Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

1994 Les Paul Standard


plankofwood64

Recommended Posts

Hello All, I'm new to the forum so have a heart. :-)

 

I have a very unusual LP - It's a '94, birds-eye maple top, honeyburst or tobacco finish. I bought it used and it was labeled as a '97 because of how the serial number reads. It starts off 94...... so I know it's a '94, et al.

 

It didn't come with a pick guard or are there any holes indicating that one was ever there. Is this some sort of "special" LP they made that year? Sans the pick gaurd?

 

BTW I have it wired ala Jimmy Page with the push/pulls and installed a Duncan JB in the bridge and a Duncan Jazz in the neck.

 

Any info on this particular birds-eye maple top LP would be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yoda, think about it...he said the first two numbers are 94.

If what you say is correct, then his guitar would have been built on the 4-hundredth and something day of the year.

This guy owns a 1994 Les Paul Classic.

 

plankofwood, I'm sure you have a very nice Les Paul but thinking it's "special" just because the pickguard wasn't installed is stretching it a little, don't you think? It just means they did not install the pick guard at the factory. They still do it today.

 

Anyhow, it's customary for few members to post pictures of their guitar(s). We'd love to see it.

If you don't know how, create an account at photobucket.com, upload pictures there, copy the IMG code and paste it here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in my office now, so I'll post some pics when I get home. Further more, correct me if I'm wrong - Per Gibsons serial number information, weren't guitars built in 1994 have serial numbers that start out 94xxxxx? I read the bit about the 1st and 5th which in my case it would be a 97. But when I obtained the guitar the first thing I did was shoot a e mail to Gibson's customer service. The reply I got said it was a 1994. The following is from Gibson:

 

There are always exceptions to these rules, the two listed below are worth noting:

 

Les Paul Classic: This model features an ink stamped serial number with no "MADE IN USA" (just as we used on the original 1952-1960 Les Pauls). Most will be 5 to 6 digits in length, but the earliest examples feature 4 digit serial numbers. There should be a space after the 1st digit with the 4 and 5 digit serial numbers, and no space with the 6 digit numbers.

 

The 1st digit indicates the year of manufacture for the 4 & 5 digit serial numbers, these were used from 1989-1999. The 1st and 2nd indicate the year of manufacture for the 6 digit serial numbers which we've been using since 2000.

 

Examples -

9 xxx = 1989 (4 digit number beginning with "9" used only in 1989)

0 xxxx = 1990

9 xxxx = 1999

00xxxx = 2000

05xxxx = 2005

 

Those beginning with "94":

In 1994, Gibson's Centennial year, many instruments have a serial number that begins with "94" for the year, with the remaining 6 digits indicating the ranking number.

 

I don't believe its a LP Classic hence it having "Made in the USA" stamped on its peg head. And like Standards from this year it has Standard on it's truss rod cover. And my point about it being "special" wasn't the fact that it doesn't have a pick guard, it's the fact that it has a birds-eye maple top. How many birds-eye maple top LP have you ever seen? In the 30 years I've been playing I had never seen a birds-eye maple top LP.

 

Other Gibsons that I own are: 1974 Grabber Bass, (heavily modified with 3 p/u's, Bad *** Bridge, dp/dt switches), 2007 '61 reissue SG, 1999 J200, 1993 LP Studio, 1994 LP Special in TV Yellow and a 1981 Sonex Deluxe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a Birdseye maple top that was said to be a custom shop guitar last year on Craigslist

here. It ended up being a scam but the photo was real. Beautiful guitar. The old I'm across the

pond send me the money scam.

 

CW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lovely guitar, plankofwood.

 

I think you are probably correct in thinking it is a '94. The guitardater site may not have taken the anomalies you mention into account.

 

Unless it's been greatly modified it's certainly not a Classic. It's a Standard as you say.

 

As far as the bird's-eye maple goes I've only seen one other (in 33 years) and it was finished in 'Clownburst' and was, therefore, pretty hideous (to my eyes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...
  • 4 years later...

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...