Age Old Question....Fender or Gibson?

Steve_o

Which do ye prefer??

sei046

fender for quality : price ratio but gibson make some classic instruments

dalk

Is it an either/or question? Why can't you like both?

I've owned guitars by both companies. They both makes guitars to lust after.;)

I refuse to limit my choices because of some silly brand loyalty...

bombidol

Gibson, never liked Fender myself.

BME

dalk wrote:

I refuse to limit my choices because of some silly brand loyalty...

spot on chief

magpie

Rickenbacker. Next question.

dalk

Ahhh Rickenbacker...

Remember tryin to pick up a 360, cheap off the internet a few years ago.. Y'know, one that'd been through the wars, needed some work done to it. The idea being to get it for a good price...

After a few months of looking: nothing. Rick owners never seem to abuse their guitars...Ever.

Steve_o

i actually like both was just seeing what the general concensus was...i also think that it depends on the type of music you play.

Doctor J

dalk wrote:

After a few months of looking: nothing. Rick owners never seem to abuse their guitars...Ever.

Not quite true :v:

The answer to the main question... Heritage... no, wait... G&L

jcoote

i had an sg and it was great but lacked versatility...i know have and ibanez which does the job of the sg and a strat which does everything...fender tho all the way gibson are too dear for what they are tbh

Maccattack

I have a Rickenbacker bass 4001 - 1974 (i think).

Its a wee bit battered. I bought it second hand in the late 80's /early 90's.

Theres a few chips on it. The guy I bought it off never cared for it properly. Didnt appreciate it obviously. It hasnt acquired any more bruises since ive owned it.

Lovely warm sounding animal. So I agree on Ric's. Id love a 360 but at the moment I have a Fender Tele which I just love.

Id also like to get a Gibson LP at some stage so I LIKE TEM ALL!! GIMMMMEEE!!!!

Quattroste

I think the Fender Strat is very versatile. The Gibson les paul not so much versatile but just beautiful in looks and tone.

If I could only pick one I'd pick the strat and get a Tokai LP copy with the cash I'd save on buying a Gibson.

Ravelleman

I think the real question should be: Heritage or G&L?

I doubt I'd ever buy a Gibson when there are so many more cost effective alternatives, like my Ravelle for example. The American Series Fenders don't do that much for me either to be honest. I'd rather go with an appropriately priced Japanese Fender than any of their USA stuff.

:v:

Giblet

Hmm, I don't know, depends on what mood I'm in. I've played both of mine today

The Freeman

both companies are class and build beautiful guitars,with gibson your paying for the name a bit
,its just down to what sound you're looking for though,check
reviews on the net on what your after dude,
i got a
gibsn sg standard and sounds class,wouldn't
mind a stratocaster,telecaster,les paul
custom and a cople of ric's knocking around the gaff
too mind ya.

Karl Hungus

dalk wrote:

Is it an either/or question? Why can't you like both?

I've owned guitars by both companies. They both makes guitars to lust after.;)

I refuse to limit my choices because of some silly brand loyalty...

Sense tbh.

A Strat is a very different instrument to a Les Paul, and you really get a whole different sound out of them, so there's no point comparing. Just buy one of each. :v:

Eoin Madsen

Karl Hungus wrote:

A Strat is a very different instrument to a Les Paul, and you really get a whole different sound out of them, so there's no point comparing. Just buy one of each. :v:

My thoughts exactly!

magpie

Blur, no wait...Oasis.

Steve_o

Giblet wrote:

Hmm, I don't know, depends on what mood I'm in. I've played both of mine today

Lucky Ba****d I wish I had both.....That'd be Sweeet!! is it an American Fender or Mexican or wha??

disgruntled

I don't really think that you can compare the two, as someone said earlier strats and les pauls are very different instruments and both are great in their own way. I personally don't have a preference between Fender of Gibson, nor would I limit myself to just those two brands. For some stuff I'll use my strat and for other stuff my Les Paul, its not a case of which I prefer, more which is most suitable.

Rustar

Personally I think they should make a guitar that is half Les Paul and half Stratocaster, give it a halloween paintjob, and call it the Vampire LesStrat.

sroberts82

Gibson make quality guitars but I dont think the Tele will ever be equalled. So the question comes down to, what kind of Tele do you prefer?

Doctor J

I'm just trying to think of something innovative Gibson have done since the mid 60's...

All their guitars, really, are still churned out as they were (ok, modern build quality aside) before 1970. Without their innovations of the 50's and early 60's what would they have to offer today? The vast majority of Gibson's output doesn't feature anything that didn't exist in 1960.

To their credit, Fender are still churning out the old classics but at least the Strat, Tele, P and J basses have evolved to incorporate modern features (and some refined older features) and there are very contemporary models of all their classics. Having said that, G&L make what Fender could have if they hadn't rotted during the 70's.

magpie

The vast majority of Gibson's output doesn't feature anything that didn't exist in 1960.

Which is only as it should be. I can live without the carrying handles, pink "graffix", pointy headstocks and locking tremeloes.

Jackson? B.C. Rich? Charvel? all for the tight of trouser and tousled of mane.

Doctor J

And Steinberger?

Johnny Storm

Doctor J wrote:

And Steinberger?

Parker too.

EDIT: I probably misunderstood what you ment, Dr J. Gibson/Epiphone bought Steinberger in 1987. Recent comment: "Bottom line is that Gibson is a company living off of 1950's designs with a 1970's corporate philosophy. With current management they'll always get left behind when it comes to true innovation. Sorry - reissues and distressed "relic" guitars don't count."
Who said that? Well, OK it was the mod of the Steinberger forum.

magpie

The last worthwhile guitar innovations were 12 strings, and possibly rick-o-sound

Johnny Storm

I would add - locking tuners, jumbo frets, composite materials.

magpie

I would add - locking tuners, jumbo frets, composite materials

As being worthwhile or useless?

Those locking tuner things are awful, make it much harder to tune on the fly, drop down to a D and generally fiddle about. I hate them.

Karl Hungus

magpie wrote:

The last worthwhile guitar innovations were 12 strings, and possibly rick-o-sound

I don't know about that, the Ibanez Universe brought the 7 String to the lowly punter, and pretty much sparked a revolution.

magpie

I don't know about that, the Ibanez Universe brought the 7 String to the lowly punter, and pretty much sparked a revolution.

True, but I really don't like Korn.

Karl Hungus

magpie wrote:

True, but I really don't like Korn.

:rolleyes:

You know there are more musicians out there using 7 strings. Steve Vai, John Petrucci, Jeff Loomis, Steve Smyth, Trey Azagthoth, and a hell of a lot more, and they're all doing far better things than those idiots from Korn.

Doctor J

And they are idiots... I've seen the video :v:

Karl Hungus

Doctor J wrote:

And they are idiots... I've seen the video :v:

Hell, calling them idiots seems like praise in light of that video. Those retards could barely speak coherently.

Doctor J

magpie wrote:

As being worthwhile or useless?

Those locking tuner things are awful, make it much harder to tune on the fly, drop down to a D and generally fiddle about. I hate them.

Are you sure you don't mean a double locking tremolo?

Locking tuners are fantastic, make it much easier to string up and stay in whatever tuning you see fit.



I'd also vouch for graphite nuts, bi-flex truss rods, graphite neck reinforcement and piezo pickups

feylya

Hmm, a guitar made from nothing but graphite nuts, 2way truss rods, graphite and piezos with locking tuners... Yes, it shall be done :v:

magpie

Are you sure you don't mean a double locking tremolo?

No, come to mention I'm not.

Locking tuners are fantastic

This being the first time I've ever seen one I'll have to take your word for it

Steve Vai, John Petrucci, Jeff Loomis, Steve Smyth, Trey Azagthoth

Only name I recognise there is Senor Vai. Its possible that we may not be singing off the same musical hymnsheet however your point is taken. Now we come to mention it I quite liked that All Day I Dream About Sex one by Kr0n....

Karl Hungus

magpie wrote:

Only name I recognise there is Senor Vai.

Get this man some Dream Theater. STAT! :v:

Ravelleman

Doctor J wrote:

I'm just trying to think of something innovative Gibson have done since the mid 60's...

All their guitars, really, are still churned out as they were (ok, modern build quality aside) before 1970. Without their innovations of the 50's and early 60's what would they have to offer today? The vast majority of Gibson's output doesn't feature anything that didn't exist in 1960.

To their credit, Fender are still churning out the old classics but at least the Strat, Tele, P and J basses have evolved to incorporate modern The reason that Gibson only seems to produce its older models is because that's what people want. features (and some refined older features) and there are very contemporary models of all their classics. Having said that, G&L make what Fender could have if they hadn't rotted during the 70's.

In general I agree with you. However, it must be mentioned that Gibson did attempt to introduce a large number of new models between the 1970s and early 1990s including the RD Artist, the Explorer 2, the Spirit, the Corvus, the Alpha, the US-1, the V-II, the MIII, Blueshawk and various others. While not necessarily the most innovative or successful designs out there, they did at least make an attempt to adapt to changes in the market.

The reason that Gibson only seems to produce its older models is because that's what people want. For axample, during the Norlin era of Gibson Guitars, the Les Paul slowly changed in the way it was constructed and the parts that were used, and became unpopular. In the early 1990s Gibson released the original Les Paul Classic, an attempt to accurately recreate the 1960 Les Paul, which was completely different to what they were then calling the 'Les Paul Standard'. This was done at customer and dealer request. When they saw how popular the Classic was becoming it was nuked and they overhauled the whole Les Paul range. The Standard was redesigned to be more like the early Les Pauls and the Classic was reduced to the lower price band. If they've learned anything it's stick to the classics.

bounty_hunter

Rustar wrote:

Personally I think they should make a guitar that is half Les Paul and half Stratocaster, give it a halloween paintjob, and call it the Vampire LesStrat.

I audibly groaned.

feylya

bounty_hunter wrote:

I audibly groaned.

That's a first

bounty_hunter

:v:







You're in so much trouble.

Doctor J

Ravelleman wrote:

In general I agree with you. However, it must be mentioned that Gibson did attempt to introduce a large number of new models between the 1970s and early 1990s including the RD Artist, the Explorer 2, the Spirit, the Corvus, the Alpha, the US-1, the V-II, the MIII, Blueshawk and various others. While not necessarily the most innovative or successful designs out there, they did at least make an attempt to adapt to changes in the market.

Precisely, a lot of their newer models were half assed rejigging of older models, basically set neck, stoptail bridge and two humbuckers with an optional stupid body shape. The Corvus? Come on, only a crackhead would have thought that wasn't going to sink. That's not innovation, that's Poochie the Rockin Dog :v:

magpie

I presume you're not referring to this piece of engineering genius?



I do like the blue fur though, classy.

Doctor J

Yeah, she's a keeper, eh?

Karl Hungus

Doctor J wrote:

Yeah, she's a keeper, eh?

Yeah, keeper locked in the attic! Yuk yuk yuk...

magpie

I can almost hear the fret buzz just looking at that picture. And see the 16 year old who bought it from the Rock Shop (does it still exist?) aka the Hock Shop, aka the Spock Shop, aka the Robbed Shop (I could go on) banging out Stepping Stone at a school concert.

EDIT/ I was that soldier

Doc_Savage

two sides of the same coin lads!

too hard to make the call....
i use gibson but i still love fender!!

Doctor J

LOL

The point is, regardless of Gibson's new models which flopped, they haven;t done anythin to enhance the old designs which keep them in business. Take the Les Paul Standard vs the AmSe strat (let's say the flagship designs). The Les Paul is the same as it was in the 50's, the contemporary Strat has 2-point trem, microtilt neck, S1 switch, staggered tuners and better truss rod design. All subtle things which don't interfere with the look of the guitar. They don't spoil the classic design. The Les Paul doesn't even have something discreet like a push/pull pot for coil tapping or parallel/series switching. It's as if the last 50 years heven't happened. You've got to admire Fender for at least introducing new technology into their standard designs.

Karl Hungus

Doctor J wrote:

LOL

The point is, regardless of Gibson's new models which flopped, they haven;t done anythin to enhance the old designs which keep them in business. Take the Les Paul Standard vs the AmSe strat (let's say the flagship designs). The Les Paul is the same as it was in the 50's, the contemporary Strat has 2-point trem, microtilt neck, S1 switch, staggered tuners and better truss rod design. All subtle things which don't interfere with the look of the guitar. They don't spoil the classic design. The Les Paul doesn't even have something discreet like a push/pull pot for coil tapping or parallel/series switching. It's as if the last 50 years heven't happened. You've got to admire Fender for at least introducing new technology into their standard designs.

To be fair though, doesn't the Slash LP have peizo electronics?

Doctor J

Sig models don't really count. We're talking about their standard models. Fender still make guitars to their 50's specs and they make guitars even more technologically advanced that the AmSe but the AmSe is their main production model.