What is with the Gibson Les Paul craze? - Page 5

540s · #61 10-25-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ibanezking

come on mate - their nick name is ****son Le's Shoulder Pull!

Too heavy - check!
Not versatile - check!
over complicated layout - check!
Very poor upper fret access - CHECK!
Poor tuning - check!
Heavy sound - thats not verstaile
one vol, one tone - any more is just gettin in the way
unless your a fukn gynaecologist, you need way more access than a LP can offer
those green kluson type tuners are sh1te - my double cut has Grovers that you can adjust!

You're not talkin to some Jemsite gobsh1te here........... i fix these things day in day out............

Max

Actually most of those items are all opinions.. i.e. just like a favorite color.... all except the upper fret access & the "poor tuning".

The upper fret access is indeed quite limited compared to many other designs but many many people get used to it. Re the "poor tuning"...if you cannot keep a LP in tune because of the Klusons youre either using cheapo imitations or are missing some other problem with the nut or perhaps the method of string winding.. Sometimes there is a bad one that needs to be replaced but klusons are a very stable design as long as you avoid the cheapo imitations.

...which pretty much leads up to this....

ALL of it is a matter of opinion & personal preference...

Racerx2k · #62 10-25-2007, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by funkdubious

As far as image goes,for the image consious a LP will win every time.Ibanez rock guitars will date any player to a 80's throw back or 90's nu metal player where as an LP is timeless and pretty much genreless aswell(is that a word?).That's right,you can shred on them,ask Zakk!

You coulda said the same thing about LPs back in the 80s. Ibanezes and Jacksons were the rage, and Les Pauls looked dated, then. Things come in cycles. I own both, and have zero qualms about playing either one of them, no matter when.

funkdubious · #63 10-26-2007, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racerx2k

You coulda said the same thing about LPs back in the 80s. Ibanezes and Jacksons were the rage, and Les Pauls looked dated, then. Things come in cycles. I own both, and have zero qualms about playing either one of them, no matter when.

I don't know about LPs being dated in the 80's.As I remember it bands like G n' R were around the same time as DLR,Poison and the like.
I'm not saying I'm image consious,but would have to say if I was chasing a record deal I don't think my bandmates would be impressed with me playing a pointy pink guitar!

**elcid** · #64 10-26-2007, 07:28 AM

From VH - GnR, no one wanted a LP. I remember my friend getting a new LP Studio for $400

Carlo · #65 10-26-2007, 12:24 PM

It took me a while to understand the Les Paul craze...but when I sat down actually played a genuine, well-made Les Paul standard. I was blown away! The tone was absolutely killer.

But I just didn't like bridge...I'm not use to the strings so slanty and it's a bit stiffer feeling when you compare it to a LoPro Edge, which is silly easy to play. For me the feel, weight, and the neck joint is a bit too much of a trade off....when there are much more playable guitars out there, even if the tone and sustain is not there.

jwoods986 · #66 10-26-2007, 01:55 PM

Well the current craze, with the younger bands, is probably more image/marketing.

But as far as why LPs are popular and have been for 50 years? One word - tone. For example:
Clapton - Bluesbreakers
Gibbons
Green/Moore
Page (live)

And of course there are many more players:
Lifeson (early Rush and using them on the current tour)
Frampton
Hackett
Fripp
Slash

As far as shredding on a LP, Zakk and John Sykes do ok

Personally, I like the 24 3/4" scale, but as much as I WANT to like LPs, my short sausages just can't deal with the upper fret access (or lack of). SGs do have that addressed but have fatter necks that I expected. I do like Flying Vs though, better fret access and a smaller neck.

ibanezking · #67 10-26-2007, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carlo

It took me a while to understand the Les Paul craze...but when I sat down actually played a genuine, well-made Les Paul standard. I was blown away! The tone was absolutely killer.

But I just didn't like bridge...I'm not use to the strings so slanty and it's a bit stiffer feeling when you compare it to a LoPro Edge, which is silly easy to play. For me the feel, weight, and the neck joint is a bit too much of a trade off....when there are much more playable guitars out there, even if the tone and sustain is not there.

I suppose thats my point - IT DOES HAVE SOME GOOD POINTS!!

BUT they are (in my humble opinion) easily outweighed by the bad points.

Its like seeing a pair of jeans that look absolutely awesome............
But when you wear them they feel like they're cutting you in half and feel like you're wearing a barbwire thong.
So as nice as they look, you don't wear them.........

My other arguement is that i am in the (i suppose) enviable position where i'm that bit older now and can afford to indulge in my guitar desires........
Do i own a Les Paul - NO!
As i said earlier the double cut is only a LP in name..........

Max

Racerx2k · #68 10-26-2007, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by funkdubious

I don't know about LPs being dated in the 80's.As I remember it bands like G n' R were around the same time as DLR,Poison and the like.
I'm not saying I'm image consious,but would have to say if I was chasing a record deal I don't think my bandmates would be impressed with me playing a pointy pink guitar!

GNR was kind of the turning point in all that. At least they broke around the same time it started to become cool to play an LP again. Until then, they seemed reserved for classic rock, almost.

sick-boy · #69 10-26-2007, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racerx2k

GNR was kind of the turning point in all that. At least they broke around the same time it started to become cool to play an LP again. Until then, they seemed reserved for classic rock, almost.

I don't know. C.C. played one as well. Seems like there was some other hair metal bands that played them. Faster *****cat maybe. I don't remember, I was quite young then.
I think you will find them in every music genre and time period.

Tank · #70 10-26-2007, 04:29 PM

Well my LP is doing ok. I like it when playing old Zep stuff and some Slashy tunes, but it sits more in the corner and looks nice. I like how the LP looks, but to play a whole gig I get my RG and Patrick Eggle.

For all you PRS lovers, you should really check out Patrick Eggle guitars. Sold my PRS for a Patrick Eggle made to my specs. Surely a matter of taste PRS are very nice guitars and extremely versatile.

I do agree with the sheep thing, I bought my LP because that was the guitar to get when I started playing. But I moved on, I still like the look and the LP has a few features to make it unique, some guitarist can put that to magnificent use (Wilde, Slash,...), but most just use it as it looks cool...

Tank · #71 10-26-2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by courtney2018

Has anyone played Ibanez's Les Paul look-a-like? I've been considering getting a cheaper Les Paul - around the $500- to $600 mark - but wonder if Ibanez's version has about the same sound, feel, tone, etc. Anybody here got any experience with them?

If you are really sure to get a LP lookalike... The Ibanez' are nice but do not sound as "fat" as the originals. There are some quite OK japanese Tokai LP's that come close to the original and are quite cheap. Also if you get an Epiphone with a serial starting with EE, it is from the new Gibson factory in Qua Dong, which are made to the exact same specs as the originals just not finished as nicely. Tone wise they are cool, other Epiphones can range from OK to total crap...

Got my nice one of those EE Epis and it sounds close to my LP standard, of course the finish is not as nice... But she is still a sheep and might wake up one day

as she did not want my RG prestige so I can get a JEM hehe....

Carlo · #72 10-26-2007, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ibanezking

I suppose thats my point - IT DOES HAVE SOME GOOD POINTS!!

BUT they are (in my humble opinion) easily outweighed by the bad points.

Its like seeing a pair of jeans that look absolutely awesome............
But when you wear them they feel like they're cutting you in half and feel like you're wearing a barbwire thong.
So as nice as they look, you don't wear them.........

My other arguement is that i am in the (i suppose) enviable position where i'm that bit older now and can afford to indulge in my guitar desires........
Do i own a Les Paul - NO!
As i said earlier the double cut is only a LP in name..........

Max

yeah I hear ya

And if I had the cash to blow on a genuine Les Paul, I would much rather spend it on a Suhr, Tyler, Tom Anderson, or Vigier who have much fussier builders and quality control. Much like how I would choose Diezel, VHT, or Conford over a vintage Marshall these days.

SilverSurfer2 · #73 10-26-2007, 10:03 PM

These guitars are too overpriced, but that's my opinion. You could easily settle for an Agile LP guitar and call it good, for lower than half price of an LP IF you wanted a guitar that resembles a real LP, but with a cheaper pricetag. People that can afford the real thing, will most likely buy the real thing.

I've once owned a Gibson, and a high end Agile LP.......not much of a difference, if you ask me...........only the price.
Just as Satch would say a Les Paul just can't do what he wants to do on the guitar, I said the same thing about both guitars...........as i like single coil options on my guitar, and the LP's/agile LP's, don't come equipped with that option.

Some people play them just because their favorite musician plays them. Same reason why i would probably get a Js1000 if i wanted to sound like satch.

Some people just prefer the looks over any other guitar.......it's all personal taste, which everyone has a right to...........

some people like pepsi, others like coca cola.

mike80sguy · #74 10-27-2007, 06:50 AM

So I bought a RGT42DX which didnt meet my expectations. I sold it and bought a Les Paul Studio. I fell in love with sound and the whole cult around it I guess. Some of favorites play Les Paul (Neal Schon (back then and now), Doug Aldrich, John Sykes). Any way after 6 months of playing the guitar exclusively I picked my DT series agian. Everything I played, from riffing to solos the whole 9 yards, was easier. And since I play 80s Rock I dont really need the chunky sound and a Tone Zone or Super 3 can add a lot of depth too.

Down sides Les Paul:
poor fret access
weight
stiff playing due to scale
baseball bat neck (which I loved at first and hated after 6 months)
I like to have 1 volume knob (which my DT obviously doenst have either)
Easy to screw up bridge set up when changing strings
Very poor tuning stability

EDIT:
all things aside it looks/sounds really cool. (forgot that sorry)

**elcid** · #75 10-27-2007, 10:18 AM

Wow, there ae alot of girls on these boards. Les Pauls havent been THAT heavy in years. My Classic is 7 lbs. With all the weight relief and now chambering Im guessing 7-8 lbs would be the norm. Maybe 3 pounds heavier than a different guitar. Maybe if you all put down your purses the extra little bit wouldnt seem so bad. Mahogany can be a heavy wood, if you dont l ike it you can get an Agile or any other company that probably uses plywood and have a much lighter guitar. If you knew how to restring the tuning wouldnt be an issue. I've easily owned 10 Gibsons and have not had tuning issues with any. I doubt Im that lucky.