|
|
Joined:
February 2016
Posts: 1802
Location: When?? | Cruising through the OFC archives I found a post from way back in 2007 when Gibson was boasting their new robotic tuning system. Here's the demo video that was in the post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WetVXbYRfWk
Now back to 2018... I recently borrowed a friend's new-issue Les Paul with a robotic tuner on it (mounted on the back of the headstock). So I just wanted to report where it has gone in 11 years. The answer is.. nowhere. It is the.. single.. most.. ridiculous.. thing I have ever seen on any guitar. Especially on an expensive one like this. First, its accuracy is zip. It displays that the guitar is tuned, but when you play it, it sounds just like a toy guitar from a thrift shop. Secondly, the robotic gears are so incrementally small and weak that too much manual tuning wears them out very quickly to the point where the knob just simply free-wheels and is completely useless and can no longer be tuned manually at all.. but the robotics still work and that's what you're stuck with. Insane. I bought a new Gibson SG Fusion a year ago (very basic USA-made) with manual tuners, and the guitar sounds just peachy. I had my friend's "high tech" USA Gibson for a week and couldn't play a single tune on it (he's switching it out for manual tuners). What ARE they thinking over there at Gibson?
Edited by Love O Fair 2018-03-08 3:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2011
Posts: 755
Location: Muenster/Germany | The built-in tuner in my Adamas 1688 12string switches off after 1 minute. So you have 5 seconds for each string and if you are quick enough, a blink of an eye for control. That´s ok for me. I always wondered who might use a robot tuner, because 1. they are so UGLY and 2. they can not work. Everone of us knows that most of the time a physical correct tuning does not sound good. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2016
Posts: 1802
Location: When?? | I have always thought that any particular guitar should be tuned to itself. Just give me that initial bottom string note from whatever reliable source and let me go from there. That's what frosted me about the robotic gears that were so fragile and failed. No manual control. I admit that my question above was rhetorical. I realize that companies (guitar or otherwise) are these days into any wiz-bang-looking feature they can sell to a clueless consumer that will guide them through something that they know nothing about and have no desire to take the time to learn it the correct way. Even if it fails. No, make that ESPECIALLY if it fails. That way they can sell them the remedy, too. I sorely miss the days of honest, Charlie Kaman-type manufacturers. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10582
Location: NJ | Those tuners are junk |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Gibsons suck |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2009
Posts: 4535
Location: Flahdaw | Beal - 2018-03-10 10:06 AM
Gibsons suck What'd you say??!!! 
|
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2015
Posts: 287
Location: Katmandu | The time may not have been ripe yet due to technical limitations for Gibson's valiant effort of trying to find a solution to an age-old problem professional musicians have been dealing with: having to constantly tune the guitar on and off stage. While they found a solution in the creation of the G-Force tuners for their high-performance models, it turned out to be a solution too clunky and crude yet to have caught on across a larger range of the player base. I'm not a fan of the G-Force tuners either—in fact, I can't stand them. But then again, I'm not a professional musician, so it's not a product aimed at me. I do, however, dig their Grover locking tuners and wouldn't want to have to play any electric guitar without them. 
Edited by leonardmccoy 2018-03-11 5:23 AM
|
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10582
Location: NJ | locking tuners are fine.
I like the sperzel |
|
| |
Gibson Robotic Tuners...
