Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Les Paul High Performance Love Thread


Sabredog

Recommended Posts

except I don't have to learn different techniques for every string when I have a beautiful modern guitar, my PRS, my Fender Stratocaster, my Ibanez, are all high tech specifically engineered to make the guitar easy to play, transparent so that you can focus on music, instead of fighting with technique. and they all run the frets completely to the edge of the fretboard, none of the non-bankrupt companies offer this feature.

 

Paul Reed Smith has stated it He designed the guitar so it disappears in the players hand, they're doing nothing but playing music, without having to think about the guitar limitations.

 

 

The increased playable area of the frets on my HP, finally brings Gibson in line with the best guitars in the world for modern musicians, playability wise.

 

the traditional LP slows you down especially after you've played fast and smoothly on really good guitars. on the Trad you have to be very careful to delicately and precisely play the E string.

 

that's why I took the one back after three weeks, I had a PRS at the time, played the two guitars side-by-side for 20 days in a row, it was a shock, to see how superior the fret over binding was playing so effortlessly in a head-to-head competition.

 

I have heard Slash, say that he likes fighting with the Les Paul that it makes him focus, that you have to be very careful precise fretting and twisting your body to play up high on the neck, and it makes him focus and work really hard and makes him satisfied to get the notes of the guitar. but he plays guitar 24 hours a day seven days a week.

 

 

I do not like fighting with my guitar.

 

I certainly do not begrudge someone seems to find the nibs such a critical part of the guitar experience.

 

but I've never heard a rational well thought out, well written description of how and why they bring so much pleasure,

 

I remember the first time I saw them in the guitar Center I thought they were not pretty and were unfinished looking, So the old veteran guitar center guy told me it was decorative and those guitars were for collectors and not for playing, if you wanted a guitar to play music on he recommended the Les Paul studio version. so maybe I got poisoned that day.

 

but I am an engineer and highly functional designs actually are the most beautiful looking things.

9jEiOAp.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're an asswhole.

 

... but I mean that in a respectful way.

Edited by Big Bill
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sabredog, Gibson learned the hard way in 2015 that the Gibson faithful are still calling the shots (if they had any doubt). The vast overall majority want 1959 specs.

 

Gibson knew that the 2015 policy (of modern specs) was a huge risk, and they lost out massively on sales as a result. At the end of 2015, when the 2016 sprint run models were appearing, shops were discounting the 2015 models heavily. My LP was a 49% reduction from list price.

 

So you, me and any other HP fans are very much in the minority.

 

When I first came here it shocked me how passionate the traditionalists are. I didn't understand it. I'm only just starting to now. I decided to stick around and discovered that they are incredibly knowledgeable about guitars. There are some excellent players, luthiers and professionals here. Most are generous with their help & time too. I have learned quite a bit here.

 

You've made your views known in the OP. I recommend engaging with those who disagree with you. Intolerance is a dead end! ](*,)

 

That's a very good post Mr Mercy Sir.

 

Yes, I confess straight up to being an absolute hidebound traditionalist. I absolutely don't want auto-tuners, PCB boards or other deviations unless I choose to stick them on myself. I am happy with things like coil splits and series /parallel switching and that sort of stuff but to be told by Gibson (2015) that the "new" frets-over-binding is somehow so way huge superior got my goat so bad that even now I still choke on the memory of it. And as for auto-tune...no, we won't go there... [cursing]

 

The exception to my self-imposed "rule" is if modifications form part of some other "system" of generating music (e.g. midi and the Roland 13 pin or the Fishman Triple Play systems).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first came here it shocked me how passionate the traditionalists are. I didn't understand it. I'm only just starting to now. I decided to stick around and discovered that they are incredibly knowledgeable about guitars. There are some excellent players, luthiers and professionals here. Most are generous with their help & time too. I have learned quite a bit here...

I just thought the sentiments expressed above were worth repeating.

 

Pip.

 

EDIT : BTW; why are we feeding the troll?

EDITED EDIT : Damn! I've just done it again!

Edited by pippy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...vibrato on the E string is not allowed by that design limitation...

I thought the above sentiment sounded complete shite erroneous and so I've just checked. Unsurprisingly (to me) It is allowed after all.

Perhaps I just have far superior technique to the OP?

As, clearly, did Paul Kossoff. As does Eric Clapton. As does Peter Green. As does Billy Gibbons. As does Slash. As does Joe Perry, As does...well, I'm sure you get the idea.

 

...I'm sure BB was careful to not do vibrato on the e strings. only the middle strings...

Seriously?

Well I'm sure BB King had FAR better vibrato technique that I do so unless you have demonstrable evidence to prove he never used vibrato on the E string(s) can you please stop sullying the great man's name?

 

Thank you.

 

Pip.

Edited by pippy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technology can be wonderful when applied correctly to your instrument. I really like the way P-90's sound, the tonal range is amazing. But I can do without the 60 cycle hum. When I got my BluesHawk I was really impressed how Gibson lowered the P-90 noise with new tech. Adding to the noiseless P-90 arsenal like the P-100 and aftermarket noiseless P-90's.

 

You have to choose what tech you want included in your guitar. Active electronics have been around for a long time, but I personally don't like having a battery inside.

 

I don't know how "nibs" evolved but it seems like binding material would not last as long as metal frets, so it seems inevitable that they would eventually cause trouble.

 

Guitars are imperfect instruments, several years ago Rickenbacker tried to introduce a guitar with angled frets to compensate for the change in intonation position of different sized strings, they didn't catch on. Auto tuning can get you close but in the end it will be your "ear" that makes you guitar sound good. I use a digital tuner with an old school VU meter, because the VU meter reacts slower and may be closer to reality.

 

Tech is good, it is just how you apply it that makes the difference. There are really no rules on what you use, its your end product that matters..:unsure:

 

I saw a performance where a guy had adapted a Theremin to his guitar when he kicked it in he started waving his hands over it producing some incredible crowd pleasing sounds. Your playing can be classically perfect or like Jimi talked about getting animated or anywhere in-between. If the people in front of you don't walk out you are doing good... :)

Edited by mihcmac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "nib" is not a fret. If you look closely (with magnification) at your frets, you will see (at least on my USA and Custom Shop LPs) that the fret is beveled out, diving down toward the binding long before you get to the binding/nib. If you're trying to fret a string on the nib you're already way off anyway. It's just that on the HP there is no nib to run onto when you're off the fret. So there can be a valid preference for a wider fret but it has nothing to do with nibs.

 

Edit: In fact, as in the picture of the binding separated from the fret, that may not be a defect in materials or workmanship but rather the result of someone repeatedly trying to use the binding as a fret until it finally failed.

Edited by Black Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

gtymWAS.jpg

This would be a real problem for me as I do sustain the E string to the extreme beyond the point shown at times. But my guitars with bound necks have the fret going well over the binding. If you only play chords this might not be a problem. I would never buy a guitar that was made like this..

Edited by mihcmac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of music do you guys do?

 

rct

 

70s 80s classic rock,

Santana Arrowsmith Pink Floyd Led Zeppelin guns and roses cream Hendrix Van Halen, ozzy .......... on and on and on. any song that sounds good, black keys. white stripes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's very easy to supply.

 

The "playing feel" of a bound neck with well finished nibs is second to none and better than the feel obtained (example: my Yamaha SG2000 - a very fine guitar if I might say so) that with a guitar without a nib finished neck.

 

Now is what I have said irrational? No, it isn't. Is it an objective testable statement? No, it isn't. It is my subjective opinion which is as valid as yours any day of the week. It is not better than yours but nor is it worse.

 

I am very happy for you to hate nibs and carry on hating them for the rest of your life but I resent being told I can't bend, do vibrato or otherwise do anything than show crap technique that inevitably will manifest on a nibs equipped guitar. Because it isn't true.

 

And I can also do all these things on my Les Paul 25 / 50 which is a fully nibbed "fretless wonder" - flat as a pancake style - fretboard of the same kind as on B.B. King's "Lucille" ES355 (but without the inlays going all the way up the neck).

 

that's a reasonable explanation. feel as you said is subjective, but certainly important, so that design probably does have a very nice feel to your style,

 

 

but engineers learn how to break that feel down into measurable quantitative elements that can show improved performance, measurable performance increase, that 95 out of 100 players can achieve the intended target note, or accuracy of fretting, or accuracy the desired result, or 10 vibrato movements obtained in one second can consistently be obtained and errors are reduced. Where as the other model has increased error rate, when the string is not hit perfectly an actual error occurs like accidentally fretted on plastic surface.

we can also 3D model a steel fret into a binding as a three-dimensional model, with identical geometry to an nib model, when players are blinded, the player would pick the fret over binding model as the superior feeling instrument equal number of times, and prove in a blind test that it's a placebo effect. When I see a nib it feels better, and plays better. which no doubt many corporations and many successful businesses many successful products are built on easily convincing people the placebo effect is real, I'm sure Gibson says they want the nibs certainly were going to sell it to them.

when somebody's put under pressure to perform and play it identically every time the number of errors prove out the facts, player error 10% instrument error 10%,

if you reduce the instrument error with a better tool you have improved performance. a 60-year-old airplane versus a modern airplane will have a lower performance.it's measurable.

an engineer figured out if you put a magnet underneath a vibrating steel string you can generate a voltage which can be amplified into awesome sounds.

From the engineers at gibson:\

Undercut, fret over bindingWith this design the frets don’t begin to taper until they’re on top of the binding, which allows for a wider playing area on the frets themselves. Also with traditional binding, sometimes strings would get caught in the space between the fret and the nib due to fret wear. This is no longer possible.

 

Not only is there more fret area—because the frets are cryogenically treated, fret wear is simply not a factor. So, the additional fret width will remain useful because the height of the ends won’t change.

 

While it’s true that undercut, fret over binding is more work and somewhat more costly, most players find the additional useable fret surface area a welcome addition that makes a fingerboard just that much more playable.

 

Website link http://www.gibson.com/News-Lifestyle/Features/en-us/Undercut-Fret-Over-Binding.aspx

 

 

 

 

bBrahwG.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be a real problem for me as I do sustain the E string to the extreme beyond the point shown at times. But my guitars with bound necks have the fret going well over the binding. If you only play chords this might not be a problem. I would never buy a guitar that was made like this..

 

First time is see that [scared]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

70s 80s classic rock,

Santana Arrowsmith Pink Floyd Led Zeppelin guns and roses cream Hendrix Van Halen, ozzy .......... on and on and on. any song that sounds good, black keys. white stripes.

 

Ok so same stuff I do.

 

I've been using Les Pauls since 1975 I got my first second hand third rate Custom. I grew up playing that music and still do. I've used Les Pauls through each decade and iteration of Les Paul. My Classic is 18 this year, it's pretty well traveled but in great shape.

 

If you, or anyone you know, is having trouble with pull offs and use of the high E because of binding over frets or the standard LP neck width, you or someone you know needs to practice. No guitar player should, in my experience, have issue with binding over frets or the standard string spacing of the pre-Pontiac Wide Track neck width.

 

All of our favorite records were done with binding over frets, standard LP width/string spacing necks. Them guys had no problems, I learned a lot from them guys and I had and have no problems, you shouldn't either.

 

I'm not hollering at you or scolding. I'm telling you that the frets over binding was cost cutting and the wide neck thing was a solution to a problem that didn't exist for guitar players.

 

Rock on. Get some GFR in that setlist bro.

 

rct

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's a reasonable explanation. feel as you said is subjective, but certainly important, so that design probably does have a very nice feel to your style,

 

 

but engineers learn how to break that feel down into measurable quantitative elements that can show improved performance, measurable performance increase, that 95 out of 100 players can achieve the intended target note, or accuracy of fretting, or accuracy the desired result, or 10 vibrato movements obtained in one second can consistently be obtained and errors are reduced. Where as the other model has increased error rate, when the string is not hit perfectly an actual error occurs like accidentally fretted on plastic surface.

 

Re your last main paragraph and the link:

 

http://www.gibson.com/News-Lifestyle/Features/en-us/Undercut-Fret-Over-Binding.aspx

 

Taking the paragraph quoted above and the content of the link my thoughts are thus:

 

Self-justificatory Sales Bollocks. Pure and Simple.

 

But as Merciful said above - a lot of us just don't believe a word of it and prefer the original version of Gibson binding.

 

But as I said, you like it done Yamaha style and that's fine by me. It isn't as if Gibson never did it your way. I think the Les Paul Recording is not nibbed and never has been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guitar was invented a long time ago. Every single iteration of it has had problems of one sort or another. The main problem they all share being that they don't play themselves. Someone has to learn how to do that. Amazingly, people through the ages have been able to do that in spite of one design problem after another.

 

An engineer (I think you may have mentioned that you're an engineer) may start to look at their guitar and identify all the things they think are wrong with it that are impairing their playing.

 

People that are actually good players (i'm not saying I'm one of them) seem to be able to pick up most any instrument and make it sound good, flaws and all.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...people through the ages have been able to (play their guitar) in spite of one design problem after another.

An engineer...may start to look at their guitar and identify all the things they think are wrong with it that are impairing their playing...

People that are actually good players seem to be able to pick up most any instrument and make it sound good, flaws and all...

There is a saying - well-known in engineering circles or so I'm led to believe - which suggests a link between 'Tools' and 'Bad Workmen'.

 

Pip.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a saying - well-known in engineering circles or so I'm led to believe - which suggests a link between 'Tools' and 'Bad Workmen'.

 

Pip.

 

The one I am familiar with goes something like - it's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

 

The first time I ran a string off a fret, I didn't think to blame the guitar. I thought I needed to practice more.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one I am familiar with goes something like - it's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

 

The first time I ran a string off a fret, I didn't think to blame the guitar. I thought I needed to practice more.

 

You are spot on!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem, as I see it, is the string spacing on the nut.

I've had an SG where they put the high E string a bit too close to the edge (for you Yes fans).

Instead of taking a look at the nut they went with the Aircraft Carrier neck profile.

 

Nibs should not present a problem with playing unless they're FUBARed.

In all these years I've never had a problem with them, I always thought they were a classy touch.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem, as I see it, is the string spacing on the nut.

I've had an SG where they put the high E string a bit too close to the edge (for you Yes fans).

Instead of taking a look at the nut they went with the Aircraft Carrier neck profile.

 

Nibs should not present a problem with playing unless they're FUBARed.

In all these years I've never had a problem with them, I always thought they were a classy touch.

 

I can actually agree with that, all you have to do is leave enough space maybe 1 mm extra metal, I actually have seen some less Paul's with binding nibs that actually have enough fret before the binding, so I probably got one that was very low on the quality control scale.

frets 5 through 13, the high E string came off the Fret 60% of the time.

 

I've owned about 50 different guitars from all 20 different guitar manufacturers not a single one of these excellent machines, did I have the high E fall off the board,

So I know i do not need practice, I can blame it on the guitar. all of these other well thought out excellent highly engineered guitars would not consider using Nibs. no manufacturer in the world in the modern day would consider introducing a guitar with 20% of a fret being plastic and 80% being metal.

I never experienced the problem until I played the Les Paul with nibs.

I'm not saying that type of design especially at the time period, is not a good guitar, clearly it's a very good guitar with some minor minor flaws, as you say because many people used it to make good music , but just because something can be made to work does not mean that it can't be improved. It has a lot of parallels to golf clubs. the equipment improves a players playing. no golfer of the 60s could hit a 300 yard drive now 90% of the players can hit the 300 yard drive. it's all related to improved equipment.

I'm just saying the HP version is an improved version to an already very good guitar, not disrespecting the 60s. but engineers do learn how to make things better.

 

if you are regularly hitting 280 yard drive with a driver today, and someone gives you a persimmons wood and it's not much bigger than a golf ball itself, and you only hit it 180 yards, and your friends tell you you just need more practice, you actually say no I just need modern equipment.

 

absolutely from an engineering perspective there are multiple approaches to correct this design flaw or quality control flaw of a string too close to a rounded fret edge, combining the approaches would probably be best.

1. optimize the string spacing give the outer edge strings a little more freedom to operate. i.e different string spacing in the nut cut,

2 extend the fret somehow.

3. extend the fret by extending or widening the fret board relative to the nut cut string spacing.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is probably better to simply agree to disagree Sabredog.

 

You are not going to change my mind about nibs in a million years and vice versa I fancy.

 

As for other manufacturers I really wish my Yamaha SG did have nibs but it hasn't. I can happily live with that because it is a superb guitar anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...