Dingwall - no more D-Bird...

[dannybuoy]

This stinks.

I can understand Gibson going after those making cheap replicas of their instruments that could eat into their sales, but the D-Bird is nothing like any Gibson bass. It's not like there are people tossing up whether to buy a Dingwall or a real Gibson/Epiphone, they are worlds apart.

[Dapper Bandit]

Gibson are trying to protect their IP about 40 years too late, as has been said already.  Legally if you don't use it, you lose it.  They tried to go after PRS and failed.  So now they have gone after Dean on similarly spurious grounds with the added bonus of threating Dean dealers with legal action as well.

Fender are in exactly the same boat as Gibson, if not to a worse degree.  How many world class luthiers are churning out "Super Rippers"?  Not many posts on here or Talkbass about the latest 5k "Victory on Steroids".  But Fender of late seem to be focusing on giving their customers what they want, which is a quality instrument that has the look they want, the playability they want and also the headstock they want.

Gibson have still got another 20-30 years worth of customers to tap into, what with people who were teenagers in the late 80s - late 90s coming to an age where they may be more financially comfortable to buy the instrument they lusted after as a youth and the dyed in the wool Gibbo fans who still want to want a Gibson have still got some mileage left in them.

When cheap Chinese counterfeits (the real problem in all this legal kerfuffle, not Sheldon's nod to an old classic that probably stems as much from his passion for classic car design as anything) and the second hand market are taking as huge a bite out of manufacturer's bottom line as it is, questionable lawsuits are probably not the way to go.

Morally and ethically it's a bit more of a grey area, guitar designers have been stealing, borrowing, taking inspiration from and downright copying each other since the damn things were invented.  Nobody is going to mistake a D-Bird for a Thunderbird because the D-Bird would be available in nice colours.

[Cuzzie]

11 minutes ago, Dapper Bandit said:

Gibson are trying to protect their IP about 40 years too late, as has been said already.  Legally if you don't use it, you lose it.  They tried to go after PRS and failed.  So now they have gone after Dean on similarly spurious grounds with the added bonus of threating Dean dealers with legal action as well.

Fender are in exactly the same boat as Gibson, if not to a worse degree.  How many world class luthiers are churning out "Super Rippers"?  Not many posts on here or Talkbass about the latest 5k "Victory on Steroids".  But Fender of late seem to be focusing on giving their customers what they want, which is a quality instrument that has the look they want, the playability they want and also the headstock they want.

Gibson have still got another 20-30 years worth of customers to tap into, what with people who were teenagers in the late 80s - late 90s coming to an age where they may be more financially comfortable to buy the instrument they lusted after as a youth and the dyed in the wool Gibbo fans who still want to want a Gibson have still got some mileage left in them.

When cheap Chinese counterfeits (the real problem in all this legal kerfuffle, not Sheldon's nod to an old classic that probably stems as much from his passion for classic car design as anything) and the second hand market are taking as huge a bite out of manufacturer's bottom line as it is, questionable lawsuits are probably not the way to go.

Morally and ethically it's a bit more of a grey area, guitar designers have been stealing, borrowing, taking inspiration from and downright copying each other since the damn things were invented.  Nobody is going to mistake a D-Bird for a Thunderbird because the D-Bird would be available in nice colours.

Agreed it’s all rubbish, and saddening. What is also rubbish is trying naively to place some companies as a pariah of innovation when clearly they are also not.

Gibson not going after Tokai - or are they? I don’t know, but I think if they are not it’s due to the fact they are on a different continent, and this more difficult to pin down.

Similarly did they go after Greco? I don’t know (happy to be wrong on both accounts) but again, different continent and also I think Greco are owned by Fender, not sure Gibson have enough money to take that on.

Gibson going after Dingwall - well same continent, and the fear factor of a smaller company making high quality basses driving this as well as being monkeys.

Morals and ethics go out the window with cash - Leo started Fender, ended at G&L - they had to change their headstock design (although it’s gone back now) and he bloody designed the guitar.

Its really simple - trust in the quality of your own product, the truth will out you will get customers and keep them

[Dapper Bandit]

8 minutes ago, Cuzzie said:

Its really simple - trust in the quality of your own product, the truth will out you will get customers and keep them

This is pretty much the best course of action. People want a decent Gibson at an affordable price, give them that!

A friend of mine has spent a fair old chunk of cheddar on Gibsons, owns a Jimmy Page LP amongst others. His favourite guitar is a PRS because it plays well, sounds good and never needed to go back to the manufacturer / tech because of wonky QC...

[Deedee]

6 minutes ago, Dapper Bandit said:

This is pretty much the best course of action. People want a decent Gibson at an affordable price, give them that!

A friend of mine has spent a fair old chunk of cheddar on Gibsons, owns a Jimmy Page LP amongst others. His favourite guitar is a PRS because it plays well, sounds good and never needed to go back to the manufacturer / tech because of wonky QC...

I agree. A guy I played with tried a wall full of Gibson LP's before opting to buy the MIJ Tokai equivalent and he never had an ounce of trouble with it.

[Dapper Bandit]

He bought a limited run Gibson once, took ages to come down and when it arrived the neck was so bad that when Gibson got it back they just destroyed it. They offered to replace it, while making a huge deal out of it because "limited run" having conveniently forgotten that it's not really making an extra guitar because you royally screwed the first one. Months later the replacement arrives broken because it hadn't been packed properly.

No dice with Gibson at this point, they don't want to know. Money back and micturate off!

[uk_lefty]

It's the only Dingwall I like the look of! Glad they've found a way to keep it going

[Thunderpaws]

Look at Lulls front bass page. It’s full of shapes that somehow remind me of other brands designs, can’t for the life of me 🤔 who!? Will Gibson go for them too?  What about smaller boutique companies all over the place who make pretty much copies of instruments from any of the big companies? 

If it’s just based on headstock design I’d have to wonder what Ibanez would do if someone came out with a JEM design. 

 

[HazBeen]

On 13/07/2019 at 00:05, CameronJ said:

I quite like the design tweaks. Makes it look more distinctly “Dingwallish” while still being a pretty strong nod to the Thunderbird.

I like it!

Edited July 17, 2019 by HazBeen

[chris_b]

On 13/07/2019 at 09:19, Mastodon2 said:

Gibson threatening to tear down everybody else's house rather than getting their own in order.

No. This is just one of many things the Gibson management will be addressing as they put their own "house in order".

[BassApprentice]

On 12/07/2019 at 23:05, CameronJ said:

I quite like the design tweaks. Makes it look more distinctly “Dingwallish” while still being a pretty strong nod to the Thunderbird.

I don't mind it too much, shame the photo is so heavily shadowed so you can't quite appreciate the changes but I'm sure there will be more photos very soon. 

[Dapper Bandit]

2 hours ago, Thunderpaws said:

If it’s just based on headstock design I’d have to wonder what Ibanez would do if someone came out with a JEM design.

The real question there would be would this JEM design feature the monkey grip?  If that has been copywritten (copywrited? copywrote?) by Ibanez then it would be liable for legal action.  If we're talking about a superstrat with a floating trem and a thin neck then that boat has long set sail.

 

[Musicman20]

I have two Gibson guitars, one is a 2017 LP Tribute, and strangely, this guitar has excellent QC and sounds/feels brilliant considering the prices back then. It could do with a new pickup selector as it's a bit finicky but it works.

The other is an Amazon exclusive SG Standard 2017 ish in Sunburst. Nicely built. The odd tiny flaw....but other than that, it is a proper Gibson and it does look lovely.

I think I was VERY lucky to get two decent Gibson at decent prices. I recently bought an R8 Les Paul in the huge sale they had, and to be honest, it felt cheap, the finish wasn't great and overall it felt rushed. That guitar normally is around £3.5-4k I think....this was £2.5k in a huge batch sale.

Gibson have a lot of things they NEED to get right. I still don't trust buying new without a complete thorough check.

Instead of suing and collaborating to make sure they have their name in the right places, they need to make customers confident the guitars are perfect, especially at the price they are. 

 

 

 

[Doctor J]

Or they could just try to make the competition disappear?

[Musicman20]

Oh, and their current roster is rubbish for basses IMO. Make a few decent period correct Thunderbirds, and maybe a modern version with improvements (like they do with the modern take on Les Pauls). £1600 or less. 

[Muzz]

4 hours ago, Thunderpaws said:

Look at Lulls front bass page. It’s full of shapes that somehow remind me of other brands designs, can’t for the life of me 🤔 who!? Will Gibson go for them too?  What about smaller boutique companies all over the place who make pretty much copies of instruments from any of the big companies? 

If it’s just based on headstock design I’d have to wonder what Ibanez would do if someone came out with a JEM design. 

 

I think that seeing as they've gone for Dingwall, whose only Gibson-reminiscent bass has a completely different headstock and so many improvements on the original it's basically only the overall body outline that's in any way similar, then Mike Lull had better be lawyering up right now...his are straight copies by comparison, plus he's also the right size for Gibson's legal team to push around...

Edited July 17, 2019 by Muzz

[Bobthedog]

Do we know for certain that Gibson have gone for Dingwall? As Crunchman states, it could be Dingwall have made the changes just to avoid court costs etc. That is not an unusual behaviour for business and, in my mind probably the route taken. The costs of changing the design, just in case, are a lot cheaper and a lot less hassle than going to court. Especially if the owner is just coming out of a battle with cancer.

[Muzz]

I'd suggest that the first line of their announcement 'Due to circumstances beyond our control' suggests very very strongly either imminent or actual legal action from Gibson...in the end, it makes no difference: they've changed a popular design (and the name) due to external circumstances. No point in taking on extra work, and possibly losing sales, if that wasn't the case.

[crunchman]

4 minutes ago, Muzz said:

I'd suggest that the first line of their announcement 'Due to circumstances beyond our control' suggests very very strongly either imminent or actual legal action from Gibson...in the end, it makes no difference: they've changed a popular design (and the name) due to external circumstances. No point in taking on extra work, and possibly losing sales, if that wasn't the case.

I'd guess they have had a Cease and Desist letter, and have decided that changing the design is safer than the potential costs of a court case.  Most small businesses do the same as they can't afford the legal fees even when they have a good case.

[Muzz]

Yeah, I'd put a C&D into 'imminent legal action' territory. Awful timing for Sheldon, mind.

[Cuzzie]

It’s prob not much different to Fender and Sandberg.

Like or loathe the basses shape change came about 2015 probably earlier than planned because Fender gently suggested to retailers if they continued to stock Sandberg, Fender may not send stock to them.

Backdoor pressure

Thumbs up to Dingwall for just moving on, but of course they may have to change templates, CNC’s computer programs etc. It’s no small thing for a smaller company

[Cuzzie]

Will any old shapes they have made be binned or be available cut price?

Promise not to say it is from Dingwall

Edited July 17, 2019 by Cuzzie

[Muzz]

I wish...

[krispn]

I'd be tempted to pick up a D Bird now before the revised model ships. GuitarGuitar now stock them - played one a few weeks ago in Glasgow! Sounded and felt great!

[Muzz]

None on their website any more (or Bass Direct's, and he's the biggest stockist anywhere), tho they might have one stashed under the counter...I'm in Glasgow tomorrow for a couple of days for a gig, I might pop in and ask...