I have to agree with Spacey that the...which is better...Fender or Gibson, question is a silly agruement. They are both very fine instruments (tools) in the hands of any professional musician. They are 2 flavors in which to choose from. Up until a couple of years ago, I owned both and used both based on the needs. I traded my American Deluxe Strat straight up for a Gibson LP Studio, so that tells you right there that they are equivilant instruments. I miss the Strat often, but Gibson's 24-3/4 scale works better for me, my hands and my tone. It's like asking which ice cream is better, vanilla or chocolate.
I have been under the ussumption through out this thread that we are talking about electrics; because its no contest with acoustics. I am not, by the way, a fan of Gibson acoustics. I'm a Martin guy all the way there.
What I don't agree with, is when people say Gibson's are over priced. I think they can get what the market bears. I have seen them lower their prices lately because of the poor economy. They do have brand recognition, similar to PRS or even Rickenbacker for that matter. I think it is humorous that Les Paul's (the man) first electric guitar that he produced was called "The Plank", or something like that. It was litterally a plank of wood with stings and a pick up. I bet the materials in that guitar were not very expensive. I do guess that a lot of time went into the R&D side of that "Plank", however.
Spacey may say that I am wrong, and I would stand corrected, but I would venture to guess that more expensive materials go into a Standard Les Paul as compared to a Standard Strat and that there is more labor required to build the Les Paul. The LP has a mahagany body with a thick maple cap. It has a carved face to the top of the body and has inlay and usually book matched maple. The necks are more intricate with the trapezoid inlays, binding, and often inlayed Gibson logos. The solid body, neck through construction has to be a little more time consuming than a bolt on neck. I have worked around and managed Carpenters for over 30 years; I often have to estimate the projects that they work on. I know that I would estimate a Gibson Les Paul to require more expensive woods, labor and CNC tooling than a typical Fender Strat.
If you were to look at it this way. If the instrument sells for $2,500 and you want to make a 50% cost margin on the job. Your total cost to produce the instrument would have to be $1,250. If you say that $625 of that cost is for materials and $625 for labor, break that down. If you as a Luthier were to make $20 and hour, you could put 31.25 hours into the build. Painting the guitar alone has to take some time and that does n't even include dry time...what about sanding between multiple coats. How many coats...5..6...8? What about materials, 2 humbucker pickups would be a couple hundred dollars. The reason that MIM Strats and Epiphones cost less is because they have gone to cheaper labor in other countries, along with cheaper materials. The pickups that are in an Epiphone LP are not of the same sound quality that are in actual Gibson pick ups. Same with Fender pick ups. The pick ups that come in a MIM are not equvilant to Fender Noiseless pickups. It comes down to cost of materials, cost of labor and profit margin. Gibson, Fender, Taylor, Martin, Rickenbacker, etc... are all in business to stay in business and to make money. All have longevity in a tough competative market.
And as I mentioned earlier, me personally, I buy instruments somewhat for the brand recognition because they are easier to sell or trade and get value back out of the instrument. I have owned Carvin guitars and amps. Great stuff, high quality...but they don't have the same type of resale value. Unless you buy one that has been in the hands of some one famous...like our own Danny D.
