Post
by Larry Mal » Wed May 02, 2018 6:08 am
Well, Gibson has tried to monetize the Les Paul to such a degree that everyone can afford one, with those who can pay more hopefully paying more.
A Les Paul Studio- I own one from '93 I think- is arguably all the Les Paul that anyone really needs, of course, if you can pay more they'll outfit it differently and so on. It's trim after a point.
And of course there are cheaper versions of the Les Paul even than the Studio, all of which would really do about the same thing as any other Les Paul in the end. But adding value to things is pretty hard.
But you know the point of the Boogie Van Les Paul and the Dusk Tiger and shit isn't to sell those guitars, right? It gets Gibson's name in the press. People talk about those instruments at a level that they aren't going to talk about the Les Paul Studio- "How's the Studio?" "Still good." "Oh."
Not much there. Sadly, if Gibson's goal is to get their name in the press, they've just succeeded wildly.
And the robot tuners to me really shows the limitations of bolting new technology onto old technology more than anything else. Like, if you wanted to design a guitar that tuned itself automatically and multiple tunings quickly was the goal, then what Gibson did is a cumbersome design that you'd likely not arrive at if you started from fresh.
But that's the problem. Gibson seems to be under the impression that people want innovation in the electric guitar these days and they don't. That's a fundamental disconnect between seller and consumer and that rarely works out in the marketplace for long.
Like me, I talk a bunch of shit about how the Firebird X should give Gibson some respect for trying to do something different, but then again, I'd never buy one. I could have, you know? But everything I buy is a representation to some degree or another of a classic guitar design and I have little to no inclination to change that.
So who is Gibson innovating for? The kids of today will grow up watching people playing the same guitar designs and so they'll want those too, same as I did. People have pointed out, no one expects innovation with the violin, or the saxophone, or the tuba. I don't think that people really expect much from the electric guitar either, since when you think of an electric guitar, you are almost certainly thinking of a sound that already exists. What else can you do?
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.
) but from appropriation of existing design outside of it's original context and often outside the widest dream of the designer. You can see this in the biker jacket's development from something for male motorcylists inspired by military wear, to something for rebel motorcyclists, to a male rock star item and signifier of a wrong un, to a unisex rockstar item, to a teenage girl jacket and onto a fashion item for fashionable women who'll never see 35 again and now fully female outside the dressing up like a greaser rock steady crew. You just can't design this, it has to be adopted and reappropriated. 
