Black Inlays on Maple Necks

[johnnybgoood]

Gibson has dabbled with maple necks but I think if they make this guitar with black inlays and tag it with an affordable price, it would be a hit.

 

What do you think? Please answer the questions in the poll also.

 

I've played Gibson guitars since 1988 and I own three.

[btoth76]

Hello and welcome to the Forums.

 

As an option why not, but if it`s standard definitely not. This optional/standard feature question stirred up some emotions recently...

 

As for the inlay, I'd like this solution better:

 

http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/The-Les-Paul-All-Wood.aspx

 

Wooden inlays.

 

Cheers... Bence

[Guest Farnsbarns]

Your poll is interesting. The last 2 questions don't really make sense to me. Why would anyone want to see the end of modern wiring as an option?

 

Why would anyone want to see the end of 300k pots as an option, especially with some pickups?

 

To answer your other question... Personally, I don't generally like black hardware and I'm not surprised to be discovering I don't like black inlays either.

[rct]

I, your humble pedestrian, white trash guitar player from the 70s sez:

 

1. There is a company on the other side of the country that makes maple necks with black inlays. Just sayin.

 

2. Seriously, when drummer boy starts wailing away and the keys guy ruins your ear canals and the bass player is causing your guts to churn, nobody can hear yer pots. Just sayin, again.

 

3. "50s wiring" means, in short, not to piss anyone off here, absolutely nothing. I can pick up pretty much any Les Paul anywhere, from any decade, and get some pretty great Les Paul sounds out of it, no matter what the wiring. The wiring is the absolutely last thing I would ever look at as far as what the guitar realistically sounds like when used realistically. If it has decent pickups in it, it'll sound good most of the time, and any wiring change is not going to be all that dramatic. If it sounds like crap to begin with, no wiring change is going to un-crap it. That's my experience.

 

I'm sorry I said all those things.

 

rct

[pippy]

You'll numb yer bum sittin' on that fence, rct.

Tell us what you really think...

 

P.

[Pin]

Nothing wrong with a maple neck but I'd sooner have an ebony fingerboard on top of it.

[pippy]

My answers to the questions, FWIW;

 

I know there are some folks who like the look of a maple 'board on a Les Paul. I'm not one of them. I think they look unspeakably hideous.

With the pearloid inlays they look bad enough but with the black inlays they look like a cheap mid'70s Japanese copy of a Gibson.

 

Pots? No opinion one way or the other. I happen to have 500k pots on mine and they work fine but I'm sure 300k or whatever would work, too.

 

'50s wiring? I prefer '50s wiring because of the way the vol & tone pots work together. I believe I'm in the minority.

To enforce '50s wiring across the board would not suit the majority of players IMO.

 

P.

[BigKahune]

.

Maple necks were in production for some years in the 70s and early 80s - I'd call that more than a dabble. I like maple necks.

 

Maple fretboards with black markers is another thing. I'd be okay with an occasional special issue - like the recent Raw Power Studio was all maple and might've looked a bit better with black dots.

 

The pots and the wiring is no big deal to me. It would be nice if Gibson put more effort into paring pups and pots.

 

Anyway, that was three no votes for me.

 

 

.

[rct]

You'll numb yer bum sittin' on that fence, rct.

 

Tell us what you really think...

 

P.

 

I'm sorry man. A great dude from your parts once uttered, lastly, at the top of his lungs in his bio-epic motion picture that I just enjoyed the other night again:

 

FREEEEEEEEEDDDDDOOOOOOOOOMMMMMM...

 

rct

[buliwyf]

I love maple necks and always wanted a LP custom exactly like the picture you have posted.The maple with the black custom block black inlays look killer.I usually look for maple necks first on any guitar i buy. Then Ebony,I had one on my 1996 Studio LP it felt and sounded great then the rosewood.If i ever buy a Strat again it will have a maple board but LP,s with maple necks are hard to find.

[johnnybgoood]

Hey great to be on this forum! Thanks for reading my topic and participating. In an interview, Clapton stated the reason he preferred playing maple-neck guitars and stopped playing Gibsons was that it felt to him as though there was less friction between his fingers and the fretboard. I know what he means. The maple necks are smoother than rosewood. I think the black block inlays look great and would be a nice extra option to consider when buying a guitar. Les Paul owned several Les Pauls with maple necks, although his favorite guitar was '74/75 Deluxe that was a factory reject.

The reason for the questions about pots and wiring is for the following reason. Some of the greatest rock records in history that had monster tone were made by guitarists that used PAF pickups wired to a 500k audio pot for volume. All these players are icons in rock music. If the 500k audio pots for volume is what they preferred, then why not for the rest of the public?

Here is a short list...

Clapton's 1960 Les Paul

Peter Green/Gary Moore Les Paul

Van Halen's Frankenstrat with PAF

Angus Young's 1968 SG with CTS audio pots (tone bypassed)

Billy Gibbons Pearly Gates

Jimmy Page's Number 1 and 2

Slash's Derrig Clone

Really, all this is talk to spend some time with fellow guitarists. In the end it doesn't matter what kind of guitar anyone plays. Even the junk is great. It's most important to go out and play!

[knucklebut]

1413387894[/url]' post='1577761']

My answers to the questions, FWIW;

 

I know there are some folks who like the look of a maple 'board on a Les Paul. I'm not one of them. I think they look unspeakably hideous.

With the pearloid inlays they look bad enough but with the black inlays they look like a cheap mid'70s Japanese copy of a Gibson.

 

Pots? No opinion one way or the other. I happen to have 500k pots on mine and they work fine but I'm sure 300k or whatever would work, too.

 

'50s wiring? I prefer '50s wiring because of the way the vol & tone pots work together. I believe I'm in the minority.

To enforce '50s wiring across the board would not suit the majority of players IMO.

 

P.

I think 50's wiring makes the LP one of the most friendly guitars for stage. Endless tonal options if used correctly. IMHO

[BigKahune]

... Some of the greatest rock records in history that had monster tone were made by guitarists that used PAF pickups wired to a 500k audio pot for volume. ...

 

Interestingly, guitarists sometimes use different guitars in the studio than what they perform with on stage. The details can be hard to dig up. But for instance - Billy Gibsons used Fenders during the recording some of the Tres Hombres sessions. In the studio, with the right set up, you can chase any tone you want with just about any guitar, and it can be difficult from listening to tell exactly what was used to make the recording - making gear lists important.

 

 

.

[rct]

Here is a short list...

Clapton's 1960 Les Paul

Peter Green/Gary Moore Les Paul

Van Halen's Frankenstrat with PAF

Angus Young's 1968 SG with CTS audio pots (tone bypassed)

Billy Gibbons Pearly Gates

Jimmy Page's Number 1 and 2

Slash's Derrig Clone

 

I've seen most of those guys play, the first one quite a few times. It's important to note that in the overall tonal picture if you will, the sounds them guys got on the records everyone loves, were made at volumes and gains that render the pots and the wiring and the weight of the guitar and the length of the tenon and everything else that seems to be an ingredient in the recipe of Holy Grail Tone, irrelevant.

 

Volume, speakers moving air, the freedom to place mics to catch the sound in a bunch of ways and put it all together to make the dimension(s) we hear, and most of all the unbridled enthusiasm of a guy lucky enough to be just tearing it up freely on a great guitar, these make for great "tone". Not pots and caps and wiring. I'm sorry.

 

If you and I could sit down in front of that Marshall that Slash used on that great record, and used that guitar at those volumes and gains and mic placements and everything else, no matter what the wiring or PAFs or pots, we still would not sound like him. I could try to get close, I don't know about you, he has a way of underbending that is pretty sweet, so I'd take a crack at it, but I'd fail.

 

While your list is good, it's important to note that those guys also made all the OTHER great sounds we all want, on all the OTHER great records we love, and they didn't use the PAFs and 50s wiring and special caps and pots and stuff to make those great sounds.

 

In short, lots of other people made lots of other great sounds with lots of great guitars, and they never gave a thought to the caps and pots and pickups and switches. A great guitar just sounds great with a happy player driving it with a great amp.

 

rct

[pippy]

 

I love it when you talk like that, rct, but from earlier on; isn't Mel Gibson from the state of New York?..........lol!

 

P.

[capmaster]

OK, although including a 50's wired guitar as a reference and ending up with a maple neck for a comparison, this will lead a bit off topic.

 

When about clean tones, RCT, I found out that guitars may play a huge role, even if their make is different from the ones originally used. Here are two examples of hair-raising experiences. First the one with the sad background.

 

When trying several Les Paul Standard 2012 guitars, there has been one that NAILED Billy Gibbons' rhythm guitar tone of the ZZ Top track "Cheap Sunglasses" to the bone. It was the only Les Paul I had ever played up to that day without a dull A4 on B2nd, 10th fret. It had a beautiful flame top and Trans Amber finish. Sadly it was not for me since the frets were beveled too wide, any mezzoforte downstroke blew the E1st off the board when fretted at 2nd, 3rd or 4th fret. Defintely unplayable. My Traditional 2013's tone is close, but far from nailing it, no matter how I try.

 

In my arsenal is a close to 9 lbs MIM Fender FR Stratocaster with rosewood board, originally HSS, modded with a Graph Tech Ghost piezo bridge and Fender Vintage Noiseless SSS magnetics. This guitar NAILS the tone of James Calvin Wilsey's '62 Reissue Stratocaster on the Chris Isaak track "Wicked Game" again to the bone. No other Strat I ever played and none of my other three does it this way.

 

Back to the topic, another one of my four MIM Fender FR Strats is a 7 lbs 8 oz Plustop with one-piece maple neck, originally HSS, modded using a Graph Tech Ghost piezo bridge and Fender SCN (Samarium Cobalt Noiseless) SSS magnetics. This one comes close to Wilsey's tone, but clearly doesn't nail it. It also wouldn't with same magnetic pickups as the previously mentioned one I guess. Their piezo tones tell that these two are rather different as "pure" guitars. The maple neck seems to make for less bass and more midrange. I don't think the weight makes much of a difference. Perhaps the maple top veneer on the alder body adds a certain edge.

 

I have to admit I didn't actually look for both these tones, I just happened to find them.

[rct]

 

I love it when you talk like that, rct, but from earlier on; isn't Mel Gibson from the state of New York?..........lol!

 

P.

 

I always thought he was an Aussie.

 

rct

[pippy]

I always thought he was an Aussie...

Just you and the rest of the planet.

 

Funnily enough I asked him about that...........(I'll scan something tomorrow - and, yes, let the missus know).

 

Born Jan 3rd 1956; Peekskill, New York.

Moved to Sydney, Oz, as a 12-y-o kid.

 

I blame 'Mad Max' for the confusion.

 

P.

[Bryan Sutherland]

Just you and the rest of the planet.

 

Funnily enough I asked him about that...........(I'll scan something tomorrow - and, yes, let the missus know).

 

Born Jan 3rd 1956; Peekskill, New York.

Moved to Sydney, Oz, as a 12-y-o kid.

 

I blame 'Mad Max' for the confusion.

 

P.

Your knowledge and wisdom know no bounds, Mr. P

[pippy]

No, not really.

I, too, thought he was Australian but I chatted with him about it one day and he put me straight.

 

And Google helps when the memory fails, too!....lol!

 

P.

[johnnybgoood]

CTS audio pots are the same price as linear pots. If the logarithmic (audio) pots are placed in Gibson's most expensive and prized guitars as they are concerned about the subtleties of volume control, then why not make the change across all lines of products? For example, a Les Paul Jr from 1958 sold for $99.50 and also used audio pots. (http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-Custom/1958-Les-Paul-Jr-Double-VOS.aspx)

 

Here's a few more examples of Gibson guitars with 500k Audio Pots.

 

Duane Allman 1959 Cherry Sunburst Les Paul

 

Jeff Beck 1954 Les Paul Oxblood

 

Joe Perry 1959 Les Paul

 

Steve Howe 1959 ES-175

 

Wes Montgomery L-5 CES

 

1958 Les Paul Jr. Double Cut VOS

[pippy]

CTS audio pots are the same price as linear pots. If the logarithmic (audio) pots are placed in Gibson's most expensive and prized guitars as they are concerned about the subtleties of volume control, then why not make the change across all lines of products?

Possibly because most guitarists who are playing and/or picking up the guitar nowadays are more familiar and more comfortable with the way linear pots work in both positions.

 

From chatting with many, many folk over the years I've met probably less than a dozen who like the way the audio pots work - especially in the volume position.

I happen to prefer them - as I mentioned earlier - and am comfortable with that jump between 8.5 and 10 but it puts most folks off.

 

P.

[Guest Farnsbarns]

CTS audio pots are the same price as linear pots. If the logarithmic (audio) pots are placed in Gibson's most expensive and prized guitars as they are concerned about the subtleties of volume control, then why not make the change across all lines of products? For example, a Les Paul Jr from 1958 sold for $99.50 and also used audio pots. (http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-Custom/1958-Les-Paul-Jr-Double-VOS.aspx)

 

Here's a few more examples of Gibson guitars with 500k Audio Pots.

 

Duane Allman 1959 Cherry Sunburst Les Paul

 

Jeff Beck 1954 Les Paul Oxblood

 

Joe Perry 1959 Les Paul

 

Steve Howe 1959 ES-175

 

Wes Montgomery L-5 CES

 

1958 Les Paul Jr. Double Cut VOS

 

Well, those are all reissues with low output pups and "should" have 500k pots.

[johnnybgoood]

As a general rule of thumb, for single coil pickups we recommend 250k audio taper pots, and for humbuckers we generally recommend 500k audio taper pots. The most basic reason for these recommendations is that it allows a smooth swell in volume from zero to full out." - Seymour Duncan

 

Guitars sound brighter with higher-value potentiometers. The partial reason all these "Collector's Choice" reissues from Gibson sound so great is that their tones have clarity as a result of the use of 500k volume pots.

[btoth76]

...

Guitars sound brighter with higher-value potentiometers.

...

 

Hello!

 

Thanks for informing! That is why I will stick to 300Ks.

 

Cheers... Bence