Gibson Launching Digital Guitar Model

[BiC]

CLICK

 

Blessings

[Beermouse]

Old news.

 

Older news.

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

dude, they've been "building' this stenkin' guitar for six years. I still haven't seen one.

 

At a trade show I did see a stack of Les Pauls with Rj-45 jacks where the 1/4" jack would be. (No other changes.. standard complement of humbuckers and switch and pots)

 

I asked to see the spec, but they didn't have but one copy and couldn't give it out. I asked some pointed wuestions about the guitars, got answers about footpedals and amps (???!!!) What about guitars? Well, the guy who nows that stuff was at lunch. I suggested to them that the ethernet jack on a Les Paul would last about as long as a 17 year old virgin backstage at an Ozzy show.

 

A few tradeshows later, the guitars were gone, and the booth had a couple of guys with papers, trying to market the idea to other developers.

 

A few trade shows later, the guitars were back... still stock, but with the new improved Switchcraft (or possibly Neutrix) version of the ethernet jack, and a standard 1/4" jack. I didn't bother explaining about the ethernet cables, since there was obviously nothing going on in the guitars anway.

 

Every now and again they float a press release about this imaginary vaporware. But no one can tell me exactly what it is supposed to do, or how it is suposed to make me a better guitar player, or make my guitar sound or play better. Lots of

talk about pedal/amp control, but it is all vague.

 

Now, I agree that a new instrument might be fun, but the guitar, like the other stringed instruments, are very tactile and I think that most of us play them because of the actual emotional link between the response and ourselves. Witness the failure of the various digital instruments.. the various MIDI guitars, the Roland VG-8... all of these things get some play, but the vast majority of guitar players want to play a guitar, through an amp, maybe with a pedal or two in line.

 

If Gibson actually ever gets this Spruce Goose off of the ground, I'd certainly like to review it. But I'll not hold my breath.

 

Bill

[fantasticsound]

Bpark, I can understand your frustration early on. I worked for Gibson 3 years ago and, while they had a website devoted to MaGic, I couldn't seem to get any information either.

 

However, there has been plenty written on it since then. Here's the idea.

 

First, the guitar signal is sent through an analog-to-digital converter. The digital signal, like any other digital signal, should be possible to transfer over ethernet similarly to any network. In addition, the nature of the base code allows for many channels to be transferred bidirectionally, again, just like a network. They have specs for the number of audio, video, midi, etc. channels available.

 

So why could this be helpful to musicians?

 

Let's start with education. Hook this instrument to a computer with music education software and the program could conceivably show you what you are playing, assess whether it matches the lesson, etc. In addition, an instrument such as those with embedded LED's in the fretboard could be used to show you where to finger a lesson or song via software on the computer.

 

As for amp/effect control, because a vast amount of information can be sent individually across a network, you could have a guitar with a programmable control surface onboard that could link to your effects boxes. On the fly, you could change amp or effect settings without leaving your place onstage or bending over to tweak a pedal's knobs. Instead, the knobs (along with an LCD or LED readout) could be on the guitar. Plus, the touch of a button could change those controls from one amp or effect control to another.

 

On the professional side, many touring acts rely on the FOH or monitor mixer to change effect settings from their console. For them, they could have complete control over the effect from their position without needing the pedal, amp, or rack effect crowding there setup.

 

These are only a few possibilities of this system. Like you, I want to see one in action before I hail it as a real way to make these concepts possible.

 

And yes, BiC, this is old news. Sounds to me like Henry wanted to keep the buzz going and called the AP.

[Guitarzan]

true, but the sad part is its an expensive tool with zero support from software developers at present. it would have been cool if gibson had worked with some big name software developers while designing this thing. good idea with no application yet. they should have sat on it until the whole package was ready. just my 2 cents.

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Neil,

 

"there has been plenty written on it since then."

 

Yes there has. And it has all followed the party line, much as yout post does. (Intentionally or not...)

 

All of the possibilities that are mentioned always existed. Its great to say.. "It could do THIS" and "it could do THAT"... but the reality is that it can't do anything, or at least, not anything that anyone at Gibson has ever been willing to demonstrate to me or anyone else that I know.

 

The FretLite has been available for some time for instructional use, and it is not setting the world on fire.

 

All that stuff about program controls and LEDs etc... they have existed before in other formats, and guitarists stayed away in droves.

 

Though it may be A solution for the touring professionals, they have always had solutions available, and many use them. Many guitar players have turned over control to the FOH/monitor guys. Right now the Shania Twain tour is almost entirely automated... even the fiddles. The monitor guys and FOH guys don't even touch a knob unless something crashes. So a Gibson solution for guitar players seems to me to be a little behind the curve.

 

It also seems to me to be a solution in search of a problem, and that is the wrong approach.

 

I believe that if they market it as a new instrument they might have better luck.

 

I mean, my favorite guitars are Gibsons, and I love what the company has done, and how they have arisen from the debacle of the 20 years of stumbling that they did until the late 1990s. But the dishonesty of showing what they have been showing and trying to call it a 'product' is not good. Their prior handling of other technical aquisitions has been miserable, too. They understqand instruments. They have trouble with computers and such.

 

When synths were introduced they were not keyboards. (The first synths didn't even HAVE keyboards, and early iterations were one switch 'keyboards'... really primitive.) Nobody tried to call them pianos or organs, they were synths. Even after the keyboard was settled upon as the human interface, they were still called synths. Why not build a product with it's own unique name that uses the guitar paradigm as the human interface, and create the entire deal with all the 'pedals' and such as a part of the instrument, wanting only an amp or perhaps just with a digital audio output? Perhaps because such a products near cousin, the Roland VG-8, failed. The Yamaha nylon stringed MIDI guitar failed. The Casio MIDI guitar failed. etc, etc.

 

I see where they are trying to make a product that does not threaten the average guitarist, in the hopes that he will buy one. I feel that this is a bad plan. The average guitarist is not likely to ever want one. But the adventurous could create their own market place, much as the synth players did.

 

In any case, continually releasing press notices of nothing and showing me an unmodified Les Paul guitar with an ethernet jack in place of the quarter inch jack is pretty lame.

 

Bill

[fantasticsound]

I agree I'd like to see more meat and less frosting... (working product with supported third party products and support vs. just their technology.)

 

However, it's not like they haven't been trying to get third party support. MaGic has made specs and circuit boards available for at least 3 years. I have to think that releasing information on a periodic basis is by design. If they can only get a little buzz going, then maybe they'll have better luck convincing software and hardware manufacturers to work with them on it. It's not like they've been holding the tech info close to the vest where third parties are concerned.

 

Still, I agree with you. I'd rather not hear anymore about it until there is a use for it.

[BiC]

Old news to you all...

 

New news to me...

 

Oh well.

 

Blessings