Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Wmachine

All Access
  • Content Count

    324
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Wmachine last won the day on October 27 2019

Wmachine had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

93 Good

About Wmachine

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think that is just being passive aggressive if that is truly the case. Not liking the aesthetic? That signature is Les Paul if you don't like it, that's disrespectful. Nobody says you has to like it. But to speak negatively about it and make fun of it is just wrong. That is holding one's opinion of how it looks in higher regard than that signature. That is a terrible display of self importance. That is disrespectful. There is no way to whitewash that.
  2. Sure, and that is supposed to make you feel better? Do you say that every time you hear the truth? You must have really enjoyed being part of the 2015 hysteria. It has been discussed many times since then objectively and 2015 are truly great ones. So you can quit banging that drum.
  3. The replacements are titanium, not chrome plated. And it is really no big deal to replace them. Brass has been used on saddles, so it shouldn't have really been a wear issue. Possibility the particular brass used was off-spec. As for the signature, in honor of Les, Gibson used the last know signature of Les. That makes it especially cool to me. Gibson did nothing wrong there, the problem is that you and quite a few others have no respect for that signature. That's a poor refection of you and the rest of the critics, not Gibson.
  4. At the risk of feeding the trolls, the same could more so be said for you. You obviously don't know what happened or what the real question was, so as the saying goes, you don't have to make a worthless smart-*** answer.
  5. That is a half answer at best. In most cases, you can contact Gibson with the serial number and get the model and specs. So in the big picture, the serial number CAN get you the specs. Far too much hashing the little points here and making bad analogies that keeps the OP from getting what actually can be had.
  6. That's the most logical explanation that they had a small run done. But not for the model I have, because every other one I've seen of that model does not have one. And I'd like to find *any* other Memphis guitar that came with one, but so far have not found any. That's one of the reasons I've posted about it, hoping to find another somewhere.
  7. Yes, one can get a cover with custom text on it. But that is not what mine is. I'll say it again, it came from the factory with that.
  8. I wouldn't say just as illusive. I have a few of the models with F hole covers, and have seen many others. But I've never seen another one that says Memphis on it. I'm still trying to find out if and where they ever used that cover.
  9. I am far from an expert here. No hands on experience with the vintage models but do own a few reissues. From what I read on others experiences, the vintage '60s were not considered to be that bright. When Memphis was making the last of their reissues, there were some that thought they were not bright enough. Certainly they were not as bright as the regular models, but the consensus was though they were not as bright, they did indeed more accurately nail the '60s sound. One contributing factor was the nylon saddles. Swapping them out for titanium saddles would brighten up the sound but ult
  10. The aforementioned cover. Now I have a puzzle I've not been able to solve. I have a 2015 reissue '54 ES-175D VOS with this Memphis cover on it. Bought it new, came this way from Memphis. Never seen this cover anywhere else. Including on others of the this model of which there were supposedly only 50 made. Gibson had no answers for me about this.
  11. I know what you mean, but never say never. They are some model and some dealer limited editions that they make known the number made when they are sold new. But whenever you contact Gibson, they won't ever give out numbers. Amusingly they may even tell you "they don't have" the numbers even on the exceptions I mentioned.
  12. My take is not well received by 339 lovers, but to me the 339 is compromised 335. All the accolades given to 339s revolve around them being smaller and more desirable for that reason only. I don't see any serious or pro players using them, though I'm sure there must be some. I've actually heard some say that because they are shorter themselves, they looks silly playing that large 335. Huh? Are they a players or posers? Tommy Shaw doesn't have any problems playing one. If you want a 335, get a 335. To me, a 335 and an LP have just enough overlap that there is no ground covered by
  13. What's funnier than that (to me at least) is that you made me go look at it again just to be sure.
  14. Thanks. String spacing is perfectly fine. Either the angle or maybe that its a 2015 with the wider board that is throwing you off.
  15. Though somewhat evasive, Gibson has defined what the top differences are, sometimes in word and sometimes as illustrations. Here is an example of one such illustration shown for the 2015 LP Traditional. http://legacy.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/2015/USA/Les-Paul-Traditional.aspx I find any such explanations to be of little use. From what I have seen, it is no more than a general and loosely followed (or at least highly subjected) scale. The 2015 LP Traditional is supposed to have an A+ top. Here is mine: Judge for yourself, but I can tell you that it is a
×
×
  • Create New...