1961 Les Paul

[dumbassbob]

My pal who passed away 50 yrs ago was a great guitar player..I had not seen his guitar in 50 yrs,I was shocked to see that the headstock had 4 hairline cracks at the vout? and the tuner were bent and a big bash dent on the back at the 7th fret..Can I heat the dent with hot water and then dropfil it with superglue? and the pegs can they be straightened only 2 of them are bent.It has had the same strings on it for 50 yrs.. I think it is ok if not bashed anymore..The guitar looks like someone gave it to kids to play with..The body is still OK...Also how much do you think a pro would charge to fix these issues..The guitar in engraved in his headstone..Steve was so good that Scott Gorham of Thin Lizzy and Bob Benberg of Supertramp were his bass and drummer..His brother Jimmy got the guitar 20 yrs ago from his stepmom who had other kids and there the ones who messed it up.

[John_H]

Take it to a professional. Estimates are free! It's such a shame when things like this happen.

[Helmholtz]

^^^^^^^^^^^That!

But I'd still like to see pictures.

[olddawg]

You used to be able to send a guitar back to the Gibson Custom Shop for “certified” restoration...

[Chuck H]

You used to be able to send a guitar back to the Gibson Custom Shop for “certified” restoration...

It's a meek, new world. I never thought I'd see the end of Gibson in my lifetime. But there you go.

[dumbassbob]

Maybe it is a good thing..It will come back I am sure some super rich guys will buy it and go back to just making a few models again Love those 15 LP that Norlin made in the 1970's...Like Fender started over 38 yrs ago "We are going to keep it small and real" In 1981 Guitar Player artical... and look at us now we own everything..

[rockon1]

Did I miss something? They filed for chapter 11 but aren't belly up. Bob

[Chuck H]

Did I miss something? They filed for chapter 11 but aren't belly up. Bob

They're a bad imitation of themselves at best. The Gibson guitar company was an iconic part of my early years. There's nothing about their offerings in the last ten years that should be associated with their legacy. They filed chapter 11 because they wiped their @$$e$ with the original mission statement too many times and people stopped buying their products. I don't expect them to hang around as they are, bankrupt and without a clue.

Hopefully it'll go sort of like it did with Fender and some currently involved true believers will resurrect it with honor.

[rockon1]

I dont think people stopped buying Gibson. I think guitar sales are down overall and that combined with poor management trying to diversify put them in financial trouble. If they make them they will come., lol Bob

[Justin Thomas]

I think they put way too much emphasis on crazy-expensive models, and let QC for everything under that slide. The bang-for-the-buck value of Gibsons was surpassed by just about everyone.

I think if they were to refocus on putting out mid-grades w. really good QC they coupd do well. I would hope they'd survive, but it's gonna be rough.

Justin

[olddawg]

Too much competition from similar knock offs. All you they had to do I’d blueprint a Gibson and change the headstock a bit. Back in the day asian knock offs were garbage... but it’s been inevitable since the “lawsuit” era. What exactly is it that Gibson does better these days?

[dmartn149]

Can they continue to build guitars the way they do, but to a higher standard of quality, or will the have to completely change their processes in order to improve quality without making the guitars way too expensive? I don't know what they do differently than PRS, but judging from the results there must be quite a bit that's done differently. And would buyers accept a Gibson made like a PRS?

[Justin Thomas]

If the quality was the same, I'd take a Gibson over a PRS. I'd take a Fender over one of their renowned copiers. That said, I may pay a certain amount for "a name," but I think what Gibson was charging, I'd just get an Epi that's 95% there for fit & finish, refit the electronics, new nut, & a fret dress, & still pay half the price.

I don't take issue with paying for a brand. I take issue with paying excessively for a brand. That's just me.

Justin

[Chuck H]

Can they continue to build guitars the way they do, but to a higher standard of quality, or will the have to completely change their processes in order to improve quality without making the guitars way too expensive? I don't know what they do differently than PRS, but judging from the results there must be quite a bit that's done differently. And would buyers accept a Gibson made like a PRS?

The smart move might be to use more innovative technologies to "blueprint" coveted instruments for reproduction and sell them for greedy prices to fund actual Gibson U.S.A. efforts. I don't know the current state of affairs WRT Epiphone, but the overseas instruments have been as good or better than the U.S.A. instruments for over a decade! Something about this picture doesn't jive. It demonstrates a clear effort to compete with foreign manufactured instruments with parent companies that are foreign manufacturers. Which is just stupid. It also demonstrates that they've given up on the idea that quality sells. Something that had worked for a very long time for the rivals Fender and Gibson. Fender rebuilt itself by getting back to something resembling quality and pride in their domestic product via the custom shops. As a result they remain a contender in the industry and sell plenty of high profit foreign manufactured product that has it's roots in the U.S.A design aspect. Gibson is currently miles away from that having allowed their domestic product to become what I can only call shameful. I've been on this end of the foreign manufacturing game enough to know that there are two ways to manage it. One is to hold onto design and control to dictate what gets sold. The other is to simply take what's offered cheaply and sign off with a "your logo here" product. Often the bottom line is chiseled even more before it's done in that case. Without a quality domestic design and product base Gibson has become a poor maker of Gibson like products. I know that Asian manufacturing is hard to contend with, but they don't have the iconic name of Gibson to sell, yet. There isn't much time to redeem it's worth and I think that, regardless of the new instruments being necessarily more expensive, there could be a market and command the respect needed to give the company some honor and power. That would require more reinvestment and QC than the current incarnation of the company has been practicing. Only time will tell. I sort of expect "Gibson" to be bought by some foreign manufacturer within five years. And probably for the better WRT to their most recent offerings. I might even sign up for an Asian CNC '59 Les Paul because I know it would be a good, and likely more representative and historically respectful guitar in all aspects other than it's country of origin.

Rant over.

[Justin Thomas]

Rant over.

Rant my [Mustang B]ass. That was damn near perfect. IMNSHO.

Justin