Captain Bassman Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 Such a shame the company can’t seem to get a grip on QC and management issues. I have such GAS for one of these right now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 (edited) Gibson have issued a cease and desist letter to Kiesel over their Ultra-V, introduced in 1986 🤣 Edited February 21, 2020 by Doctor J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stub Mandrel Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 minute ago, Doctor J said: Gibson have issued a cease and desist letter to Kiesel over their Ultra-V, introduced in 1986 🤣 Of all the guitars to pick on - probably based on how big Gibson think Kiesel's legal budget is rather than choosing a guitar that actually looks more than vaguely similar to a flying v. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemmywinks Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 (edited) I was listening to the guy from Kiesel talking about this, he says they released their V 9 years before Gibson bothered to trademark theirs. If there's two things Gibson are good at it's making sub-par instruments and losing court cases, looks like this trend is set to continue. Edited February 21, 2020 by lemmywinks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cato Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said: Of all the guitars to pick on - probably based on how big Gibson think Kiesel's legal budget is rather than choosing a guitar that actually looks more than vaguely similar to a flying v. Yep. You can bet they won't be going after Jackson for their Vee and Explorer inspired shapes, because Jackson is part of the Fender group which can afford to contest these lawsuits. Gibson seems to focusing mainly on companies which would struggle with the legal fees needed just to fight a case, let alone win it. Edited February 21, 2020 by Cato 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 (edited) Meet Your Maker: #43 - Gibson's James Curleigh Gibson CEO James 'JC' Curleigh: Not even remotely a smarmy gobbin James Curleigh reclines in his very expensive black leather swivel chair. "It's made of the same leather that went into my jacket," grins Curleigh. "It's actually from the very same cow. I've got a certificate to prove it". Curleigh leans forward intently, his flowing, if slightly greasy, locks swinging like a pendulum; the same pendulum, perhaps, that has swung in Gibson's favor after the dark Henry Juskiewicz years when Gibson became a reviled name among guitarists. "It was the cow certificate thing that got me thinking. And then I had one of those ideas for which I'm justifiably famous. Why not identify every tree that arrives at the Gibson plant and note down which guitars it goes into? Then when someone buys a Gibson they can go online and type in the serial number and see which other guitars came from the same tree and who owns them". Curleigh arches an eyebrow: "And here's the killer. Those people with guitars made from the same tree can join together and form discrete, semi-autonomous online communities where they can talk about how amazing their Gibsons are and how it's great that Gibson are protecting their brand's authenticity by hunting down small-scale luthiers and threatening to kill their families unless they sign up to our 'Gibson Friends' deal where they have to make only Gibson copies and we take all their money". But what about the blowback from the 'Play Authentic' video? Curleigh chuckles. "I guess I feel kinda sorry for Mark Agnesi. He took all the heat for that video when it came out but then his boss Cesar (Guelkian) just revealed last month that Mark only made the video because Cesar told him to. So now Mark looks like a stooge and a püssy but, hey, them's the breaks when you work for a prestigious brand like Gibson. Anyhow, who cares? It's just business". Edited February 21, 2020 by skankdelvar 1 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellzero Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 I only have one question : Is the stool screwed or pushed in his *ss ? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binky_bass Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 On 01/08/2019 at 21:22, SpondonBassed said: It puts me in mind of our local Toyota factory. They'd send whole cars to Sims metal yard for secure destruction. These would be development test cars and such. Although he was not allowed to get near them, my mate Jack was told by the yard supervisor that some of the cars had nothing wrong with them. Some had less than 10,000 miles on them and looked as new. They all got crushed. There is a reason for this sir... I work for Ford Motor Company and we do the same thing. PP (Post Production) units are built prior to homologation, therefore they are not and can never be legal for use on UK roads. Yes they are functional vehicles, but they very likely won't conform to the legal homologation requirements that the end result 'mass produced' vehicle will. They're primarily used for final stage testing and because they are built for testing purposes they don't need to yet conform to final legal requirements, this does unfortunately mean that they must be destroyed after purpose with proof of destruction on record for audit purposes to prove that PP vehicles never make the open road! All car manufacturers will have a very similar process. The only other use for these vehicles are 'display pieces'. We had a yellow PP Mustang in our canteen for a few years! 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibob Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 2 hours ago, binky_bass said: There is a reason for this sir... I work for Ford Motor Company and we do the same thing. PP (Post Production) units are built prior to homologation, therefore they are not and can never be legal for use on UK roads. Yes they are functional vehicles, but they very likely won't conform to the legal homologation requirements that the end result 'mass produced' vehicle will. They're primarily used for final stage testing and because they are built for testing purposes they don't need to yet conform to final legal requirements, this does unfortunately mean that they must be destroyed after purpose with proof of destruction on record for audit purposes to prove that PP vehicles never make the open road! All car manufacturers will have a very similar process. The only other use for these vehicles are 'display pieces'. We had a yellow PP Mustang in our canteen for a few years! 😂 Sure, but those are for purposes of wider-reaching legal implications....these are guitars lol. I work for a music gear manufacturer and we have the same ES/PP/MP production stages, while PP are usually representative of the final product, we don’t want them in the public domain for a myriad of reasons. But we don’t wantonly destroy them, they’re often just circulated around the office for internal use, or sometimes raffled off for staff with an agreement that they’re never sold/given away etc. Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binky_bass Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Sibob said: Sure, but those are for purposes of wider-reaching legal implications....these are guitars lol. I work for a music gear manufacturer and we have the same ES/PP/MP production stages, while PP are usually representative of the final product, we don’t want them in the public domain for a myriad of reasons. But we don’t wantonly destroy them, they’re often just circulated around the office for internal use, or sometimes raffled off for staff with an agreement that they’re never sold/given away etc. Si My above comment was specifically about the comment @SpondonBassed posted about vehicle destruction, not about these guitars! To be fair, these guitars were SUPER ugly!! Shame they couldn't have been repurposed but not a shame they don't exist anymore! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibob Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 48 minutes ago, binky_bass said: My above comment was specifically about the comment @SpondonBassed posted about vehicle destruction, not about these guitars! To be fair, these guitars were SUPER ugly!! Shame they couldn't have been repurposed but not a shame they don't exist anymore! Ah apologies, serves me right for not reading further back. Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binky_bass Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 9 lashes for you!! 9 lashes for everyone! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stub Mandrel Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 With the 'Robot Tuner' innovation, Gibson made the first step towards the self-destructing guitar. My brother sent them a video of his removing it's own strings in response to being played... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemmywinks Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said: With the 'Robot Tuner' innovation, Gibson made the first step towards the self-destructing guitar. Surely that was their headstock/neck design? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stub Mandrel Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 Rumour has it that Gibson have backed out of suing Guild and Gretsch for their use of tha capital letter G. Instead their lawyers have filed a suit against Nestlé, quoting Golden Grahams., As these can be more easily be confused with a gold top Les Paul. 1 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neepheid Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 On 22/02/2020 at 17:22, lemmywinks said: Surely that was their headstock/neck design? They're never going to be forgiven for designing musical instruments as musical instruments rather than engineering projects/pry bars/battering rams, are they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozza Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 On 21/02/2020 at 20:07, skankdelvar said: Meet Your Maker: #43 - Gibson's James Curleigh 1 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stub Mandrel Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 Are Gibson trademarking a new Guitar Power Pose? How long before they decide that standing legs akimbo with your instrument angled upwards is an infringement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpondonBassed Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 On 21/02/2020 at 20:07, skankdelvar said: Meet Your Maker: #43 - Gibson's James Curleigh 2 hours ago, Fozza said: Does we have any information as to how far apart James Curleigh's nipples were at the time of the photo-shoot? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 2 hours ago, SpondonBassed said: Does we have any information as to how far apart James Curleigh's nipples were at the time of the photo-shoot? Same as the distance between his ears. So using the photograph and comparing the distance between Mr Curleigh's ears with the the known dimensions of the J45 he's holding it should be possible to establish the distance between his nipples. No need to thank me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpondonBassed Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 4 minutes ago, skankdelvar said: it should be possible to establish the distance between his nipples Then it is also possible to determine how much of his shizzle is pure bluff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemmywinks Posted February 29, 2020 Share Posted February 29, 2020 17 hours ago, neepheid said: They're never going to be forgiven for designing musical instruments as musical instruments rather than engineering projects/pry bars/battering rams, are they? You would assume that designing a musical instrument would involve some sort of insight into structural integrity. The headstock problem is comically easy to resolve, every other manufacturer manages to do it. Wood grain was a known factor many centuries before Gibson started making instruments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted February 29, 2020 Share Posted February 29, 2020 Or, perhaps, they might make the radical and easy move of addressing the area of weakness. It’s not as if they have remained true to any other facet of the design with such zealotry in the last 70 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Apple Posted February 29, 2020 Share Posted February 29, 2020 (edited) On 01/08/2019 at 12:31, NancyJohnson said: This is an absolute disgrace. Any fools knows you keep the tumbler at the rear when travelling. This is why he has to sprag half way through to keep on target. In effect he is tracking the machine in reverse. If a track was to snap the tumbler could drive off it and then he'll be stuck with a job to get it back on. F**king amateur. Makes my blood boil Edited February 29, 2020 by Billy Apple 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HazBeen Posted February 29, 2020 Share Posted February 29, 2020 Gibson, you build ugly, horribly designed, badly built, heavy, over-priced rubbish..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.