Californiaman Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Knowledge is power. What's the R9 designation? Can someone clue me in please. R8 etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCI Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 R = Reissue Number = year Reissue 1956 Reissue 1957 Reissue 1958 Reissue 1959 Reissue 1960 No Reissue 1961 - Gibson put out the SG and called it a Les Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
six-string Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 R is for "Reissue" as in a copy of a vintage model and the number is the vintage year so an R9 Les Paul is a reissue of a 1959 model an R8 LP is a reissue of a 1958 model etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted January 22, 2009 Author Share Posted January 22, 2009 Wow, thanks. How simple. I didn't even give it much thought. That makes total sense to me. The 61 thing is interesting. That's when Gibson's contract with LP ended, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffster Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Also (and I am just guessing here) there are no re-issues from 1952 to 1955 because the Les Paul had initially the trapeze tail piece and then the wraparound bridge, I guess those features are not very desirable. Am I right or is there another reason for not reissuing those years? EDIT: isn't there an R4? or was that a limited run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Also (and I am just guessing here) there are no re-issues from 1952 to 1955 because the Les Paul had initially the trapeze tail piece and then the wraparound bridge' date=' I guess those features are not very desirable. Am I right or is there another reason for not reissuing those years? EDIT: isn't there an R4? or was that a limited run?[/quote'] there are R2s and R4s out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Californiaman, it's not that Les' contract ended with Gibson, it's that he hated the SG and didn't want his name on it. The first few SGs actually had the words "Les Paul" on them and if you look at the Custom Shop SGs, they also have "Les Paul" on them. Historic Customs have it on the piece of plastic between the neck and the neck pickup. Historic Standards have it on the truss rod cover. Here's something you don't see everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted January 22, 2009 Author Share Posted January 22, 2009 Californiaman' date=' it's not that Les' contract ended with Gibson, it's that he hated the SG and didn't want his name on it.The first few SGs actually had the words "Les Paul" on them and if you look at the Custom Shop SGs, they also have "Les Paul" on them. Historic Customs have it on the piece of plastic between the neck and the neck pickup. Historic Standards have it on the truss rod cover. Here's something you don't see everyday. [img']http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg225/Gibson_Tim/les_portrait_SG.jpg[/img] Didn't like the SG? That's interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 A lot of it had to do with the neck joint. He thought it was terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elantric Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Actually the inside story I heard was the famous '50's duo - "Les Paul and Mary Ford" were going through a bitter California divorce between 1961 and 1964, when it became finalized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Ford Les's attorney suggested Les shelter all his assets the best he could. Since the early '50s Gibson was paying Les a steady income for use of his name on the guitars, and Mary would be entitled to 50% of that income. So in late 1961, Les requested Gibson's CEO Ted McCarty temporarily cease putting Les's name on the guitars until after his divorce - to shelter his assets. However, after the Beatles hit in 1964, Gibson was too distracted trying to produce newer models to directly compete with Fender at every price point (reverse Firebird, Epiphone Wilshire, Kalamazoo KM-2) But by late 1967 it became clear Les Paul guitars were very popular again (Mike Bloomfield, Clapton, Beck, Harrison, etc)- and Gibson and Les struck a new deal for the 1968 re-introduction. doesnt anyone find it odd that Les would use a guitar he hated so much on all his press materials in 1961? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.