Gibson Robo-tuners are here to stay...or not at all.

[duluthdan]

Somebody correct me if I am wrong - but most of the dialogue surrounding abandonment of some of the line-up and design changes, and price discussions, seems to be relating to the electric division and Nashville production - not so much the acoustic production in Bozeman. ???

[GangstaPat]

Originally Posted by yoni

Looks like Gibson is ready to change course and drop prices.

This is good news

2016 sales should be through the roof and you should be able to find 2015 for super cheap or in trash cans...either way.

LOL!

I got a Paul from Musicians Friend on their SDOTD dirt cheap. It was a 2013 Future Tribute. Goofy looking tuners and other homely looking features but I figured it was the only chance a guy like me will ever have to own a Paul since I don't care much for electrics anyway.

I like the way it sounds and it plays nice. Those odd tuners seem to work too. It's heavy as all get out though. Well, there is my uninformed impression. Happy hunting to all you Gibson guys out there. I'm still looking for my first Gibson acoustic.

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by Ted @ LA Guitar Sales

Interesting, wonder how this will affect current inventory dealers are sitting on.

Oh, I doubt the dealers are happy. My guess is that these 2015 Gibson electrics will be like Gibson's mid-1970's marketing fiasco, the Gibson Mark Series acoustic guitars, most of which hung on retailers' walls for YEARS without being sold.

It's my impression that Gibson guitar sales have been stagnating for a while, anyway. Somehow they convinced themselves that this radical reboot and redesign would generate more business.

Obviously they didn't think it would have the opposite effect, or they wouldn't have done it.

It's kind of like the "New Coke" marketing debacle in 1985, where Coca-Cola decided that they'd get Bill Cosby to convince us all in television ads that it was a good idea to buy a reformulated Coke that tasted more like a Pepsi.

My father was an avid hunter and target shooter, and I've been around firearms all my life. The American Rifleman magazine doesn't do this, but all the other gun magazines will often run pictures of gun prototypes on their covers, accompanied by breathless cover stories about this great new gun that some gun company is coming out with.

Supposedly coming out with, because what those magazine covers and cover stories really are are fishing expeditions to test the waters and to see whether there's enough interest generated to actually put the gun on the cover into production.

What the gun companies hope is that those cover stories will make longtime gun owners say: "Gee, I don't have one of those - I need to GET me one!!"

And I suspect that was a large part of Gibson's thinking on this. For years now they've basically been giving the Les Paul and the SG different paint jobs and hardware colors, and trying to eke out more sales that way. I'm guessing that they thought that by presenting their entire standard product line with these radical new features, it would make every Gibson guitar owner say: "Golly, I don't have one of those - I NEED one!!"

Not unlike the way that millions of music lovers replaced their vinyl LP's with CD's when CD's first came out.

But this whole endeavor has turned out to be an unwise decision on Gibson's part. I certainly didn't feel any great need to run out and get a new Gibson Les Paul.

Besides, I do have some experience with the first generation of those robo-tuners, and found it to be pretty bizarre. Remember "Mystery Science 3000," where one of the robots who's been condemned to watch bad movies is named "Tom Servo?" (He's the one on the right.)

Well, when you monkey with one of these robo-tuners, you hear that same "zzzooop-zzzooop-zzzooop" sound that Tom Servo makes, because that's what's in the robo-tuner, little servo motors.

So when I heard those little motors going in the robo-tuners, I thought: "Okay, now I'm going to be watching a really bad movie and saying rude things about it!"

Which didn't happen, dagnab it....so I guess saying rude things about robo-tuners themselves will have to suffice.

Seriously, I do believe that Gibson honestly thought that putting self-tuning mechanisms on their guitars would attract new players and longtime Gibson owners alike. They were trying to be pre-emptive, visionary and bold, but it's all too clear that they completely miscalculated.


Wade Hampton Miller

[Sombras]

I only came to appreciate Les Pauls in the past three or four years, so it took me a bit to understand the big sea change that Gibson instituted beginning in 2014-2015.

I bought a new Studio Deluxe II in 2013 and was extremely impressed. It apparently just preceded the changes, but it stood as my benchmark for all things Les Paul. Even though I loved the Studio, I regularly played new LPs hoping to one day "move up" to a fancier model. I ended up playing A LOT of 2015 models with the robotuners and zero fret nuts. Like Mr. Brill, I noticed that they detuned very quickly--even the ones with newer strings. And I also experienced the electronic tuner "freakout" several times. If I had that happen in the times I spent with them at the store, then certainly it's happening at home when people are playing for hours. And I agree with the opinion that the zero-fret contribute to an increase in treble. Did not like the wider nut, either.

I feel *very* fortunate that I found a killer 2012 Traditional Pro II with the narrower traditional nut, locking Grovers, and no phase switch. I'm all for useful innovation, but I'm happy to hear that Gibson's returning to some of the fundamental features that made LPs great in the first place.

[aknow]

Originally Posted by Dominus Mortem

... and the wider neck. Why did they think that would appeal to everyone universally? Of all the things they did, the wider neck was what kept me away more than anything. It felt like I was holding a neck and a half in my hands. I honestly tried to adjust to it because I wanted to buy a 2015 Gibson, but in the end I gave up trying to acclimate to that wide neck. I love Gibson, I just wish they'd approach new stuff at a bit slower pace and not put it on everything all at once. Even if they blow 2015 Standards out the door at 1k I'd still refrain from buying one.

It was a terrible idea to force these changes on all instruments.
I actually like the wider neck. It took about an hour of playing, I got used to it, and can articulate notes more accurately. I DO NOT like the g-force. Doesn't work well, and the guitars do not stay in tune, even after a good professional set-up. Some of that is the poor excuse for a nut these guitars have.

[aknow]

Originally Posted by fishstick_kitty

It's a good sign that Gibson is able to hear what customers are saying...although I wonder how much all of these changes have cost the company...a lot I would imagine.

I called their customer service to return an unusable Les Paul les/plus. The guy I spoke to was a gentleman, smart, and well aware of the problems. He said:
"You wouldn't believe how many calls I get a week, complaining about these 2015 electrics". I explained that I bought a Studio and Les Paul les/plus, heavily discounted and they were unusable for a professional, what were you guys thinking. Don't you play these before you retail them?/? He then sort of laughed and said I could do what I wanted, return them for repair, refund, older/manual tuners, etc. I ultimately sent one back for a refund, (still waiting), took the other back to my luthier for some additional adjustments. Now, I actually like the Studio, but the only way to play it is with a headstock tuner, re-tune after every song... Unsuitable for note benders or anyone who gigs for pay. I'll never buy an 'experimental' guitar again.

[aknow]

Originally Posted by Ted @ LA Guitar Sales

Interesting, wonder how this will affect current inventory dealers are sitting on.

Musician's Friend just re-discounted remaining stock another 20%. I think they still have a long way to go.

[rogthefrog]

I don't know about the 2015 Les Paul nut, but we'll made zero frets are an improvement over a bare nut in just about every way.

[Purfle Haze]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

Remember "Mystery Science 3000," where one of the robots who's been condemned to watch bad movies is named "Tom Servo?" (He's the one on the right.)

Wade, I LOVE Mystery Science Theater. To be clear, Tom Servo, the funniest character on the show, is on the left, with the gum-ball head.

I enjoy your posts!

[Humbuster]

Obviously not, as many 2016 models will not have the robo tuners..

[dagobert]

I noticed last night the Gibson SG Special I bought - 2014 model - is now for sale at a higher price than when I bought it. Maybe with the price was low with the anticipation of the arrival of the 2015's?

Tempting to sell it and make a few extra $$.

[MBE]

Originally Posted by fazool

If they would have been even remotely in tune with their customers and the market, this never would have happened.

Oh, they were in tune with their customers. In perfect tune. In ROBO-tune!

[zabdart]

Just goes to show that, like many another corporate executive, Henry Juszkiewicz may not CARE about what his customers want, but if his sales figures drop off enough, he's smart enough to hear what they're saying.

[RustyZombie]

Most of the complaints and arguments I've heard about the robot tuners are the same ones people had when Gibson "forced" adjustable truss rods on everyone back in the twenties. And there have been a few other innovations since then that people took exception to having "forced" on them. I'm not really that surprised that Gibson didn't listen to the market at first, because they do have a strong history of being correct on this sort of thing.

However, the big difference is a lot of those past innovations worked more or less flawlessly. The same can't be said of the robot tuners. It's still a good concept, but its implementation certainly leaves something to be desired. If done correctly, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up being another one of those "gimmicks", like truss rods and humbuckers were, that become standard features in a few decades.

[fishstick_kitty]

Originally Posted by RustyZombie

Most of the complaints and arguments I've heard about the robot tuners are the same ones people had when Gibson "forced" adjustable truss rods on everyone back in the twenties.

WOW I did not know that!! Adjustable truss rods are at least not visible. Now, other things that Gibson has tried that ARE visible are adjustable bridges in the late '50s (FAIL) and changing the J45 into a square shoulder dread in the '60s (FAIL). I'm sure there are many other examples...but I appreciate that they are not afraid to try new things.