Gibson Reverse Explorer

Talk about all other types of guitars. Jazzmasters and basses go here!

Moderated By: mods

User avatar
bamonte
.
.
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Where everything is green and submarine

Gibson Reverse Explorer

Post by bamonte »

What do you guys think of this soon to come Gibson reverse explorer??
I think the color could be better and the thunderbolt thing is kinda weird looking. so is the headstock.


Gibson
Looking for recommendations on some new music?
www.gnaracidlovemusic.com
User avatar
mewithoutus
.
.
Posts: 1246
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:46 am
Contact:

Post by mewithoutus »

they need to knock this reverse shit off. the reverse V was bad enough.

they should stick to the reverse firebird. the only guitar they have ever "reversed" that looked better than the non reverse model.

why dont they come out with a new semihollow? or maybe a new SOMETHING?

they should focus on amps for a while.
rich people say fuck yeah hey hey
heavium wrote:grow a bat army in my room and train them to attack when someone comes in
User avatar
Nick
Y'SEE!?
Posts: 9520
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:13 am
Location: Albany, NY

Post by Nick »

ugly.

Gibson had a chance to sell me a guitar last year with their "guitar of the week" series. They failed. I wanted the 3 single-coil SG but the 3 tone burst didn't do it for me....then they made one in black but it was like the ugly worn finish.

If they made the 3 single coil SG in either light blue or "classic white" I would have done it in a heartbeat. They could have made at least a nicer one than last year's in this run. They can't say it wasn't a popular model, my store alone special ordered 3-4 of them last year for customers who hadn't even played it first.
User avatar
Will
Up on his Whore Lore
Posts: 5328
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:40 am
Location: MADTOWN RAT 2011

Post by Will »

Trewth

Their amps a few years back were wonderful - that one with the mismatched 10 and 12 speakers was really unique and special.

They're catering to this strange aging-metalhead audience with all this crap (Les Paul BFG especially). I want an affordable semi-hollow, some sub-$4,000 jazz boxes, maybe a les paul that offers something besides a new finish, not this crap.

The one good thing this year is some of the non-60s Icon series - the Nick Lucas and J-45 in particular.
User avatar
mewithoutus
.
.
Posts: 1246
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:46 am
Contact:

Post by mewithoutus »

seriously. gibson are just loving themselves hardcore arent they?

some sub $1,000,000,000,000 jazzboxes would be great. no more "satin finish" bullshit either. get rid of the worn finish models too.

just well made guitars, affordable, that would cater to working musicians who arent in the upper tax bracket. good golly. its so easy. they would make a killing if they started waking up. fender did. they have some great stuff out now!
rich people say fuck yeah hey hey
heavium wrote:grow a bat army in my room and train them to attack when someone comes in
User avatar
tribi9
Administrator
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:14 pm
Location: Canada

Post by tribi9 »

That's fucking ugly! No boner for that P.O.S.
r40f
.
.
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:19 am
Location: new york
Contact:

Post by r40f »

it's upside-down... was there a new guy at the factory who routed a body on the wrong side and tried to save face by calling it his new design?
User avatar
SickenedEmotions99
.
.
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:54 pm
Location: Sparkill, NY
Contact:

Post by SickenedEmotions99 »

Terrible. Simply terrible.
User avatar
Richard
.
.
Posts: 1353
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 4:59 am
Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Post by Richard »

That's really hideous, especially the headstock. I can't understand how they could fuck it up so bad.
skip wrote:satan rules