So thats why the management at gibson decided to lay off Edwin wilson ? But what happened to Rick Gembar ?Well, as I said plastics did change. I think I mentioned the dish carve claims. Rolled binding, I forget when that happened.
So, he's correct, although I think overly focused on the changes [or lack thereof] being the root of the matter.
The issue regarding the 'True Historic' marketing push wasn't really the incremental changes associated with them, Gibson has been marketing "new and improved" type change in marketing tripe along with those incremental model changes, halt-stepping toward accuracy.... To me, that's understanding specification alterations, and marketing akin to that done across many, many product spaces.
The first kicker, and I think I alluded to what sparked TL's vocal stance, was purported differentiation from Reissues that had come before, especially the 2013- changes. So, it was a perception of being disingenuous and "lowering" the value of the Reissues that had been produced prior. 'Hey, don't SH*T on existing Reissue guitars... we've been the ones supporting you, buying your products over and over, in fact the folks giving you the information to make them better... and now you are going to F-Us over with this marketing...?!' was a prevalent sentiment.
That said -- I think what's really overlooked, and I'll stress again although I've mentioned it -- is the nomenclature changed to make way for the most consequential 'unforced error' which was the stratification of the Custom Shop/Historic Les Paul Standard product line with not just the 'True Historic' but 'Historic Select' and in particular the 'Custom Select' models and associated branding hullaballoo.
'True Historic' was just what the marketing folks picked. Debating how more 'Truer' the 'True Historic' guitars with incremental specification changes over prior years being less relevant to actual motivation than introduction of Custom Select (CS, or C-Sel) models with Reissue 'dressing' but 'structural' differences e.g. the short tenon in tandem with a price increase was seen as a bum move. With C-Sel, Gibson had to create another designation, because they were introducing an inferior model [from a historic reissue accuracy perspective, it's still a fine guitar if you aren't hung up on the tenon]. Not sure if there were wood-sort, top-choice shenanigans too, or just the tenon. Of course, Historic Select and Hand Select became more layer beyond the TH branding.
Too much noise, not enough signal. And price differentiation (increase) without perceived value for cost difference.
Anyway do you guys own or played the 2017 era R9 with the TH appointments vs a regular R9? Does it sound better ?
I didnt a google search and reading some guys stating able to hear the difference on the hide glue and probably the unsheathed truss rod.... or it probably just rule as what as discussed being a marketing hype rather than specific tone contribution....
How true and big of a difference is that? Or still a widely debated topic... do the guys here do agree choosing the latest 2020 till now Murphy lab R9 vs 2017 era R9 with the TH specs for a more well recieved tone improvement? Clearer, more open etc...