that with some brands, the odds of getting an excellent quality bass are very high while with others your chances go down a bit.

The ones with less consistency can be very great instruments and might be just what you want, but you have to play it a fair bit to be certain. A bit of "buyer beware" in that.

The ones with stellar records of quality consistency; well, you stand a better chance of picking up a good one but it might not have the exact tone and feel that you're looking for.

From what I'm reading here, it sounds like Gibson might be comparable to the Fender basses of yesteryear in that you could get one that's absolutely magic, or not....

FWIW, it's my understanding that the current Fender basses have very high consistency of quality and I would expect that to apply to their guitar line as well.

Thanks for the information guys, this has been very enlightening and civil. I appreciate that everyone has been sticking to observations and facts which is very useful to me.

[deeaa*]

Indeed. In my experience it's usually mainstream Japanese etc. manufacturers that make the most consistent good quality. It's very hard to find a bad Yamaha or an Ibanez or such. Don't think I ever saw one. They are very very good quality thru and thru no question about it. Kinda the same with cars, Japanese cars are very reliable and good quality, whether you like them or not, or whether they have the feel you like. I don't like them Toyotas etc, to me they're fugly and feel like worn slippers to drive, very tasteless and boring in every detail. But if I had to pick a car to drive accross Sahara I'd surely pick a Toyota no doubt.

Other than that, often the 'starting' companies make stellar instruments. Early Charvels, Jacksons, even Charvettes, very good stuff usually. Just an example.

Big manufacturers...seems to fluctuate. I don't know if it's the corporate way of running things, but seems to me Gibson, Fender quality changes a LOT over the years. Possibly by patches as well, who knows.

All I know in early 90's we sold a lot of Fenders and they were largely VERY bad quality, and USA models in particular. We had like half a dozen warped neck returns in a year...neck woods with hardly any wood grain visible, just cellulose, neck sets that you could fit a creditcard between, paint defects...

And the funny thing was at the same time we were getting the 'new' Mexican made strats and they simply floored the USA made ones with better quality. A lot of pro players who came to buy a Strat walked out with a mexi one and a set of better pickups&electrics.

But Gibsons were very good in that time it seemed.

Currently, to me it seems like it's again tables turned...I pick up an U.S. made strat and it's perfect, everything about it is exceptionally nice. Gibsons, another story.

I guess they're like wines...you have to know what vintage to buy :-)

But in case of Yamahas etc...only guitars I might buy sight unseen are quality japanese made instruments. Well just now probably I'd be brave enough to try a Fender.

[ZMAN]

Whether you agree or not I think it is the shape of the headstock that makes or breaks a Gibson copy. The Japanese have solved that issue. In Japan the Epiphone LPs come with a Gibson style open book headstock with Epiphone logo. From 20 feet away you would be hard pressed to tell that difference. Back in the 80s the copies all used that headtstock, and they are now rivalling the Gibsons for price in the Vintage market.
Of course Gibson realized and took the manufacturers to court about it, but now they sanction the guitars that are supposedly only for the Japanese market.
As far as workmanship in the Gibson's vs Epiphones I have not seen that.
In fact I sorted through about a dozen of the first LP Standards shipped from China and found loose tuners, skewed bridges and poorly set up guitars.
The bodies and necks were virtually identical because of the CNC machines, but I guess it took a while to get the QC up to standard. Now I see them as pretty well on an even footing.
When you speak of Fenders the Indonesian, and Chinese made Strats are now as good as MIM and approaching US quality without a doubt. Agian sanctioned by Fender.
And I think that if the Tribute had come with an open book headstock with the Epi logo you would not be able to keep them in stock.

[FrankenFretter***]

Interesting that nobody has mentioned Heritage. Would they even be considered copies? I suppose they are, but with a big difference.

[Jimi75]

Interesting that nobody has mentioned Heritage. Would they even be considered copies? I suppose they are, but with a big difference.

I do not consider Heritage a copy. It's the old Gibson staff, factory, blueprints, headstock angle, etc...Lets not talk about Heritage as copycat here, maybe the Heritage is more original than some Gibson

[marnold***]

I do not consider Heritage a copy. It's the old Gibson staff, factory, blueprints, headstock angle, etc...Lets not talk about Heritage as copycat here, maybe the Heritage is more original than some Gibson

I was going to say. Heritage IS Gibson. Still in old Kazoo.

[ZMAN]

Probably a lot drier as well.

[NWBasser]

I do not consider Heritage a copy. It's the old Gibson staff, factory, blueprints, headstock angle, etc...Lets not talk about Heritage as copycat here, maybe the Heritage is more original than some Gibson

And G&L is more Fender than Fender!

[gordy_sg_no1]

i have several SGs in my rack but i have to say my main goto guitar is my vintage vs6 sg clone. damn i love the vs6 set up nice, easy to play, sounds great (not a kick in the groin off a gibson) so it ticked all the boxes. although what i have found is most copies are good but not exelent compared to the real deal............... but just occasionaly you strike gold in a clone. the golden rule of guitars is play em before you buy 'em. my 2007 sg standard needed more work on it than any other guitar i own, whereas i have got an epi lp that i didnt need to touch and sounded exellent. so yeah you can get a clone that is great and can be as good as a gibson but its never going to beat it and its seldom to find. best evidence of a cheap guitar sounding good is jimmy page's danelectro which costs between £150 and £200

[Andy]

both Gibson AND Fender have equally expensive guitars..BOTH companys have serious competition from many manufactures.and I venture to say the stratocaster has been copied more than any other guitar

for some reason people tend to bash Gibson , vs copies more than any other brand


why is that?

[deeaa*]

both Gibson AND Fender have equally expensive guitars..BOTH companys have serious competition from many manufactures.and I venture to say the stratocaster has been copied more than any other guitar

for some reason people tend to bash Gibson , vs copies more than any other brand


why is that?

Because there's been too many occasions where the price doesn't in any way correlate w/quality...I didn't mind paying less than a 1000 bucks in the 90's for my LP Standard, which was a very good guitar indeed, but I've seen some today selling for over 2000 that have been no better in any real terms than a 500-buck Epiphone...sometimes even clearly worse in finishing etc.

I wouldn't mind a gibby again, a nice V perhaps this time, but I won't pay such a premium for brand name alone. So it just angers me in such occasions.

[Duffy]

My new Epiphone Tribute 1960 is an awesome guitar, stock. Whether it is a copy or not I'm not sure, I would suppose it is to some extent a copy and at the same time a unique product on its own.

My new Agile AL 3100 bound on top and bottom is stunning and awesome, stock. It is heavy and has a very substantial neck which I really like. The tone and feel are great and the playability is really great. The guitar looks super great. It is a copy but stands on its own as a unique product, priced very well for its worth. I plan on getting a black one like it. Just set it beside a lot of other guitars and look at it and you can compare the two and see how superior the Agile is.

I also think that there are some great Fenders out there that an intermediate player can appreciate, MIM, Indonesian, etc. Very reasonably priced. The blacktops are great. I played a Jaguar blacktop yesterday and it was a really flawless guitar with great tone and feel played thru a new Hot Rod Deluxe III. I really wanted to play the Jazzmaster but the neck P90 would not switch on, so why bother since I wanted to hear that neck sound and see if I like it. But these blacktops are beautiful and feel great and have an awesomely low price, almost in the Agile price range, even though a different animal but a quality guitar nonetheless, style of guitar aside.

I like my Agile LP copy as well as my Epi standards, but the Epi Tribute is totally awesome and a pleasure to hear, feel, and play - not exactly a cheap guitar. I paid 299 for my top and bottom bound Agile AL 3100 and it is awesome in every respect. The Tribute was much more and really awesome as well.

Even the LTD LP-ish copy-ish EC series are very nice, especially the Deluxe with the Seymour Duncan humbuckers, very superior guitars and light too.

[Bloozcat]

I suppose you have to proritize your criteria when talking about copies or clones of Gibsons.

Are you looking for a dead ringer copy right down to headstock shape, curve of the body horn, tuner type, paint finish, etc.?

*OR*

Are you looking for a clone that has those things that are responsible for the tone and playability of a Gibson even though it might not look exactly like the Gibson its copying?

The basic shape of a Les Paul is partially responsible for its tone. Start with the correct wood types like the 2-piece mahogany body, 2-Piece book matched 3/4" carved maple top, one piece mahogany neck with the correct tenon and you complete the proper wood aspect of the LP puzzle. Then you add the quality of assembly with proper neck work, fit, finish, intonation, and playability, and you've got the "feels right/proper set-up" aspect in place. Next, you add quality hardware & electronics and finally the finish (paint) and you've got the rest of the puzzle. It isn't magic, it's attention to detail and good quality control that makes a clone "just as good as a Gibson" or not. The Japanese proved it by not only making clones that sound and play like Gibsons, but they even look just like them. Many of these Japanese copies go for more than the Norlin era "real" Gibsons due to their superior quality. Of course, we're now in the lawsuit era where exact copies are disallowed by law, but that doesn't mean you can't get a quasi-clone that feels and sounds like a Gibson.

A word on the electronics: Gibson doesn't hold their electronics to a rigid spec. They do with their pickups, but not the rest of the components.They basically grab whatever 500k pots they have on hand (+/- 20% tollerance) and add them to the Gibson/Switchcraft toggle switch and input jact that's also on hand. Then they add generic capacitors (or deceivingly, "fake" look alike bumblebees), good quality wire, and that's the electronics package. Just take a trip over to mylespaul.com and look at all the Gibson LP owners over there who regularly change the electronics on their $2500.00 (and up) "real" Les Pauls. And many of them change out the Gibson pickups for after markets as well. So, does it really matter if your "clone" uses lesser quality electronic components if you're likely to change them out anyway? At least with your clone, you didn't pay a premium price for those components.

I don't have a thing against Gibson, except that the price of an LP has gone up 400% since the mid 70's. I've owned a couple of Gibsons in the past and liked them very much.

A buddy who I hunt with bought a new Gibson Les Paul that he brought to the hunting lodge a couple of years ago. I got to play it a lot for 4-days and although I thought it was a good guitar, I like the feel (and tone) of my Agile AL-3100M better. He paid just under $2k for the Gibson. I paid, tops, $725.00 for my Agile with hand selected CTS pots, Switchcraft toggle switch & input jack, NOS Sprague PIO caps, and Guitarforce custom pickups installed.. Is my friend's LP worth the $1275.00 extra he paid for it? Not to me, not for my needs, not for my pocket book. Ok, he got a nitro finish while mine is just polyurethane, but mine has better tone and plays better...

We're in a golden age of guitars. Never has the availability of inexpensive, quality, guitars been better.

[deeaa*]

Superb post blooz, just one detail to add...many transparent-finish les pauls have 1-piece bodies, mine for instance had.

BTW one pf the best gibsons I ever played was an all-walnut The Paul from the 70's. Had it had the normal wide neck not the 70s narrower style, it could have been close to best guitars I ever played...well its still in top five.