Ok, first, let me just say I like Gibson guitars (and amps, and their straps are great too, and I like their picks...), so I'm definitely biased. But:
When it comes to finding fault with guitars, and judging how bad the faults are, I think a lot of it has to do with mindset, preconceived notions, expectations and price.
A lot of people claim everything Gibson is simply
these days. They are wrong. And a lot of people can't accept that there might be faults with Gibson guitars at all. They are wrong.
I've been really lucky with my Gibsons, all of them. But then again, I'm not picky with necks, I'm not picky with small dings, and I accept that I need to set my guitars up properly before judging how they really perform. I accept that although a guitar might not suit ME perfectly in every way conceivable, that doesn't mean it is not a great guitar. It is quite simply impossible to please everyone.
However, sometimes guitars slip through QC when they shouldn't. Evidence (although quite often anecdotal) definitely shows that. The guitar John just bought is a good example. It should not happen, but it will. And if it happens, the dealer or Gibson themselves should correct the problem for the customer, either by replacing the guitar or fixing the fault, no questions asked. I accept that a guitar bought on the net will not be guaranteed to have the perfect setup out of the box, but it should at least have a decent setup done to it before leaving the factory/store. And guitar stores should give you a free setup when you buy a guitar, that much SHOULD be expected of them.
That being said, I still think Gibson gets a harder rap than a lot of other producers. Not necessarily just because of they marketing themselves as a quality brand, but largely because of their"legendary" status as one of THE greatest guitar brands historically. When a lot of people buy a Les Paul, they are not just buying a guitar, but also a piece of music history, They are buying part of the legacy of people like Eric Clapton, Peter Green, Slash, Duane Allman, Michael Bloomfield and, well, Les Paul... Whether consciously or unconsciously, with a lot of buyers, a Gibson signifies more than just a musical instrument. When those standards are not met a 100 % (how could they be, really?) the distance between "the best" and "crap" is very short. I think this not only applies to Gibson's expensive models. When people buy the cheaper models, SG Specials etc., I think people tend to have the same expectations as for the more expensive ones. (Mind you, there is no reason to accept faults with cheaper guitars!)
I would have liked to see statistics of how many guitars from the different brands are in fact faulty, and by faulty, I mean de facto faulty. Without having any clue, really, I would imagine Gibson is not worse than similar high-end brands. But I think they get bashed more for problems than other brands.
Again, I'm not saying people imagine the problems they have had with their Gibsons, definitely not. Way too many people report problems for that to be the case. Those of you here who report problems with your Gibsons know that all too well. But I think there is a clear tendency towards
ing on Gibson, particularly on YouTube, for things that are not real problems.
As for complaining that the Les Paul Standard really should be what the Traditional is etc., come on, just get a different TRC...
