The new Angus Young SG!!!

Discussion in 'Gibson SG' started by TNT, May 5, 2010.

  1. sneakerpimp

    sneakerpimp Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    586
    Likes Received:
    158
    Location:
    The O.C.
    [quote author=suicidehummer link=topic=20627.msg249222#msg249222 date=1275514655]
    Yeah, the complaints were that the existing Angus Sig didn't have lightning bolts. It would have made sense on the old sig because he actually plays one similar to that. It makes no sense on this new one though because he doesn't.

    And I'm not complaining that it's a gussied up Standard, I'm complaining that they're asking more than a '61 RI for it.

    Well they suck at it because all they did was create a guitar THEY think looks like something Angus would play.
    [/quote]

    is that the criteria for creating a signature model? or was it just their's (Gibson's)?
     
  2. nvosmeier

    nvosmeier New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
  3. TNT

    TNT Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,161
    Likes Received:
    46
    Location:
    Noblesville, IN
    [quote author=Tenafly Viper link=topic=20627.msg249249#msg249249 date=1275570815]
    Let's be honest people. I have seen a preponderance of Gibson remakes that miss the mark. Very little that Gibson does seems to make complete sense. It seems they always get some things right and then botch up other stuff.

    I remember reading an article with Brian Setzer taking about the remake of his 6120. Before Fender grabbed Gretsch the guitars were never quite exactly right. But when they entered the deal with Fender Brian changed his tune. It wasn't just an influx of cash either. They xrayed his guitar. They did everything they could to study it to duplicate as well as they could. Brian even seemed to have some influence of quality control. He would talk about checking the top and back thickness to make sure they were making them thin enough.

    I never see Gibson doing anything like that. Maybe they have cut apart some old Les Paul's but hell Gibson makes Historic reissue guitars with weight relief.... What kind of sense does that make? The new Gibson has always given the impression the thing they care about the most is dollars and not guitars.
    [/quote]

    They actually have done all that at Gibson (see the Eric Clapton and Jimmie Page $igs).
     
  4. Tenafly Viper

    Tenafly Viper Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Gloucester, MA
    [quote author=TNT link=topic=20627.msg249317#msg249317 date=1275699445]
    They actually have done all that at Gibson (see the Eric Clapton and Jimmie Page $igs).
    [/quote]

    Correct, which bothers me even more that they take such little care with some things when they have the ability to do so much. Secondly, for instance the Clapton 335. The guitar is a standard 64 ES335. I am sure there are tons of them around with the standard finish he had. So why buy his to imitate it, when it is probably absolutely identical to almost every other one? Guitar Center backed it, that's why. They put up the almost a million for the guitar. It was in investment for them.

    Let's take a look at Slash's AFD Les Paul. It is essentially a standard LP with a 17 pitch on the headstock, not 15, oh and it has a tuneomatic and not an ABR1. Oh yeah and it is the 3rd sig they have made from him. How much for this slightly modified LP that may or may not be anything actually like the real AFD guitar? 12K or 9K.

    All businesses should be about making money, but you can't tell me this collection of Harvard grads care about anything but money. At one point being USA made, meant quality, and value. There is nothing rock n roll about a company that sells 12K guitars.

    Don't get me started on the Joan Jett signature at least she tried to get us something the average person could afford. Even then they f-ed it up. You shouldn't have to be a dentist or a Japanese industrialist to own a guitar. It is just sad.

    I am sorry to hijack the thread, but Angus's signature should be a copy of one of his guitars. Unless you wanna call it what it is which is an Angus model and not a duplicate of anything he actually has played or plays. Oh yeah and I love the Gibson Angus's regardless.
     
  5. dbb

    dbb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    9,958
    Likes Received:
    3,776
    Location:
    California
    [quote author=Tenafly Viper link=topic=20627.msg249340#msg249340 date=1275753613]
    Correct, which bothers me even more that they take such little care with some things when they have the ability to do so much.....All businesses should be about making money, but you can't tell me this collection of Harvard grads care about anything but money. At one point being USA made, meant quality, and value. There is nothing rock n roll about a company that sells 12K guitars.

    Don't get me started on the Joan Jett signature at least she tried to get us something the average person could afford. Even then they f-ed it up. You shouldn't have to be a dentist or a Japanese industrialist to own a guitar. It is just sad.
    [/quote]

    Damn, you said it. The prices are f'ing ridiculous for some of this stuff! Most working pros do NOT have that kind of extra cash, and the guitars probably are no better than the 2-4 G models of the standard "classics".
     

Share This Page