Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Gibson les paul standard


hoross
 Share

Recommended Posts

I got several les paul standard in between the 90's to 2013, i agree that the 2008 std is quite versatile, except that it could not be modded to death metal sounding, for most of the users , the 2008 std 's chambered body could really give a warm tone with sensitive high response, real nice!

 

 

Please feel free to visit and give a "Like" to my facebook fanspage:

ProGitarColacter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had several Gibson les pauls including the standards but for me i think the 2008 was the most versatile,what is your opinion on your favourite Gibson les paul standard?

The 2008 Standard is a great guitar I can attest that (but then im bias as I have one :))....

 

I think 2011 was a good year too actually...

 

But really as always.. The best guitar for you is the one that sounds the best to YOU and feel the best in YOUR hands.. Every guitar is unique in that way no matter if its a 59 or 2015 :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Limited Quilt Top Standard 2011, modern weight relieved and predating the 2012 model with that feature, is a very nice one, and my Standard Premium 2012 made in early 2012, too. I also love the switching options of them both.

 

However, my Traditional 2013 is somewhat more of what a Les Paul guitar should be in my opinion. The only upgrade to this model would be a long neck tenon I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 2008 Standard is a great guitar I can attest that (but then im bias as I have one :))....

 

I think 2011 was a good year too actually...

 

But really as always.. The best guitar for you is the one that sounds the best to YOU and feel the best in YOUR hands.. Every guitar is unique in that way no matter if its a 59 or 2015 :unsure:

 

EXCELLENT Response!! How true.

 

MississippiBlue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many of us on this forum have or have played one of the real one's from 50's to 1960. Those are the only people qualified to chime in. I know I haven't. If you have a '59 reissue but it was made last year it is still a 2013 IMO. I had a LP Classic with the 1960 on the pick guard. I don not feel I can chime in and say how great the 1960 LP's were cause it is a replica.

Same here, no clue how a real pre-production hiatus LP feels and sounds. I guess that will never change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love my 2003 Standard, but had to stick a classic 57 in the bridge as the BB pro was way too thin. They sound great in the neck though.

 

I had a 2008 Standard when they first came out. Liked the neck and sound, but that neutrik jack ruined it for me.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Odd, that I've never owned any Les Paul "Standard!" I've always had my Deluxe,

Custom's, and Classic, as well assorted double cut Specials. Of course, one could

argue that the "Classic" is really just a renamed, and somewhat re-spec'd "Standard?" [tongue]

 

But, ANY year, and any model, that you love, and love to play, is the best one! [thumbup]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I think they all have their place.I have played almost all except the 2012's onward and cant comment.

 

I prefer the 07/08's's and own one.It took me 6 months to find one a year ago.I sold my 78 a while ago too,but i like some 70's LP's.I played another 77 the other day and it doesn't come close to my 07 in sustain and attack.IMO.

 

I like the weight of a 58,59's(8 to 10Lbs)(i've played both but could never own one)

 

But even Clapton doesn't strap on a 59-60's Strat or LP anymore.The are alot of great things- developments and refinements in modern guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, one could argue that the "Classic" is really just a renamed, and somewhat re-spec'd "Standard?"...
And some reason cheaper than a standard... which ive never really understood...?

Well, as has been said before; when the 1960 Classic was introduced to the LP range in '89 it was around 35-40% more expensive than the then current Standard.

It was only much later, after a series of what were in essence specification downgrades to the model, that it fell below the Standard in terms of retail price.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, as has been said before; when the 1960 Classic was introduced to the LP range in '89 it was around 35-40% more expensive than the then current Standard.

It was only much later, after a series of what were in essence specification downgrades to the model, that it fell below the Standard in terms of retail price.

 

P.

 

Did the early Classic have a long neck tenon? The only change I see is the cutaway binding and headstock face? I think imho it was a marketing issue from the on-set. The guitar was never a 60-RI?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It always had a short tenon.

Even those Classics produced for a short period by the Custom Shop between 1996/97 had the short tenon.

And it was never a R-I. They should never be referred to as a '1960 Classic Re-Issue'.

 

As originally introduced the Classic was positioned half-way between the Standard and the (then) current Pre-Historic '59 R-I.

It was intended to be a slimmer-necked, plainer-finished, hotter p'upped re-issue style guitar but made on the regular USA line instead of what was in essence the Custom Shop.

These early guitars had the narrow cutaway binding, had 'Les Paul MODEL' on the headstock (although the typeface for MODEL was different from the R-I's) and a deep-dished top-carve.

The only real non-hardware differences between them and the proper R-I's were the neck tenon and the tops; almost all of the early guitars were plain-tops although a few figured tops have been spotted.

The Classics, of course, featured the Swiss-Cheese style of weight-relief as opposed to the solid blanks used for the R-I's.

One interesting detail was that the trap inlays were sharp-pointed as per the original '52-'60 Les Pauls. I mention this because even the early re-issues didn't have these historically accurate style of inlay for many years. Why the Classic should have them when the R-I didn't is a bit of a mystery.

 

When the Re-Issue series finally got into stride in 1993 there were changes made to the 1960 Classic to distance this range further from the new R-I series and the first of these were the change to 'Les Paul CLASSIC' and the widening of the binding in the cutaway which became similar to the binding used on the Standard. Later on the infamous 'snot-green' inlays were introduced and even later the ABR-1 was changed for the Nashville.

 

First year (1993) Historic Division (later Custom Shop) '59 R-I and early period (1991) 1960 Classic silkscreens. Note slightly different typeface and spacing on MODEL;

Front.jpg

 

If you can log into the Les Paul Forum site (the link doesn't cut'n'paste - I've tried!) then you'll be able to read the most comprehensive single page of info on the Classic model that I've yet seen.

Click on the 'Articles and Interviews' page and there, at the centre-bottom, there is an article on the Les Paul Classic Premium Plus by Mike Slubowski.

 

It tells you almost everything you need to know as regards the 1960 Classic series.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It always had a short tenon.

Even those Classics produced for a short period by the Custom Shop between 1996/97 had the short tenon.

And it was never a R-I. They should never be referred to as a '1960 Classic Re-Issue'.

 

As originally introduced the Classic was positioned half-way between the Standard and the current Pre-Historic '59 R-I.

It was intended to be a slimmer-necked, plainer-finished, hotter p'upped re-issue style guitar but made on the regular USA line instead of what was in essence the Custom Shop.

These early guitars had the narrow cutaway binding, had 'Les Paul MODEL' on the headstock (although the typeface for MODEL was different from the R-I's) and a deep-dished top-carve.

The only real non-hardware differences between them and the proper R-I's were the neck tenon and the tops; almost all of the early guitars were plain-tops although a few figured tops have been spotted.

The Classics, of course, featured the Swiss-Cheese style of weight-relief as opposed to the solid blanks used for the R-I's.

One interesting detail was that the trap inlays were sharp-pointed as per the original '52-'60 Les Pauls. I mention this because even the early re-issues didn't have these historically accurate style of inlay for many years. Why the Classic should have them when the R-I didn't is a bit of a mystery.

 

When the Re-Issue series finally got into stride in 1993 there were changes made to the 1960 Classic to distance this range further from the new R-I series and the first of these were the change to 'Les Paul CLASSIC' and the widening of the binding in the cutaway which became similar to the binding used on the Standard. Later on the infamous 'snot-green' inlays were introduced and even later the ABR-1 was changed for the Nashville.

 

First year (1993) Historic Division (later Custom Shop) '59 R-I and early period (1991) 1960 Classic silkscreens. Note slightly different typeface and spacing on MODEL;

Front.jpg

 

If you can log into the Les Paul Forum site (the link doesn't cut'n'paste - I've tried!) then you'll be able to read the most comprehensive single page of info on the Classic model that I've yet seen.

Click on the 'Articles and Interviews' page and there, at the centre-bottom, there is an article on the Les Paul Classic Premium Plus by Mike Slubowski.

 

It tells you almost everything you need to know as regards the 1960 Classic series.

 

P.

 

[thumbup] I remember many players gravitating towards them in the early 2000 period. If I remember right the ABR-1 was part of the reason, nickle hardware, vintage style tuners etc. Good info btw.

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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...