New Gibson Line Up - Finally What Players Want?

johnniegoat

Stop, don’t, come back.
#21
now that Gibson has "fixed" their issues - effectively put a Standard truss rod cover on what was a Traditional - the next muttering is about their entry level offering

my 2 peneth worth - the realignment of pricing expectations is as important, if not more so, than relaunching the Standard

heard several commentators mention an off shore Gibson with a proper Gibson headstock. previously this would be seen as diluting the core USA brand, but if Fender (across their multiple brands) and PRS can do it, why not Gibson?
 

bad alice

Easily distracted and...OHLOOKAGUITAR!!!
#22
As has been discussed to death Gibson sits on a identity dilemma of its own making;
It’s an iconic brand which is both its biggest selling point and also its greatest limitation.
Yes, the 2019 range have looked to reset the barometer and give those who adore everything that the word “Gibson” is associated from the greatest years of rocknroll - with an avenue for modern *improvements* supplied by the Modern range.
And there’s a LOT to like; a simplified range named in a way that actually sense to the customer, a Standard that encapsulates and offers everything that the words “Les Paul” mean to most guitarists, prices that make the more desirable appointments more attainable than they have been for a good few years, a shedding of the electronic frippery (harnesses and tuners) that most guitarists never wanted in the first place, and, most importantly a return (so the reviews suggest) to a quality of build that the name Gibson used to be synonymous with.
All good.
The problem being that selling the same guitar year in year out - no matter how fecking AWESOME it is - limits the potential for customers who already own a *classic* Les Paul when they feel like buying another guitar to add to their collection, because THIS is where innovation and variety become advantageous selling points.
Add in the impressive array of other brands that now fill the market and this further aggravates Gibson’s problem.
Do I know the answer?
Course not.
But for what it’s worth, I agree to a degree with @Chu that offering a range that DOES mix things up - I’ve long wanted Gibson to be more experimental/adventurous with their pickup options eg EMGs, Filtertrons etc - feels like a better way of testing out what customers will buy rather than their previous idea of only doing this for Custom Shop models which the vast majority of us could never afford even if we wanted to! Or use Epiphone to do this and get an idea for what options actually sell.
Not to forget that Gibson also has a looooong list of successful alternativebody shapes that could be brought back - for me, the Trini Lopez as a standard model springs immediately to mind (the Dave Grohl association makes that a no brainier), as does a 22 fret DC Standard last seen in 2014.
I will be watching with interest to see where Gibson go in the coming years and I hope with all my heart that pull off an epic return to form because they will always have a special place in MY heart along with Fender.
One thing I think we can all agree on, is that WHATEVER they do in terms of the guitar they make and the options they offer, is that their quality levels need to make a return to those guitars of the 90s and crucially, do so constantly with every guitar that comes out of the factory.
Keeping prices competitive and offering entry(ish) level guitars #Tributes etc at a price that appeals to those making the big step up to Gibson in the first place will be part of that too...
:)
 

Felix

Addicted to Grunge
#23
Just want to state again, that in my first post, I agree I was not thinking about the bigger picture with the weight relief, as I didn't think about people like Chuy, who regularly gig standing up with their guitars. As most of you who have known me over the last 5-10 years on here know, I worked my way through 6 Gibson Les Paul's, before finding my Custom. I was constantly trying to find one of the lightest versions, that were done from the main production line (I almost spent the money on one of the hollow body LP's and I was even closer to getting a CS version of a Custom, before turning my LP Classic Custom into an exact match for one of these guitars), They were all typically on the low 8lbs region until I got my Custom, which I found to be the most manageable to play of the lot. A guitar weighing in about 10.8lbs, was easier on my back and just felt effortless to play. I still think with it being close to what the classic LP's weighed, meant it was more balanced and didn't constantly move on my lap, causing me to struggle with my backs posture.

I think it is very important that with the main traditional/standard/classic , that Gibson try to be as faithful to the '57-'60 era guitars. They are now doing 50's and 60's models, which have some minor changes that reflect how they evolved the Les Paul is these very sought after years. When most of us are in the position to buy one of the top spec production line LP's, we tend to want an LP that will be as close as possible to the traditional specs.

Gibson were trying to do way too many radical changes (some listed, so not) in one big sweep. Look at the 2015 range, which really earned Gibson a lot of negative feedback, as they didn't give people an option with the top end models of Les Paul from the main production line. I think they could do well with some of the modern features, but it was have to be something like a "Les Paul Modern" , rather than totally replacing the Standard without people have the choice to get an old style version, without going up to the Custom Shop built models. Again, as most of the people in this thread who speak to me outside of the forums know, I tend to like the more "basic" approach to my gears equipment. So when they said that they were removing the push/pull pots and PCB for the tone and volume, I was generally impressed.

On Trogilies Guitars on YouTube, he got himself one of the '60s Standards and actually took it apart and inspected the small details that Les Paul fans totally nerd out on. The neck tennen is still the more modern style with it being a "short" one. When he checked over the ARB-1 bridge setup, he noticed that it was the screw in style posts, rather than the posts that were directly set into the body. How much of a difference this makes that a normal player can notice, is at best tiny (I don't think there is an big enough difference a normal fan could notice), but the changes Gibson have made are really a step in the right direction. Trogilly also pointed out that they have changed the routers drill bits, as all the cavities in the body were really cleanly carved and had good clean edges. To me this seems like they have invested in some retooling, so that it's easier for the production line to have a better quality from the very moment they start to cut the body blank.

Looking at the whole 2019 range from Gibson, it seems like they are really focusing on getting things right on all the "standard" models. The options they have decided on, to me, make sense. Now you finally know that a 50's and 60's variant are different, yet there is not that feeling that choosing one over the other means you are getting less for your money. They are about the small changes they did, such as a slimmer neck profile (on a 60's model) and that the magnets change from the Alnico 2's to Alnico 5's (not 100% on the number), they change the tuners from the classic Kluson Deluxe to the all metal locking Grovers. As people who go for the 50's options IMO are the ones who want it as faithful as possible to the '57-'59 era, whereas the '60s version are changed in a way that adds mods many players of the time did to their guitars.

Some of you guys have made a good point about the fact Gibson could use the Kramer brand to experiment with, where they can do the more modern and try experimenting with new build specs, like they did with the fingerboard/neck/nut with the 2015 models. I use to really love some of the gear Kramer made, as I love loud, bright coloured "Super Strats". With them typically building them in their far east factories, they can make Kramer an ideal testing ground before building them in the Kramer US Custom Shop.

One thing I would hope they change with the Epiphone brand, is by having the same style headstock, but with Epiphone on it. That way, people who can't afford to get one of the USA, have a guitar that faithfully looks just like the Gibson's. After seeing the thread which had @bad alice '89 Epi Les Paul with a headstock done just like that, it confirmed that it looks so nice and means a younger kid starting out, don't need to feel "embarrassed" playing the Epiphone, because they couldn't afford a full blown US model. I think it's one reason why Squire are so popular, as they look just like all the other models in Fender's range and just allow them to feel like any other Fender player.

While not earth shattering changes, what they have done is make smaller and smarter changes that are not expensive and will breed goodwill with their customer base and might tempt people back to the brand. I love they are using the ARB-1 bridge system again, as I've always thought they look nicer than the bulkier Nashville setup (I use a mix of ARB-1 and the Nashville studs). I think taking out the push/pull pots and replacing them with traditional high quality pots, that are hand wired, rather than attached to a PCB, was a really good statement from Gibson, as they are trying to bring back a higher build quality on all the small bits, which show an attention to detail that has been missing for a long time.
 

Lonestar

SC Relics Guitars
#24
On another note (which engulfs Gibson online) is their customer base has a proverbial shitfit when the lacquer begins to craze check. This seems to be a large part of the “QC” issue amongst people on forums. I think it’s a particularly odd thing to bitch about. As a 2015 Gibson owner I can honestly say the only thing I didn’t like about the guitar was the gold (Star Trek inspired) case!

Picking up on a point mentioned... we can’t say it’s a con to produce the same model year after year with little or no innovation. Fender have been making the telecaster since Xmas 1949... regardless of how many random finishes they apply (wtf is that jimmy page mirror thing about??) it’s still a tele...

Most of us guitarists want the classic options readily available. Some want new options. And in this day and age, compared to 30 years ago) EVERYONE with an internet connection can have an opinion.
 

mirage2101

Well-Known Member
#25
On another note (which engulfs Gibson online) is their customer base has a proverbial shitfit when the lacquer begins to craze check. This seems to be a large part of the “QC” issue amongst people on forums. I think it’s a particularly odd thing to bitch about. As a 2015 Gibson owner I can honestly say the only thing I didn’t like about the guitar was the gold (Star Trek inspired) case!
Really? I loved that case!
Sure it looks like it hides a more modern looking guitar. But the case looks great and is a nice and sturdy thing.
 
#26
I noted that the new SGs they have at my local place come with a very nice leather (appearing) gig bag. I liked that option a lot. They eliminated the hard case for less expensive guitars a few years ago I think but the bag I saw is a nice upgrade.
 

Felix

Addicted to Grunge
#27
On another note (which engulfs Gibson online) is their customer base has a proverbial shitfit when the lacquer begins to craze check. This seems to be a large part of the “QC” issue amongst people on forums. I think it’s a particularly odd thing to bitch about. As a 2015 Gibson owner I can honestly say the only thing I didn’t like about the guitar was the gold (Star Trek inspired) case!

Picking up on a point mentioned... we can’t say it’s a con to produce the same model year after year with little or no innovation. Fender have been making the telecaster since Xmas 1949... regardless of how many random finishes they apply (wtf is that jimmy page mirror thing about??) it’s still a tele...

Most of us guitarists want the classic options readily available. Some want new options. And in this day and age, compared to 30 years ago) EVERYONE with an internet connection can have an opinion.
I'm with you on both counts Scott dude.

Lacquer checking is part and parcel of owning a nitro finished guitar and Gibson have been having this happen for over 60 years now! While as we have spoken about numerous times over the years, I like to have the finish to stay in as mint as possible condition. But with it being my main guitar and one I play most of the time, even I can accept that it's going to rub/wear away as the years tick by. Just like the plastics such as the binding are going to yellow as UV light changes is lacquer. If people don't want a clear/top coat to change during the guitars life, then they should find something with either a Polly lacquer or go with a Satin finish?

When you think how many people are more than happy to pay you to build them a custom guitar that looks genuinely played for a decade, with the added fact plenty of people love a guitar that looks played, it's not like having this happen to the guitar is going to damage it's resale value is it? Heck in some situations, you can find yourself being paid even more money for a guitar in that stage. Those types of owners you mentioned, kinda give all the owners a bad name.

Guitarists tend to like a mix of both the oldschool and modern take on things. I think the issue with Gibson before they went into receivership last year, was they were aggressively trying to blend the two together, whilst at the same time preventing customers getting the classic specs outside of the Custom Shop built Les Paul's

I really don't have much interest in the "normal" Les Paul's such as the Standard, I have loved the LP Custom for a long time because of it's looks, but I did/do love how they were not built the same way. I am willing to bet that these new Standard's will feel very similar to play as the Custom. If Gibson decided to go down the same route with the Les Paul Custom and build it to the '57 specs (Dual Humbuckers, Mahogany Body and Cap) and on the main production line again (they made the Custom become a Custom Shop guitar), I would totally have a fanboy moment and run squealing like a 5 year old girl being given a puppy and a load of Barbie's.


With regards to the 2015 case, I had totally forgotten the gold monolith that my 2015 Wine Red Studio came in. I do prefer the classic tan or black LP Shaped cases, as they are just so much easier to grip onto when moving the thing. Again I think they do look better, either with the Pink, Blue (I think only the 80's Chainsaw case had that) or white (which is what my LP Classic Custom came with).



I noted that the new SGs they have at my local place come with a very nice leather (appearing) gig bag. I liked that option a lot. They eliminated the hard case for less expensive guitars a few years ago I think but the bag I saw is a nice upgrade.
My old '67 Flying V and my Les Paul LPJ came with the padded gigbag and they do a good enough job of protecting the guitar if you're taking somewhere, or just to keep the guitar covered when not in use.
 
#28
One thing I would hope they change with the Epiphone brand, is by having the same style headstock, but with Epiphone on it. That way, people who can't afford to get one of the USA, have a guitar that faithfully looks just like the Gibson's. After seeing the thread which had @bad alice '89 Epi Les Paul with a headstock done just like that, it confirmed that it looks so nice and means a younger kid starting out, don't need to feel "embarrassed" playing the Epiphone, because they couldn't afford a full blown US model. I think it's one reason why Squire are so popular, as they look just like all the other models in Fender's range and just allow them to feel like any other Fender player.
Dang man, that is some bull, no offense. First and foremost: Nobody should be embarrassed for the brand they play. Like Scott said, everyone has an opinion and the possibility to let it be heard. It’s part of modern society to think “fuck them and their ignorant BS.” I remember a great quote by Doc from years back that stuck to me, I’ll update if I can find it!
Secondly, about 10+ years ago it was very popular to hate on Squiers. I think the Classic Vibes have sort of been a turning point when even arses couldn’t deny that quality at entree level was possible. Our very own @strigadae can testify for Classic Vibe’s awesomeness! ;)

But for what it’s worth, I agree to a degree with @Chu that offering a range that DOES mix things up - I’ve long wanted Gibson to be more experimental/adventurous with their pickup options eg EMGs, Filtertrons etc - feels like a better way of testing out what customers will buy rather than their previous idea of only doing this for Custom Shop models which the vast majority of us could never afford even if we wanted to! Or use Epiphone to do this and get an idea for what options actually sell.
Not to forget that Gibson also has a looooong list of successful alternativebody shapes that could be brought back - for me, the Trini Lopez as a standard model springs immediately to mind (the Dave Grohl association makes that a no brainier), as does a 22 fret DC Standard last seen in 2014
What most people tend to forget is that Gibson still sort of does this every year. The core range gets a lot of attention but they always introduce limited ‘attractions’. The Guitar of the month-ones in 2010/2011-ish were a great example as were the flood-series, amongst many others like the Gothics. It’s just not viable to have a core production line of Filtertron fitted Lesters, but limited to 200/250 (like Guitar of the month was) or more makes it doable. More attention to that is the only thing that’s needed

heard several commentators mention an off shore Gibson with a proper Gibson headstock. previously this would be seen as diluting the core USA brand, but if Fender (across their multiple brands) and PRS can do it, why not Gibson?
Imho that is THE reason not to do it. It’s not so much diluting as hugely confusing to mess up a range. PRS is a better example in how they class them S2 and SE though I’d still prefer it simpler like Gibson always being USA. MIA, MIJ, MIK, MIC, MII, MIW: these all don’t make the world easier to understand, even more so when you take into account that the switch their origin through the years while maintaining similar model names! :p
 

johnniegoat

Stop, don’t, come back.
#29
@Rick

the problem for gibson is they are driving disappointment. people who buy a squier aspire to a fender, people buying an SE want a Core

its a stepping stone to realising their goal

with the epi headstock, at least on SGs and LPs, gibson is creating a gulf between its own customer groups. and its not like the epi guitars did not feature the correct headstock shape in the past

$_86.jpg
 

SemiCullen

Still haven't got the hang of Thursdays
#30
Figured as much! ;)

Having seen the range, it’s heavily LP and SG based, nothing new per se. Colour options seem very limited. The neck joints on Junior and TV Special seem irregular. Unpopular opinion; it makes no sense to abandon the G-Force for the modern series. They should’ve kept it and make it better and more intuitive through the years.
Or, better than auto-tuners, what if they put an Evertune bridge on the high performance models? I'd be on board with that.
 
#32
@Rick

the problem for gibson is they are driving disappointment. people who buy a squier aspire to a fender, people buying an SE want a Core

its a stepping stone to realising their goal

with the epi headstock, at least on SGs and LPs, gibson is creating a gulf between its own customer groups. and its not like the epi guitars did not feature the correct headstock shape in the past

View attachment 36620
If I’m 100% honest I don’t know the ins and outs of such Epiphones. On it’s own it’s not a solid enough argument for me to start making Epiphones the open book style though.
 

Sustainerplayer

On the edge of breakup
#34
I would love to love a Gibson Les Paul. But I never really liked the Gibson scale and the switch placement (I keep hitting it ... ).

But a gold top or a creme white with bindings LP just looks rawk'n'roll the right way. And on the right day I could be tempted to buy a P90 loaded gold top.

But in reality the only Gibson model I would consider buying would be a real re-issue of the '93 Nigthawk (the 3 pickup version). That one fits me like a glove (it is indeed a 25,5 scale and with the switch "the right place"). But they have only issued tame editions of that model since then. Actually the Epiphone Nighthawk from 2011 was much closer to the original '93 Gibson - than the Gibson's were :facepalm:

Yeah - and I know it is a niche model anyways. I'm just babbling.

I'm not a armchair CEO so I don't have the faintest idea what they should do. I know that half of the internet think they are "too modern" and the other half thinks they don't stick enough to the traditions. :D

But I do hope that Gibson comes back strong. It would be weird if they were no more.
 

SemiCullen

Still haven't got the hang of Thursdays
#35
I've said it before, I think Gibson should cap the Epiphone line at, like the $600-level instruments and rebrand all instruments above that price point as Gibsons. There you have your foreign-made, affordable Gibson, you maintain the Epiphone brand in the same kind of way that Fender does with Squier, and I think it'd be a win-win all around.
 

Lonestar

SC Relics Guitars
#36
didn't gibson have some measure of unpleasantness with the G-Force manufacturer?
I think (I’ll have to check) that Tronical had a contract with Gibson to put robot tuners on all their US models. When customers mainly rejected the idea, Gibson dropped them off their standard lines after 2015. I’m pretty sure Gibson paid Tronical millions of dollars to develop the tuners for Gibson, Tronical opened a counter suit in Germany to avoid having to explain where the original investment money went.
 

Felix

Addicted to Grunge
#37
Dang man, that is some bull, no offense. First and foremost: Nobody should be embarrassed for the brand they play. Like Scott said, everyone has an opinion and the possibility to let it be heard. It’s part of modern society to think “fuck them and their ignorant BS.” I remember a great quote by Doc from years back that stuck to me, I’ll update if I can find it!
Secondly, about 10+ years ago it was very popular to hate on Squiers. I think the Classic Vibes have sort of been a turning point when even arses couldn’t deny that quality at entree level was possible. Our very own @strigadae can testify for Classic Vibe’s awesomeness! ;)


What most people tend to forget is that Gibson still sort of does this every year. The core range gets a lot of attention but they always introduce limited ‘attractions’. The Guitar of the month-ones in 2010/2011-ish were a great example as were the flood-series, amongst many others like the Gothics. It’s just not viable to have a core production line of Filtertron fitted Lesters, but limited to 200/250 (like Guitar of the month was) or more makes it doable. More attention to that is the only thing that’s needed

I strongly disagree Rick on a number of things you've said , also I could have worded some things a bit better.

OK, your guitar hero plays a Gibson Les Paul, you want to have a guitar that looks just like it, but your parents (as it's usually them having to buy our first guitars) have to get you the Epiphone version. With the butchered headstock design, you're always reminded that you don't have a guitar like your idols. There may be some rich kid who's folks could afford to spunk a few grand on getting their kid the full blooded Gibson. It may seem irrelevant to an adult, but to a young teen, it can be a big deal.

Also, Squires only recently being seen as an OK option??? Nope, when they were being done in the 80's they were built in Fender's Japan plant and were of such a high quality, they were giving the US guitars a run for their money (Fender changed ownership and were building their new US factory). Why do you think people go to such lengths to hunt down those 80's Japanese Squire's and are prepared to part with "Fender" money for them? My uncle who helped me in my early days, actually still has his left handed Japanese Squire and it's an awesome guitar that feels and sounds way more expensive than it was ever meant to be.

I think you might be going on about when they were making the entry level Squire's in China, which would fit the time frame you mentioned, as they were poorly made and could put off even the most devoted guitarist, after they have cut their fingers up on the rough, sharp edges of the fret wire, with necks so out of spec, the guitar chokes on the higher frets and no amount of shims will fix it, as the neck pocket was routed by who have no clue about making guitars.

Fender had rested on their lorrels and they had to really get their shit together, so that regardless of which entry point you bought, the build quality was good enough, that you would always have a good playing instrument. This is possibly why Fender are not suffering from the counterfit guitar trade, nearly as badly as the other big USA brands. No matter which version of a Fender you buy, it's going to play and work. Yeah the quality of the parts and feel are more basic with the cheaper models, but they are still a much better instrument than the Strat copies I started with in the mid 90's. Even back then, a Squire was seen as something that was worth spending your money on, as you could trust the brand.


I often mention that one thing that is important to me with a guitar, is that just looking at it, makes you to pick it up and play/practice with it. This is why I put so much credence in the guitars looks. I was lucky that it was Kurt Cobain who got me into wanting to play guitar, so I naturally looked at Fender style guitars, rather than dealing with Les Paul types, such as my richer "friends" at my youth club, were dealing with. I think for most people who play or learnt on an electric, rather then the kids who had lessons with a classical/Spanish guitar, that we had a guitar hero we wanted to be like.


With the comment about Gibson each year causing shallow hype in their products, by making some important change, that actually does nothing big at all, I would agree. But this year they have genuinely made some massive changes, that are resetting the core upper models to what they should have always been. They got rid of a lot of the management and "improvements" that bankrupted the bloody company. The changes seem to be what the players have wanted for a long time. I'm not fanboying about these Les Paul's , as they have never interested me, as I always loved the Studios and Custom's , but when I learnt of the things they have implemented, the first thought in my head was "that's going to actually excite their customers, rather than piss them off for a change" . I have read on a number of different guitar magazine websites, that Gibson has brought in a good number of people who really "get" what people want and expect from the brand.
 

Lonestar

SC Relics Guitars
#38
I feel like a should say that it was Gibson’s electronic company acquisitions that pretty much bankrupted the brand. Not the guitars. Although... the guitars didn’t help. Their mission to become the worlds largest audio company backfired in disastrous fashion.
 

mirage2101

Well-Known Member
#39
I feel like a should say that it was Gibson’s electronic company acquisitions that pretty much bankrupted the brand. Not the guitars. Although... the guitars didn’t help. Their mission to become the worlds largest audio company backfired in disastrous fashion.
If you see the brands they bought it makes sense it failed. Gibson suffered from wanting to go further bigger more money. Instead of doing what they were good at.

But they also suffered from people who want to complain. About anything. Sure they shouldn’t have pushed some of the new stuff like they did in 2015. But it’s a great guitar. If they had a classic line back then it all would’ve been fine. We wouldn’t even be having this conversation.


But maybe an interesting question. So this is the 2019 lineup.. for 20% under their list price I can go to a luthier.. get any body I want. With any design.. any pickup. With a copy of the neck of my strat because I love it..
Why would I buy a Gibson?
 

Felix

Addicted to Grunge
#40
If you see the brands they bought it makes sense it failed. Gibson suffered from wanting to go further bigger more money. Instead of doing what they were good at.

But they also suffered from people who want to complain. About anything. Sure they shouldn’t have pushed some of the new stuff like they did in 2015. But it’s a great guitar. If they had a classic line back then it all would’ve been fine. We wouldn’t even be having this conversation.


But maybe an interesting question. So this is the 2019 lineup.. for 20% under their list price I can go to a luthier.. get any body I want. With any design.. any pickup. With a copy of the neck of my strat because I love it..
Why would I buy a Gibson?
Because sometimes you just want a brand and model of guitar for your collection. I guess it's easier to get a Gibson Les Paul than a bespoke guitar? There are lots of reasons why you would go down either route.

Again, to be clear, I do not care for the "normal" Les Paul's and it's actually the Les Paul Custom (not to be confused with a Custom Shop LP). I have always preferred the design of the Custom's as well as how they did differ from the Standard/Trad LP's.

For about the last 20 years, I had a dream rig setup, which I managed to get a few years ago thanks to Marshall making the Silver Jubilee a permeant model. To me, I had the goal of brands and models, as I like that sort of thing. I'm like there to be simple controls (ie not loads of dials to fine tune a tone in) and I really have a thing for having the brands that were out of my reach as an 18 year old, with a hidden drug habit. It wasn't until I started watching Chapper's that I took the plunge and bought my first Les Paul, which was the satin red LPJ in 2013. I had always thought the LP Custom looked really nice, but I didn't think it would be something I would like to own, until I played one and realised it was the missing link for me.

So for me, I like having a set brand and logo on the headstock, which really bugged me with the 2015 LP Studio I owned, as it had that messy Les Paul 100 script on it. I really like how the headstock looks with a Gibson LP Custom, with the diamond and the multiply binding. I've just been very lucky to have a guitar that looks, plays and sounds just how I want things.

For me it's the Marshall Silver Jubilee amp, The Gibson Les Paul Custom and I'm only using BOSS F/X pedals. This makes me happy and content with my stuff. I've now owned this setup for 4 years and while I've had a few guitars join my LP, I've never had wanted to sell the guitar, so GAS is not something that ever forces me to sell everything, just to get a new shiny.

When all the treatments are done on my spine sometime next year and I can start working in IT again, I have promised myself to have Scott aka @Lonestar do me his take on a Strat Plus one day, as I think he's got such a good eye with making special Strats now, that he could easily make me my dream Strat-Plus.
 
Top