New Long Scale LP

[Rabs]

NOT a 59 re-issue Shocking :)

 

Interesting though

 

However much you love the classic Les Paul look, feel, and tone, some playing styles just require a longer scale. Whether it’s bangin’ dropped tunings, liquid-like slide work, or meaty low-string twang, or just a preference for a little more string tension and a longer neck, the Les Paul Long Scale from Gibson Custom nails it all. With a 25 ½” scale length, it brings an alternative playing feel, piano-like bass notes, sparkling harmonic clarity, and characteristic long-scale “snap” to the table, all within the template of the world’s most highly prized solidbody electric guitar.

 

This meticulously crafted guitar from Gibson Custom hits on all the high points for long-time Les Paul fans. A solid, lightweight, one-piece mahogany body and carved two-piece maple top; glued-in one-piece mahogany neck; classic hardware; and Gibson’s impressive and extremely PAF-like—Custom Bucker humbucking pickups deliver timeless Les Paul tone, with much more when you want it. All that, and the Les Paul Long Scale is available in both of your all-time favorite Gibson neck shapes: a beefy true ’59 profile, or a V2 SlimTaper™ ’60 profile.

 

Its looks stem from classic Les Paul aesthetics, too, but with a few elegant twists to enhance visual interest. Single-layer reissue cream binding graces the bodies top and back, the rosewood fingerboard carries split-parallelogram inlays, a Gibson Custom medallion covers the rear switch access (spare plastic cover included), and it’s all dressed in your choice of three hand-sprayed nitrocellulose finishes: Iced Tea Burst, Antique Gold, or Washed Cherry. A Certificate of Authenticity keeps it real, and a Gibson Custom hardshell case keeps it safe.

 

 

http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-Custom/CS-Les-Paul-Long-Scale.aspx

 

[Riffster]

I always hoped that if Gibson did this they would move the neck joint but looks like they moved the bridge and tailpiece back.

[Rabs]

I always hoped that if Gibson did this they would move the neck joint but looks like they moved the bridge and tailpiece back.

Im not sure... I think they have made it longer at the headstock end of the fretboard?? :unsure:

[Rabs]

I always hoped that if Gibson did this they would move the neck joint but looks like they moved the bridge and tailpiece back.

On second thoughts you may be right.. I cant quite tell.. lol.. youd think id be able to spot that pretty easy by now

[daveinspain]

Ok so here's a dumb question, what are the advantages of this?

['Scales]

Maybe drop tunings or lighter gauge strings whilst maintaining solid string tensions?

[RevDavidLee]

I think Rabs should be banned for posting this stuff that makes me want to let go of my 401k and buy everything

 

Okay... maybe I should just quit looking

[Bender 4 Life]

Ok so here's a dumb question, what are the advantages of this?

 

Gibson will trick folks into paying a $3k "street price" for a fancy Telecaster ?

[pippy]

Ok so here's a dumb question, what are the advantages of this?

Having been primarily a Strat player for 24 years I would say that I might have been very tempted to get one of these when I went back to LPs.

 

Other than that?........IDK.

 

The quotes from Gibson state;

"...Whether it's bangin' dropped tunings, liquid-like slide work, or meaty low-string twang, or just a preference for a little more string tension and a longer neck, the Les Paul Long Scale...brings an alternative playing feel, piano-like bass notes, sparkling harmonic clarity, and characteristic long-scale "snap" to the table..."

Were talking about an extra 3/4" on the scale length. Can an extra 3/4" really transform a Gibson Les Paul into something completely different?

Other than those more used to a regular Fender-like scale-length I can't see how an extra 3/4" will make more of a change than using a different gauge of string.

In any case I'd have thought the normal LP scale would have had more "snap" than (as they claim) a longer scale.

 

But I don't really agonise over all that tech stuff. I just pick up my guitar and play. Just like Yesterday.

 

Very Pretty, though, with the single-ply binding back and front, Natural finish back and the split-parallelogram inlays.

 

P.

[Drog]

I want one of these!

 

Longer scale length, gives you more natural harmonics and the chords "pop" a bit more.

 

This guitar with a coil tapped pickup, could be heaven... Must...resist...urge...to...grab...wallet...

[Riffster]

I am sure this Les Paul is a different animal but in the end it is a matter of preference. There are a lot of Fender guys that would gladly jump on this opportunity.

 

If I see one at the store I am definitely playing it.

[capmaster]

I always hoped that if Gibson did this they would move the neck joint but looks like they moved the bridge and tailpiece back.

 

 

Im not sure... I think they have made it longer at the headstock end of the fretboard?? :unsure:

 

 

On second thoughts you may be right.. I cant quite tell.. lol.. youd think id be able to spot that pretty easy by now

Looks like they left the neck joint where it is, and expanded at both ends of string suspension.

 

Switching from 24.75" to 25.5" using same string gauges increases tension by about 6.15% whereas switching from .010s to .011s while retaining scale makes for 21% higher tension. The tone will be a little different though, due to altered pickup positions and apertures.

[Riffster]

Looks like they left the neck joint where it is, and expanded at both ends of string suspension.

 

Switching from 24.75" to 25.5" using same string gauges increases tension by about 6.15% whereas switching from .010s to .011s while retaining scale makes for 21% higher tension. The tone will be a little different though, due to altered pickup positions and apertures.

 

Yea, that's what I meant,

 

I always thought they would move the neck joint but that means they would probably need to make a special case for it. Also if Les Paul's are boomy on the neck pickup I am sure this guitar will be have even more bass.

 

IMO Gibson could have put the neck joint 2 frets up, move the bridge slightly up, you'd get plenty of LP bass on the neck pickup anyway. (which now would be closer the the bridge).

[milod]

A major reason I prefer the 24 3/4 scale and flatter fingerboard radius - and I have an archtop with a 24" scale I'd prefer if it didn't have the early '50s fat baseball bat neck - is why I do not, nor ever have, owned a Fender guitar.

 

I seldom get above the 12th fret regardless, so having wider fretting in that area of the fingerboard is not an issue, and I prefer shorter fret-to-fret distances up into the 10th-12th fret.

 

OTOH, I guess as usual, I figure that if it suits somebody else who plays significantly different technique, it's fine by me.

 

m

[LPguitarman]

Looks nice. My thoughts:

Where is the 3/4"? Are the frets wider after the 12th fret?

If they're going to add more binding, why not go all the way and put binding around the headstock too?

What does this do if you just want to keep 10's at standard tuning?

[quapman]

I can't say I have ever chosen a guitar because of it's scale.

 

I'd like to try it.

[Riffster]

Looks nice. My thoughts:

Where is the 3/4"? Are the frets wider after the 12th fret?

If they're going to add more binding, why not go all the way and put binding around the headstock too?

What does this do if you just want to keep 10's at standard tuning?

 

The 3/4" is "spread" between the bridge and the nut, so, the frets are wider all throughout the fretboard.

 

10's will feel stiffer.

[Rabs]

I think Rabs should be banned for posting this stuff that makes me want to let go of my 401k and buy everything

 

Okay... maybe I should just quit looking

haha lol

 

a burden shared is a burden halved ;)

[Rabs]

I think its pretty much all in the neck...

 

[LPguitarman]

The 3/4" is "spread" between the bridge and the nut, so, the frets are wider all throughout the fretboard.

 

10's will feel stiffer.

So I guess you go with .09's if you don't want a stiffer feel on the strings.

[Dub-T-123]

Man, I bet this guitar sounds incredible. It looks sweet with those split parallelograms

 

If you look closely the tailpiece is moved back past the rhythm volume knob a little. It does seem to mainly be a longer neck, which is cool

[Rabs]

Man, I bet this guitar sounds incredible. It looks sweet with those split parallelograms

 

If you look closely the tailpiece is moved back past the rhythm volume knob a little. It does seem to mainly be a longer neck, which is cool

Well spotted.. But the tail piece position is not so important.. its where the strings hit the bridge saddles that counts as far a scale length is concerned.

[Jimi Mac]

I always thought the more distance you have nut to bridge the slinkier or more flexible the strings would feel, but you guys are saying they'll be stiffer/tighter...

 

I can't wrap my head around that. The longer the distance wouldn't the strings bend easier and feel less tight?

 

I'm not sure this would hold any advantage for me other than wider frets at the body and my heavy-handed technique it might make high notes easier to play for me because I haven't yet been able to burn the synapse into my brain that the not is on the fret not in the space between the frets...

 

I know the larger space doesn't make playing easier, but perception is reality and if my brain thinks it's easier I just might have an easier time playing it...

 

I've tried to switch over to shooting for the fret rather than shooting for the space, but I just haven't gotten there yet and I know it's a big stumbling block for me that I have yet to successfully hurdle...

 

I'm just not very fluid in the tight frets near the body, this could possible help me, but maybe not...

 

It's nice looking, but so are all Les Pauls...

 

I think the different inlays are piquant, they have a certain appeal too...

[saturn]

I always thought the more distance you have nut to bridge the slinkier or more flexible the strings would feel, but you guys are saying they'll be stiffer/tighter...

 

I can't wrap my head around that. The longer the distance wouldn't the strings bend easier and feel less tight?

 

I'm not sure this would hold any advantage for me other than wider frets at the body and my heavy-handed technique it might make high notes easier to play for me because I haven't yet been able to burn the synapse into my brain that the not is on the fret not in the space between the frets...

 

I know the larger space doesn't make playing easier, but perception is reality and if my brain thinks it's easier I just might have an easier time playing it...

 

 

 

I'm with you on this one. I always read how long scale guitars like Strats are supposed to feel tighter because you have to wind the string tighter to get it up to pitch. But to me the extra length feels slinkier. Maybe it's just my imagination. I do know that I prefer the feel of a fat but narrow neck (like a 50s Rounded LP) over the thin, wide, blade-like neck of most Strats.

[Dub-T-123]

Well spotted.. But the tail piece position is not so important.. its where the strings hit the bridge saddles that counts as far a scale length is concerned.

Yeah. I just (maybe wrongly) have assumed that Gibson has developed a standard spacing between the bridge and tailpiece which they use on just about all of their guitars