Just on the subject of the Firebird X, I've never actually seen one in the flesh, but the stills of it on the Gibson site certainly didn't do it any favours. I've just watched a a couple of videos online...yes, visually it's a munter, a real ugly duckling, but there is something alluring about it.
From a visual aesthetic, it could have benefitted from a flat finish and a rosewood/ebony/dark wood board...on the Andertons video below:
...the top looks very lumpy. The headstock is ugly as sin, looking at Gibson's conventional headstock designs, surely they could have drawn from something along their legacy, one of the Moderne V-shaped headstock would have looked better. I don't have an issue with the robot tuners really, but yeah, I know traditionalists will shout, 'Robot tuners? We don't need your freaking robot tuners!' but it is kind of neat and I'd never tire of watching it do its thing (especially after being in a band with an exceptionally gifted, albeit pitchless guitarist, who could never keep his guitar in tune).
Ultimately, it's just an experimental instrument and shouldn't have been developed beyond the concept stage (much like the models car manufacturers show at car shows) Too many peripherals, short battery life, over-complicated. It's a toy, really.
At about the 16 minute point on the Andertons video, Rob Chapman sums the guitar up, saying that while it isn't for him, Gibson had a big set o' balls and courage for putting the instrument out. I do wonder how the technology would have been embraced if it had been presented in in a different package; a regular Explorer or even in a '57 Futura reissue.
