What is with the Gibson Les Paul craze?

[jim777]

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?

They're OK, not great. Far better are the early 80's Grecos; those are very nice LPs. Better still (surprise!) are the Ibanez Artists. I only played Les Pauls when I got my first Artist AR-300 new in '80, and I sold the LPs off right after getting it. An old Artist will run you a grand now, but they are worth the money in every way.

[ibanezking]

Originally Posted by elcid

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.

7 pounds

I just weighed my Double Cut with some decent digital scales and its 7.5 pounds............
And it feels a good couple of pounds lighter than a normal Les Paul plank!

[elcid]

I dont now what to tell you about that. My 76 Custom is heavy, not as heavy as my friends 81 Silverburst but pretty damn heavy, but it also sounds the best. You cant beat solid mahogany, if you are manly enough to hold it.

[mccabekyle]

The Gibson Les Paul...

I've had my own issues with the Les Paul, just as I've had with any guitar. Whenever I would "test drive" them at a shop, I always found that the upper fret access was lacking to say the least. So because I'm a self-proclaimed "shredder", I felt that the LP just wasn't for me.

But I just kept noticing all of these guys that got this amazing tone from their Les Pauls that I could NEVER get with my RG or S Series guitars. After I while, I grew out of the whole "I'm a shredder" phase and opened up to more of a variety of music and discovered that the LP definitely has its place - Some places, it may arguably be the only one for the job.

So I did it. I bought a brand new 2004 Les Paul Standard in the Desert Burst finish. Goddamn, what a lovely instrument! The warmth that it produces is something I can't get out of any other guitar, no matter how hard I try. The way it responds to tone knob adjustments is way more sensitive and "sweeter" than any of the other Prestige model Ibanez guitars that I own. It's truly a masterpiece, and if I could only have one guitar, this would be it.

And tuning problems? NONE. And there had better not ever be any. Not for the price I paid for the guitar. I can leave my guitar in any given tuning, leave it alone for a week, and pick it up and it's still perfectly in tune. I can play it for hours on end, full step bends and all, and it still maintains its tuning. Rarely do I have to fine tune.

The weight is a huge complaint? That's where a lot of the tone comes from, and I figure that since I'm 6'1" 200lbs, I can manage an 8lb guitar for a few hours at a time.

It may not be the be-all-end-all of guitars - There is no such thing. But the Gibson LP, I've decided, definitely has its place in any form of music. That is not even debatable. Just gotta take it for what it is.

[Salamander In The Sun]

Originally Posted by mccabekyle

The Gibson Les Paul...

I've had my own issues with the Les Paul, just as I've had with any guitar. Whenever I would "test drive" them at a shop, I always found that the upper fret access was lacking to say the least. So because I'm a self-proclaimed "shredder", I felt that the LP just wasn't for me.

But I just kept noticing all of these guys that got this amazing tone from their Les Pauls that I could NEVER get with my RG or S Series guitars. After I while, I grew out of the whole "I'm a shredder" phase and opened up to more of a variety of music and discovered that the LP definitely has its place - Some places, it may arguably be the only one for the job.

So I did it. I bought a brand new 2004 Les Paul Standard in the Desert Burst finish. Goddamn, what a lovely instrument! The warmth that it produces is something I can't get out of any other guitar, no matter how hard I try. The way it responds to tone knob adjustments is way more sensitive and "sweeter" than any of the other Prestige model Ibanez guitars that I own. It's truly a masterpiece, and if I could only have one guitar, this would be it.

And tuning problems? NONE. And there had better not ever be any. Not for the price I paid for the guitar. I can leave my guitar in any given tuning, leave it alone for a week, and pick it up and it's still perfectly in tune. I can play it for hours on end, full step bends and all, and it still maintains its tuning. Rarely do I have to fine tune.

The weight is a huge complaint? That's where a lot of the tone comes from, and I figure that since I'm 6'1" 200lbs, I can manage an 8lb guitar for a few hours at a time.

It may not be the be-all-end-all of guitars - There is no such thing. But the Gibson LP, I've decided, definitely has its place in any form of music. That is not even debatable. Just gotta take it for what it is.

Couldn't have been said better.

[Pablo]

I think that it's all to do with the beginner syndrome.

When you start out you mostly check out the shape. plus the obvious prices of Strats and Les Paul copies. A kid will say they want a guitar and with the budget packages of old that was your two choices so that's what a parent buys them. For cleaner stuff it was always strats for more rock stuff a les paul. Now we have a zillion guitars out there that are good value for money there is still the stigma that a USA made strat or Les Paul are the 'best'

Now I've always been an RG, Jem, PGM guy but I bought an epiphone zakk wylde coz I wanted something different and while I like the tone it gives I just can't get on with the shape.

The upper fret access is a bit awkward but manageable so too is a strat due to the bulky heel but it's the other things that put me off LP's. The tuneomatic bridge for one, after rg's the bridge just feels too alien then there is the control layout if I try tapping which isn't often I find that the toggle switch gets in the way then there's the dual vol and tone layouts. Ok these are good to have but I personally think that the two volumes should be at the top and the two tone controls at the bottom since they won't get used nearly as often as the volumes. Having the bridge vol that far away is a P.I.T.A. then there's the lack of rib contour. tele's are not for me due to this. So the Epi goes

If you've grown up with Les Pauls you won't notice as you'll just accept them it's when you go from an RG for 10 years to a Les Paul then you will.

I still think they look cool, Joe Bonnamassa's amber LP is REALLY nice but as much as i can dig the look and the tones I'll just stick with what feels like home and play my new RGA321F

For new bands there is the image thing like someone mentioned earlier. A band with neon guitar are going to portray an image of the 80s. A LP portrays a generic rock image good for those acts that moan on about not wanting to be pigeon holed into a genre of music

[Racerx2k]

That's just it. I started out on a Les Paul copy, over 27 years ago, and hated it, cause it didn't look "cool". I've owned plenty of Ibanez RGs, Jacksons, Fenders, etc.(even other Les Pauls), since then, but found myself G.A.S.ing for a Les Paul, again. Since I've gotten one, my RG has been taking a serious back seat, as are the others. I had a slight issue with tuning when I first got it, but finessed the nut a little, and now it stays in, rock solid.
There are Strat people, Paul people, RG people, and each guitars fills a certain void, and works well, within a certain range of playing styles and tones. Neither is bad or good, just different.

[rrhea]

I never was a LP fan, but I recently broke down and bought a new '07 LP Classic Goldtop and it is one of the nicest sounding and playing guitars I own (of the 20 or so I have in my collection).

I was always convinced I could never play a LP like I could my Stats and Strat-style guitars because I learned on Strats, so the Gibby bridge paradigm was always so weird for me. But you can easily get used to it, just as I have and play in the upper register and pick just as fast on a Gibby bridge as you can on a Super Strat.

Don't take my word for it, just watch Bruce Bouillet if you don't think shred can be done on a LP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EA9k-zhFZc

Or how about Buckethead (yikes!):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaCErlW-3p8


RR

[mccabekyle]

I forgot about Buckethead! He has definitely proved that you can "shred" on a Les Paul!

But yeah, I understand how it can feel awkward to those who have grown up playing super strats, myself included. I always hated LP's because the bridge was placed in what I felt was an awkward spot, especially for palm muting. It's just a matter of getting used to the scale length.

[David McCarroll]

Originally Posted by mccabekyle

I forgot about Buckethead! He has definitely proved that you can "shred" on a Les Paul!

But yeah, I understand how it can feel awkward to those who have grown up playing super strats, myself included. I always hated LP's because the bridge was placed in what I felt was an awkward spot, especially for palm muting. It's just a matter of getting used to the scale length.

It's only awkward until you try a Gretsch Roc Jet .......

It's kinda funny - Gibson and Fender are both painting themselves into an odd corner with this current vintage mania - I'm not saying there is a problem with vintage guitars (heck I've owned quite a few over the years), but both of these companies pretty much survive on trotting out their "heritage", to the point that both Fender and Gibson sell vintage reissues complete with the faults of the originals (The Fender Three Bolt Neck, anyone?) - to the point where it is becoming harder and harder for them to release anything new - could you imagine Gibson or Fender trying to release something like the Parker Fly?

[elcid]

Why bother making anything updated? Both Gibson and Fender have tried and they failed miserably. (Gibsons latest Digital guitar, any of Fenders super strats of the late 80s/early 90s, etc) The market just isnt there for that, and Fender owns enough companies that they have everything covered without changing what they do. The blind devotion to brands works both ways, if Gibson came out with a superstrat style guitar that rivaled the Jem in everyway, no one here would be interested because it was a Gibson.


Not to mention Gibson and Fender make the most copied guitars out there. Just about every company has guitars based on either the Strat, Tele, LP, and/or Flying V, obviously they did something right.
Gibson is not limited to a Les Paul, nor is Fender limited to the Strat, anymore than Ibanez is limited to the RG. Those are their best sellers, and there's no reason to fix something that isnt broke.


The reason the reissue guitars with "faults" is because there are people out there that like them. I have a friend who swears by 3 bolt Teles.

[JayRobIBZ]

seems guitars are the same as People, thier faults are what make them interesting.

[Darin]

Gary Moore



http://youtube.com/watch?v=4O_YMLDvvnw

[Rotti]

Originally Posted by elcid

I have a friend who swears by 3 bolt Teles.

So do I.

[FloridaNative]

I love teles! hehe