Gibson Dusk Tiger

BoringPostcards · Post by **BoringPostcards** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:19 pm

Gibson should fuck off and let Epiphone do everything from now on.

bent · Post by **bent** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:28 pm

Mo Rawka wrote:
bent wrote:In my opinion it looks like it is a new take on the Les Paul Recording...

but that guitar actually has cool stuff and DOESNT LOOK LIKE SHIT.

I'm not a huge fan of either but I am GASing for a Gibson Les Paul 1960 Classic

othomas2 · Post by **othomas2** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:44 pm

Skiptracer1981 wrote:Gibson should fuck off and let Epiphone do everything from now on.

The quality of Epiphone is very questionable... I would not buy one seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know now.

BoringPostcards · Post by **BoringPostcards** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:52 pm

othomas2 wrote:
Skiptracer1981 wrote:Gibson should fuck off and let Epiphone do everything from now on.
The quality of Epiphone is very questionable... I would not buy one seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know now.

I know, but they don't make ugly shit guitars. Gibson should retire and just be Epiphone.

The original Epiphone were better than Gibson anyhow. I mean the original Epiphone, Anastasios & Epaminondas Stathopoulos's Epiphone.

bent · Post by **bent** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:04 pm

Skiptracer1981 wrote:
othomas2 wrote:
Skiptracer1981 wrote:Gibson should fuck off and let Epiphone do everything from now on.
The quality of Epiphone is very questionable... I would not buy one seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know now.
I know, but they don't make ugly shit guitars. Gibson should retire and just be Epiphone.

The original Epiphone were better than Gibson anyhow. I mean the original Epiphone, Anastasios & Epaminondas Stathopoulos's Epiphone.

They never made solid bodies... just arch top jazz guitars.

I'd take an original Epiphone Sheraton though!

BoringPostcards · Post by **BoringPostcards** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:45 pm

I am aware of this. They were higher quality then Gibson's in the beginning.
Epiphone couldn't recover after WWII, so they got bought by Gibson.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:49 pm

othomas2 wrote: The quality of Epiphone is very questionable... I would not buy one seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know now.

The quality of some Epiphones are as good as anything else you'll buy. They make some shit, but they make some great instruments too. I think it's one of those scenarios where you have to play first, or know what you're looking at.

izodiak · Post by **izodiak** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:00 pm

thats why I am afraid of buying gear online, that two the same kind Epiphones can be very different..
thats why You need to try them out always..
But the Casino I ordered was just perfect out of the box..

chisa · Post by **chisa** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:11 am

gibson effortlessly jumps from failure to failure. just make the fucking les pauls.

bent · Post by **bent** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:25 am

...and SGs, Firebirds, ESs, Flying Vs, Archtops, and more RD Artists.

ooh ooh, I also like their basses.

taylornutt · Post by **taylornutt** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:49 am

First off, I agree the guitar looks pretty bad.

I am no fan of Gibson for sure, but I am wondering if Gibson has put themselves into a position where nothing new has a chance of being successful. They have lived off their past for so long, I think their fans won't accept anything remotely different in design. They have forgotten their innovative past (like the explorer, Firebird, etc,) that were years ahead of their time and have resorted to flashy tricks and Fender copies. If Fender tried to build a LP Copy with a maple neck, we would be headed to the Fender Factory with pitch forks and torches demanding they go back to what made them great. They need to find a way to innovate without lossing their identity.
PRS is eating Gibson lunch in terms of design and innovation.

The only Gibson guitar I kinda dig is the non reversed bird guitars.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 5:14 am

See now, I like the Firebirds, but I'm not that arsed about the non-Reverse variety. It's a classic example of Gibsonthink:

Holy wow, the Firebird is such a great guitar! But that might put wankers off, so what should we do to make it a little less challenging and a whole lot more boring? I know, let's reverse the reverse! We'll make it just like any other guitar! HOLY SHIT WE'RE GENIUSES JIMI HENDRIX NEXT LOLOLOLOLZZZZZ

nondas · Post by **nondas** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:38 am

Skiptracer1981 wrote: The original Epiphone were better than Gibson anyhow. I mean the original Epiphone, Anastasios & Epaminondas Stathopoulos's Epiphone.

I heard they made some pretty good acoustics, banjos and bouzoukis.

Nice job Skip, you've won all my internets today for spelling Epaminondas correctly (

)

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:05 am

taylornutt wrote: PRS is eating Gibson lunch in terms of design and innovation.

Really?? I admit I've not seen any recent models. The standard PRS model type back in the day is just a crossbreed LP/Strat with no flair and not as cool as either. Not a rational statement I just think they look like shit. Will take look see what they do now though. The dusk tiger largely sucks. Sorta like the plates but hate the tiger striping and fangs on the board.... Oh pur-leease. Is this to appeal to grown men who thought having skulls and wizards on thier guitars at 15 made them deep and edgey?

Dear Gibson,

Happy non-customer here.

Regards
BCB

Sloan · Post by **Sloan** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:47 am

othomas2 wrote:
Skiptracer1981 wrote:Gibson should fuck off and let Epiphone do everything from now on.
The quality of Epiphone is very questionable... I would not buy one seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know now.

i used to think this but my epiphone goth les paul with gfs '59 vintage bridge humbucker is my #1 guitar. I used to have like 12 guitars, now i have it, my hollow body, and an acoustic. it's my only solidbody until ends' gibson version arrives. it's fucking good and i've tried so many different humbuckers, but the gfs 59 vintage fucking slays all.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:03 pm

I dunno what it is. It can be effortless to love an expensive guitar, but I'd never be able to help feeling that a part of that love comes from a sense of responsibility having paid such a large sum for it. For instance, you're beginning to fall out of love with your wife, even though you've sunk megadollars into a pair of tits and a trillion pairs of shoes for her.

On the other hand, a cheaper guitar can just grow on you. You become really attached. I've known people who could have afforded a full-on Gibson who just couldn't part with their Epiphone, and I can see why at times as I've played a few blinders (and a few rubbish ones, too).

Sloan · Post by **Sloan** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:19 pm

the BEST guitar i've ever played in my life was an epiphone Ace Frehley model. it was amazing.

crofty · Post by **crofty** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:42 pm

what a stupid name too. i actually dont dislike the inlays, but then you realise theyre meant to be "claws", which is just silly.

gibson need to go home and re-think their life

never liked gibsons or epis too much. necks are to wide for me.

willlin · Post by **willlin** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:36 pm

This guitar is so ugly it makes me want to shit in my hands and then rub it in my eyes.

Just to make it go away mind.

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:50 pm

but then, rather than just viewing an image of an ugly guitar, which didn't effect you in any way, you now have shit on your eyes and hands, which can lead to all kinds of horrible things.