jimisaint Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Hi I'm getting a 2013 VOS R8 Les Paul next week. Does anyone know the neck size comparison to my 2013 Traditional Pro with a 50's neck? I don't really mind a big neck on a guitar, My hands aren't huge, but the Trad Pro's neck is comfortable. I called Gibson, but I spoke to someone who didn't really feel like explaining stuff. He just kept saying, "It's like a baseball bat!" I also spoke with someone at Sweetwater where I'm getting the guitar and he says it's bigger, but only about the size of two or three business cards stacked together bigger. I will notice it, but it won't be that big of change from the Traditional Pro. If anyone has any insight I would appreciate it. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flystringer Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Hi I'm getting a 2013 VOS R8 Les Paul next week. Does anyone know the neck size comparison to my 2013 Traditional Pro with a 50's neck? I don't really mind a big neck on a guitar, My hands aren't huge, but the Trad Pro's neck is comfortable. I called Gibson, but I spoke to someone who didn't really feel like explaining stuff. He just kept saying, "It's like a baseball bat!" I also spoke with someone at Sweetwater where I'm getting the guitar and he says it's bigger, but only about the size of two or three business cards stacked together bigger. I will notice it, but it won't be that big of change from the Traditional Pro. If anyone has any insight I would appreciate it. Thank you! Cant tell you exactly but the R7 I just bought may have the same neck and it is definitely got some shoulders, but I wouldn't say it is quite a baseball bat. I have A Trad Pro with the 60's neck that I like very much, but I cant attest to the 50's neck. FWIW I have small hands and don't mind the fat neck. Different, but very comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hall Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 The "it's like a baseball bat" comment from Gibson is on the button. I have an R8. I said in another post, it is fat and it is heavy. I had no problem adjusting to the neck, but it is mighty heavy on my old damaged back. It really is a fat neck, so be advised. I like mine. Let me know if I can help with any more on it.- steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drog Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 R8 necks are huge. I can play a Trad or 57 neck, but the 58 is just too big. Larger than your Trad. The good news on them, they sound fantastic and some have incredible tops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBMelb Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I have '14 R8 and a '13 Traditional (not Pro) with 50s neck. The R8 has a slightly thicker more rounded neck. For me it is more comfortable than the Trad's neck. The R8's radius is feels more ergonomically correct to the arch of my hand. I think the binding may have some play in that too. I can play the R8 for hours on end without hand fatigue. When I bought my R8 I had the opportunity to get a '13 R9 for the same price as the R8, but I chose the R8 because it was so much nicer to play. Even unplugged it sounded so much better than the R9. I attribute much of that to the thicker neck. My R8 is also a perfect weight in my opinion at 8lbs 9oz. I was looking for something under 9lbs and more than 8. I scored well, it even has some beautiful grain and flame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CR9 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 The comment "it's like a baseball bat" is a general answer and Gibson cannot give you an exact answer because each guitar from the Custom Shop is different. You can't fault customer service as so many of the custom shop guitar have custom specs for a particular dealer or customer. The person that actually is holding the guitar has the best chance in giving you the answer. Every answer here will be a guess. I have had 58 reissues with necks as thin as 60's and also bigger than what we would call baseball bats. You can't get upset with someone that has never held that particular guitar for not knowing what it feels like. There are many R8's out there that were custom ordered with huge necks and many with thin necks. A general answer of a baseball bat is about as accurate as we can get without holding the guitar. It "should be" bigger than a 60, and bigger than a 59, but smaller than a 54. Most likely will be an average thickness with fuller shoulders than a R9. Pretty close to the average Traditional profile but with more shoulder, which may make it feel bigger. The other variable is that we do not know if your Traditinal has a larger, smaller or average neck. The answer from Sweetwater is probably the most accurate as they have the guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WC58 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 ANYTHING and EVERYTHING in the USA Les Paul line will not have necks that compare in size to the Historic/Reissue necks. I have not come across an LP Standard/Plus/Trad Pro/etc, even with a "50's neck (now that's a joke) thats been close. As it's well known, the biggest/beefiest/chunkiest/fattest necks are "typically" on 54/R4, '56/R6 and '57/R7 Historics. Most of the time, the '58/R8's are close to the '57/R7's In the early 2000's ('00-'03) the 57/58 neck were monstrous. The 59 neck varied, but they were meaty sized necks and the '60/R0 necks were the slightest. The "beef" of the neck had as much to do with depth, as it did in girth/shoulders. After 2003/2004, the necks overall became a bit smaller (of course quite a few monster necks snuck through), but by and large, there was a "slimming down" of the necks overall. The 2009 model saw the neck reduced more in the shoulders, offering a truer vintage feel. This continued through the 2012 models. In 2013, the R7/R8 models once again saw a deeper-on-average neck AND a bit more shoulder. So to finally address your questions directly...in comparison, you can expect your 2013 '58/R8 neck to be significantly larger (both depth and shoulder (sides of neck) ) than the 2013 Trad Pro. As for comfort...trust me, once you get used to the big necks, you will never be able to play a thin neck again. PS - to clarify, each model in each year had its "oops guitar's....you may have a '60 with a big neck...ive played a friends 57 Goldtop from 2002 and the neck is like a pencil. My 2005 '59 had a neck bigger than my 2000 R7 Goldtop. But these arent the norms...just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBMelb Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 . As for comfort...trust me, once you get used to the big necks, you will never be able to play a thin neck again Amen. I have tough time playing my Custom Classic with a slim taper 60s neck. My hand actually gets fatigued much faster on the slim necks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock68 Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I have a Custom 68 and it is the thickest neck of all my guitars, the questions I always ask.. is this the reason that it sounds the best? My hands are small but cannot consider parting with this guitar as it just sounds amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WC58 Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I have a Custom 68 and it is the thickest neck of all my guitars, the questions I always ask.. is this the reason that it sounds the best? My hands are small but cannot consider parting with this guitar as it just sounds amazing. My hands are small and I absolutely love a big, huge neck. As for tone, I don't know if I buy into that. I've had some pretty big necks and some were tone turds and I've had a few( and sold them of course) thin(ner) necks that sounded amazing. I'm curious what year your '68 (reissue I assume) is. I almost bought one a few years ago. the neck was HUGE...bigger than any R7/R8 I've owned AND it was at or slightly under 9 lbs. Which for any Custom 54/57/68 is rare. The issue was, the guy wanted way too much and it was a bit beat, to boot. His was made in 2003, IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock68 Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Hi it is a 2006, although it is not a reissue it is just a Custom. Not sure what the difference is it just says 68-LPC-F on the Orange COA. An E Mail from Gibson says that it is just a Custom Shop Guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WC58 Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Hi it is a 2006, although it is not a reissue it is just a Custom. Not sure what the difference is it just says 68-LPC-F on the Orange COA. An E Mail from Gibson says that it is just a Custom Shop Guitar. You are correct....although Gibson does (did) not consider the '68 LPC a "reissue" or "historic", many historic owners will throw them into the historic mix, as they really are, for all intents and purposes a reissue of a 68. It sounds like you have a great guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLee Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 I have a 58 VOS and "baseball bat with a flat place for the fretboard" is always my description that I give. I personally love it but it's all a matter of taste. Hope you love yours as much as I do. I have quite a few guitars around the house and I still play the 58 Most of the time. Some have not liked the burstbuckers that came in some of the VOS models. There are plenty of choices out there if you want a closer to original Pups for them. Enjoy ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Farnsbarns Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 My 58 neck just doesn't live up to all the "baseball bat" rhetoric. Just a perfectly normal neck. Not a 60s slim taper but perfectly reasonable neck, possibly on the thick end of a narrow spectrum. My 56 had a v profile which really did feel thick. Tman recently played mine and agreed that the baseball bat thing is just an exaggeration of a slightly thick neck compared to modern, slim necks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.