If you can't tune your Gibson

[Robert****]

Then maybe you need this.

[thearabianmage]

Sick. But you gotta wonder if it's a good thing in the long run - will guitar players, or musicians in general, become more lazy with their instrument? Music is and has always been difficult, but for a reason: it makes you work at it. What will happen to people when it's all spoon-fed to them?

And I bet this costs a bomb, too. $2k?

[marnold***]

There was a thread about this some time ago. The system was actually invented by a company out of Germany. IIRC, the system adds about $900 to the cost of the guitar. The Les Paul version is on sale at MF for $2800. It's obviously cool from a technological standpoint, but that's about it. I also wonder what the life expectancy of those machine heads is.

[Robert****]

My first thought is, if you can't learn how tune your guitar the normal way, then why even bother playing guitar. Save $2,800 and buy a cheap pedal tuner!

[Jimi75]

Also if I use a regular and good working tuner, I have my own way of tuning my guitar, especially Gibson style guitars.....the "robot" would tune and I would "correct" the tuning.....so that the guiar sounds good :-)

Very expensive. To me it's part of the Rock And Roll to tune your guitar manually

[jpfeifer]

Yeah, I really think that the marketing wizards who thought up this idea at Gibson should be fired (maybe this is the same marketing powerhouse that came up with the backwards Flying-V idea?). Why not spend their R&D budget on something people actually need.

Why go to all that trouble to make an auto-tunning guitar? In all the years that I've played I've never once heard someone complain about having to tune their guitar. I just don't get it, especially when Les Pauls are already an expensive axe, why would you want to add another $900 for this auto-tunning feature?

OK, my rant is over ... :-)
-- Jim

[Robert****]

Jim, just wait until the come out with the "auto-playing" Gibson!
haha - then we all just throw in the towel, eh?

You're right, they should fire the R&D department. Pronto.

[jpfeifer]

I don't like to beat up on any company, but I think that Gibson is doing some dumb things lately. However, one of the things they did right was the ES-339, now that's a good idea ... a more affordable smaller version of the 335.

I also think that Gibson could get a lot more mileage out of their current designs in the same way that Fender is doing by offering hot rod versions of their Tele's and Strats, etc. I know that Gibson is doing some of this but they just don't seem to be dialed in for some of these ideas in the way that Fender is. You would think that Gibson would have their version of a modeling guitar by now, like the VG-Strat. But instead they're focusing on these silly things like this robot auto-tunning guitar concept.

-- Jim

[thearabianmage]

Spot on Jim. But at the end of the day, somebody was gonna do it. It was inevitable. Today is all about the easy quick-fix. Who wants to waste time tuning their guitar when they have other things to do? Like watch TV or something. . .

A sign of the times. . .

[bigoldron]

Jim, just wait until the come out with the "auto-playing" Gibson!
haha - then we all just throw in the towel, eh?

They already have. It's called "Guitar Hero III".

[just strum]

But can it make a good pot-roast?

I agree with Marnold, pretty interesting tech gadget, but not much more.

[bigoldron]

They already have. It's called "Guitar Hero III".

Oops! Can we say "Guitar Hero III" without getting sued? I'm sorry - didn't mean to say it - don't - stop - HHHEEEELLLLLPPPPPP!!!!!! The Gibbie Legal Department is here!!!!!

[dws]

Darn it just strum that was the joke I was going to make.

But in all seriousness, I don't like the idea of the robot guitar. As a few people said, it's just making everything easier. I believe music, and getting better at playing instruments is about hard work and getting through annoying times (LIKE LEARNING HOW TO TUNE A GUITAR). I don't want guitars to start playing themselves.

Can't stay mad at Gibson though, because my SG may be the one I marry someday.

[TS808]

I'm not real crazy about the "robot guitar" concept. I really think it does nothing but add more cost to the guitar, and also allow for one more thing to break. Modern technology is a good thing, but the simplicity of the guitar is what makes it so great.

It seems to me that companies like Fender and Gibson got their designs right the first time..the strat, tele, sg, and les paul are ageless classics. Why ruin a good thing??

[just strum]

But can it tune a fish?

[bigoldron]

Or a piano?

[marnold***]

A self-tuning piano--THAT would rock . . . as if pianos aren't expensive enough as it is.

[just strum]

A self-tuning piano--THAT would rock . . . as if pianos aren't expensive enough as it is.

Plus, think of the weight that would add: And the first buyer would probably live on the 10th floor and no elevator.: :

[Ascension]

Considering how often the other guitar player at my church has to stop playing during a set and tune his 1960 Classic he NEEDS one of those !! But hey what do you expect it's just a GIBSON : !