Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

2015 les paul fanclub


hoross

Recommended Posts

Well as I bought one yesterday (well, it arrived yesterday) that must include me.

 

Someone on the SongStuff forum opined that it would take about 5 years for the 2015 line to become 'collectible'.

Unless Gibson make some of the reviled features available on some future models, the 2015 Nashville line will be unique.

 

I really didnt need another guitar, but I like the 2015 LPs and in the uk the few remaining ones have been heavily discounted as the 2016 ones replace them. I got mine at almost half price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a fan of Gibson guitars period, and Les Pauls in particular.

Gibson Les Pauls are well-made, beautifully-finished, and expertly set up.

No matter what year they were made.

 

I must confess that there were features of the 2015 Les Pauls that I found unattractive, but then again, it was all a matter of aesthetics and not function or utility.

 

Some small things, in no particular order:

 

* The tan-colored plastic used on many models. The tan bezels around the pickups. The tan disc behind the pickup selector switch. Etc.

Not a fan. Unattractive to me, for some reason.

But then again, color-coordination and color combinations matter to me more so than they do to most people.

It's a feng shui thing, and I'm sure it sounds very petty and picky to some guys and gals, but it is what it is.

I would never buy a car with a black finish and lavender mirrors either.

 

* That auto-tuning box behind the head-stock.

Don't care for the weight, don't care for how clumsy it looks.

It probably works great, don't get me wrong, but again, this is just personal preference.

I also don't care for live performers who leave their Snark tuners or their capos on the headstock during the gig.

It's visually distracting.

(But a smoldering cigarette stuck in the headstock strings near the tuners, that's a-okay in my book, go figure. And I don't even smoke.)

 

* The LP 100 signature logo on the headstock.

I may get hate-mail, but BOY is that wrong somehow.

And I LOVE Les Paul the man, the inventor, the player, and the legend.

But that cartoonish signature just isn't pretty to me.

 

merciful-evans, you did it just right.

Getting a new LP for half price is a great deal, and you got a great guitar.

 

hoross, you are probably right.

The 2015 Les Pauls will likely be collector's items some day, and they will definitely appreciate.

Remember that the 'CBS-Era' Fenders were widely slagged as somehow inferior.

As were the AMF-era Harley Davidson motorcycles.

 

But all of them are worth pretty pennies today!

 

[drool]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to wonder why the world guitar makers were still mainly adhering to 70 year old designs. It is of course us that's responsible for that.

The negative reaction the 2015 innovations from Gibson, pretty much confirms it I think.

 

The odd thing is that many of the people complaining about the wider necks have other guitars that have got wider necks. So its not about them disliking wider necks at all. Its about them not liking wider necks on Gibsons. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Love my 15 studio i love my 14 studio. i do like the wider neck. I liked the G force in the end i took it off and installed regualar tuners as it proved to be unreliable the concept is good i am awaiting to see if they offer the wider neck and zero fret on the 2016 models as a option those two i would take if not i will buy a 15 traditional and remove the g force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Farnsbarns

No i do love the 2014 line up,the 2008 line up the 1998 line up all kickass models i dont like the 2016 line up cause it repeats itself while the 2015 was very innovating .

 

Innovating Innovative? I don't get it. What was new? Not the first brass nut, not the first adjustable nut, not the first robotic tunjng system and not the first wide neck. Is the signature script and hologram you find innovative?

 

I'm not knocking the 15s. I wouldn't buy a guitar with a wide neck but the same string spacing but if that's what the mass market wants that how Gibson Should respond.

 

What is it about the 16 line that you don't like? Seems to me they've just given people a choice of new or old spec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Innovating Innovative? I don't get it. What was new? Not the first brass nut, not the first adjustable nut, not the first robotic tunjng system and not the first wide neck. Is the signature script and hologram you find innovative?

 

I'm not knocking the 15s. I wouldn't buy a guitar with a wide neck but the same string spacing but if that's what the mass market wants that how Gibson Should respond.

 

What is it about the 16 line that you don't like? Seems to me they've just given people a choice of new or old spec.

 

Other than mini-tune, I think these things were were firsts for Gibson (I wasnt aware of a zero-fret/adjustable nut prior to this though).

 

As for the wider neck, evidently it isn't what the mass market wants because not enough guitars were sold. It certainly isn't what the Gibson faithful want, because they clearly consider that perfection was reached some 70 odd years ago. This is why Gibson are reluctant to change. Their customers dislike it. The poor sales of the 2015 models supports this view.

 

In fairness to Jim DeCola, he anticipated a reluctance to embrace the changes, but hoped that they would be embraced 'in time'. He cited the example of Gibson's intention of withdrawing the Les Paul from the product range in 1961. They were just not selling. That doesnt mean to say that they were no good, and it doesnt mean the wider neck, 0fret/nut and G-Force are no good now either.

 

Gibson certainly didn't get all their changes right. but IMO the ideas were good.

 

If the Les Paul really was perfect in its earlier incarnations, today's buyers might have a point, but it never was. Nor is it perfect now. Nothing ever improves without change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Farnsbarns

Other than mini-tune, I think these things were were firsts for Gibson (I wasnt aware of a zero-fret/adjustable nut prior to this though).

 

As for the wider neck, evidently it isn't what the mass market wants because not enough guitars were sold. It certainly isn't what the Gibson faithful want, because they clearly consider that perfection was reached some 70 odd years ago. This is why Gibson are reluctant to change. Their customers dislike it. The poor sales of the 2015 models supports this view.

 

In fairness to Jim DeCola, he anticipated a reluctance to embrace the changes, but hoped that they would be embraced 'in time'. He cited the example of Gibson's intention of withdrawing the Les Paul from the product range in 1961. They were just not selling. That doesnt mean to say that they were no good, and it doesnt mean the wider neck, 0fret/nut and G-Force are no good now either.

 

Gibson certainly didn't get all their changes right. but IMO the ideas were good.

 

If the Les Paul really was perfect in its earlier incarnations, today's buyers might have a point, but it never was. Nor is it perfect now. Nothing ever improves without change.

 

I agree that it looks as if the wider neck guitars didn't sell but I think the mistake Gibson made was to change a lot of things all at once. Now they don't really know what it was that put people off. The script and the hologram seem to be universaly disliked more than anything and they were only ever going to be on the 2015 line. Why did Gibson add to that risk by changing a load of other things the same year? I think it would be smarter to introduce one of these changes, each year, and perhaps offer guitars with and without that years innovation. Slower progress but at least you can see how your market reacts to each of them as you go. I got my nephew a cheap ibanez shredders guitar with a wide neck with more 'normal' string spacing and it didn't really bother me to play it, I certainly didn't dislike it but given a choice I would get a normal necked guitar and the nearly new, used market is huge, Gibson therefore found themselves competing with the used market for thir own product, something we see in the car industry from time to time. Businesses try to avoid it.

 

Zero frets and adjustable nuts have been around for years although I think this is the first zero fret nut. That doesn't really make sense to me, the point of a zero fret, surely, is that it's a fret, sounds like a fret and is at the hight of the other frets. If it's still different to the other frets (height) what's the point, just have an adjustable brass nut, then grooves won't wear into it. The principle of an adjustable nut is sound, I just don't think gibson did a good job of it. Others will clearly disagree.

 

Rarely does something improve by change for the sake of change. Solving problems that do exist is much better then reinventing the wheel chasing solutions to problems that don't exist. Sure, some people like the wider neck. Great, introduce it, tap that market if you gain from it and any affect in the rest of the market doeant cause a nett loss.

 

Zero frets do solve a problem, brass nuts do to some people, and adjustable nuts seem to turn people on and i can see why although my normal plastic nuts seem to work for me. I don't think Zero fret adjustable brass nuts in one piece do actually help anyone. I think the adjustability is at loggerheads with it's zero frettiness and not being a solid nut seems to cause a wear issue that didn't exist before but has been a side effect of the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picked up a new 2015 LP Special Double Cut on close-out at GC the other day for $599.99.

 

Wouldn't have bought one if they hadn't been on clearance, but - - Having said that, I really do like this one a lot!

 

 

IMG_2053%20copy_zps4unzyusg.jpg

 

 

 

I like that sunburst. It looks different to the ones I've seen here, which seem oversprayed at the upper bout, making them dark looking.

 

I certainly prefer the look of yours. The DC special is a straight ahead rock machine, and its minimalism is its charm. I have always loved the DC shape too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that it looks as if the wider neck guitars didn't sell but I think the mistake Gibson made was to change a lot of things all at once. Now they don't really know what it was that put people off. The script and the hologram seem to be universaly disliked more than anything and they were only ever going to be on the 2015 line. Why did Gibson add to that risk by changing a load of other things the same year? I think it would be smarter to introduce one of these changes, each year, and perhaps offer guitars with and without that years innovation. Slower progress but at least you can see how your market reacts to each of them as you go. I got my nephew a cheap ibanez shredders guitar with a wide neck with more 'normal' string spacing and it didn't really bother me to play it, I certainly didn't dislike it but given a choice I would get a normal necked guitar and the nearly new, used market is huge, Gibson therefore found themselves competing with the used market for thir own product, something we see in the car industry from time to time. Businesses try to avoid it.

 

About the number of changes and almost universal implementation of them, you are right of course. The main omission was choice. Only the Memphis guitars were spared.

 

I realise that most Gibson lovers care about the detail, and the signature and hologram are just such details. I don’t care for it myself, but it doesn’t bother me. If they’d knock another £100 off the price, I would’ve bought a pink one.

 

The crux of the changes (for me) is the wide neck, because that can’t be altered. I avoided Gibson guitars for 40 years because of their narrow necks. Even 20 years back I could not adjust to them at all. Now I have learned to play them. What changed? I don’t know, but given the choice I will go with the wider option.

 

Zero frets and adjustable nuts have been around for years although I think this is the first zero fret nut. That doesn't really make sense to me, the point of a zero fret, surely, is that it's a fret, sounds like a fret and is at the hight of the other frets. If it's still different to the other frets (height) what's the point, just have an adjustable brass nut, then grooves won't wear into it. The principle of an adjustable nut is sound, I just don't think gibson did a good job of it. Others will clearly disagree.

 

 

It’s usual to have a zero fret higher than the other frets to avoid fret buzz. I love the idea of an adjustable nut. They didn’t make good job of it. I wore ruts into the zero fret after 6 hours of playing!

 

On that point, while writing this I have just received an e-mail from Gibson EU which I paste here...

 

We can indeed send you an improved zero nut fret, but then I would like to receive the following information please:

 

# picture of the worn nut slots

# a copy of the proof of purchase

# your address and telephone number (in case TNT cannot deliver the package)

 

(name removed by ME)

Gibson Europe Customer Service

00800-4GIBSON1

00800-44427661

 

Now I can & will do these things but my purchase (& warranty) is confirmed by Gibson already. So asking me to provide the proof of purchase at this point suggests to me like this person is a little p***ed off.

 

The request for a photo likewise. To photograph a 0.0010" rut is a job for a good macro lens. I dont have one but I do have a full frame camera fortunately so I can crop down a lot.

 

So why not inconvenience the customer a little more and see how he likes it?

 

While I am at it why not show everybody here & now

 

http://s1382.photobucket.com/user/unwise1/media/DSC02526%20for%20gibson_zpsx1auevsk.jpg.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had been calling the shots for the 2015 Gibson USA line I would have simply introduced a new series called the M Line with the newer, more modern specs. It would have been 3 SGs. A Special, a Standard and a Custom. Then 3 Les Pauls. A Les Paul Less Plus, a Standard and a Studio all with the wide neck, G Force tuners, no nib frets, thicker fretboard, brass Zero Nut and gold case. I would also use standardized PCB controls and plug and play pickups. Since the Zero Nut is removable with just a few screws holding it in I would offer it in different string spacings. Then I would set aside a chunk of the Gibson On Line store to cater to this new line of guitars and the options available. Tuners, pickups, control systems, pickguards, nuts, bridges, nobs all 100% certified by Gibson USA to fit your guitar will instructions and maybe even short videos showing how to install the parts. Guitar geeks like to tinker. Americans like to customize. Sell them that ability regardless of skill level.

 

 

 

 

People have been disappointed with the lack of choice. That's all. But they have been SOOO disappointed with the lack of choice that they have made up all sorts of stupid reasons to not like the 2015 line like insisting that things that work well actually don't work at all. Give them the choice back and they will still complain all day and swear they will never buy another Gibson again... But they don't mean it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ not the first adjustable nut,

 

 

 

 

 

Zero frets and adjustable nuts have been around for years although I think this is the first zero fret nut.

Rarely does something improve by change for the sake of change.

 

Zero frets do solve a problem, brass nuts do to some people, and adjustable nuts seem to turn people on and i can see why although my normal plastic nuts seem to work for me.

I have never seen before an adjustable nut before these. Where else could I get one?

 

I think adjustable nuts DO solve a problem, and mostly one we maybe didn't know we had, because we guitar types tend to take things for granted. And I think most guitarist aren't really all that hip to what a difference string height at the nut can make when it comes to how a guitar plays and intonates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never seen before an adjustable nut before these. Where else could I get one?

 

I think adjustable nuts DO solve a problem, and mostly one we maybe didn't know we had, because we guitar types tend to take things for granted. And I think most guitarist aren't really all that hip to what a difference string height at the nut can make when it comes to how a guitar plays and intonates.

 

Bass players have been using them for at least 20 years. Yes that solve a problem.

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

04172.jpg

 

199354.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Farnsbarns

About the number of changes and almost universal implementation of them, you are right of course. The main omission was choice. Only the Memphis guitars were spared.

 

I realise that most Gibson lovers care about the detail, and the signature and hologram are just such details. I don’t care for it myself, but it doesn’t bother me. If they’d knock another £100 off the price, I would’ve bought a pink one.

 

The crux of the changes (for me) is the wide neck, because that can’t be altered. I avoided Gibson guitars for 40 years because of their narrow necks. Even 20 years back I could not adjust to them at all. Now I have learned to play them. What changed? I don’t know, but given the choice I will go with the wider option.

 

 

 

It’s usual to have a zero fret higher than the other frets to avoid fret buzz. I love the idea of an adjustable nut. They didn’t make good job of it. I wore ruts into the zero fret after 6 hours of playing!

 

On that point, while writing this I have just received an e-mail from Gibson EU which I paste here...

 

 

 

Now I can & will do these things but my purchase (& warranty) is confirmed by Gibson already. So asking me to provide the proof of purchase at this point suggests to me like this person is a little p***ed off.

 

The request for a photo likewise. To photograph a 0.0010" rut is a job for a good macro lens. I dont have one but I do have a full frame camera fortunately so I can crop down a lot.

 

So why not inconvenience the customer a little more and see how he likes it?

 

While I am at it why not show everybody here & now

 

http://s1382.photobucket.com/user/unwise1/media/DSC02526%20for%20gibson_zpsx1auevsk.jpg.html

 

I'm not sure I agree that zero frets are usually higher to avoid buzz. I don't get buzz when fretting the 1st, 2nd, third, why would a zero fret buzz at the same hight?

 

I wonder if the email asking for all the things they've already confirmed with you was from someone with initials SV?

 

If I had been calling the shots for the 2015 Gibson USA line I would have simply introduced a new series called the M Line with the newer, more modern specs. It would have been 3 SGs. A Special, a Standard and a Custom. Then 3 Les Pauls. A Les Paul Less Plus, a Standard and a Studio all with the wide neck, G Force tuners, no nib frets, thicker fretboard, brass Zero Nut and gold case. I would also use standardized PCB controls and plug and play pickups. Since the Zero Nut is removable with just a few screws holding it in I would offer it in different string spacings. Then I would set aside a chunk of the Gibson On Line store to cater to this new line of guitars and the options available. Tuners, pickups, control systems, pickguards, nuts, bridges, nobs all 100% certified by Gibson USA to fit your guitar will instructions and maybe even short videos showing how to install the parts. Guitar geeks like to tinker. Americans like to customize. Sell them that ability regardless of skill level.

 

 

 

 

People have been disappointed with the lack of choice. That's all. But they have been SOOO disappointed with the lack of choice that they have made up all sorts of stupid reasons to not like the 2015 line like insisting that things that work well actually don't work at all. Give them the choice back and they will still complain all day and swear they will never buy another Gibson again... But they don't mean it.

 

Hmmm, you seem to be saying you know what everyone else thinks and you know their real opinions. An interesting position. Personally I don't want a guitar with a wider neck and the same string spacing. I don't want to get used to it. I don't want to change 25 years worth of muscle memory. I certainly can't see past the 100th script thing. The hologram I can live with although I don't like it. The nut seems like a good idea on the face of it but there clearly is an issue with how they wear and for that reason I don't like the idea. That said, if I really wanted a guitar that had one I could easily replace it but there are a lot of people who wouldn't. Now tell me, which bits of that have I made up in my subconscious because really, it's the lack of choice that's putting me off.

 

Really we all have the same choice we've ever had when it comes to any given model year. Buy it or don't. I never had a choice of neck width when I bought any previous guitar, or neck width, or the nut, or the headstock design. I just bought what I liked and didn't buy what I didn't. I think the same goes for 2015 gibson customers. The difference being that Gibson offered no choices, like everyone else, but also, what they did offer was not to the liking of the majority. You're not the majority in this case, and good for you, I don't think that warrants the position that you know etter and everyone else is lying to themselves.

 

I must add that there was no way I was going to buy a 2015 Gibson long before anyone knew about the specs. I'm not looking for a guitar at the moment and could not afford a new Gibson right now if I had been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding "choice":

 

During the whole of 2015, I don't recall the 2015 models being the only Gibson's in the store. There were always plenty of 2014's (and more than that), the Memphis line, etc.

 

While for a period they may have only MADE the 2015 USA models, there is/was always plenty of stock that have already been made. As far as I know, Gibson is well aware of this.

 

As it is now, 2015 ain't even over, and from what I have seen, only account for half of the stock in the GC's around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Hmmm, you seem to be saying you know what everyone else thinks and you know their real opinions. An interesting position."

 

No, that's not what I've said at all.

 

"Personally I don't want a guitar with a wider neck and the same string spacing. I don't want to get used to it. I don't want to change 25 years worth of muscle memory."

 

And good for you. But I'm sure you have seen just as I have the new 2015 neck described at "Totally impossible to play!!" even though there is a large market out there for wider, flatter necks being gobbled up by Ibanez and others.

 

"I certainly can't see past the 100th script thing. The hologram I can live with although I don't like it."

 

Those are aesthetic issues that a player will either like or not like.

 

 

"The nut seems like a good idea on the face of it but there clearly is an issue with how they wear and for that reason I don't like the idea. That said, if I really wanted a guitar that had one I could easily replace it but there are a lot of people who wouldn't."

 

While it seems there are some issues with the nut I have yet to experience one with mine. It's a great design that could be made better with a better choice of "fret" material of a good hard chrome plating.

 

"Now tell me, which bits of that have I made up in my subconscious because really, it's the lack of choice that's putting me off."

 

You seem to be taking my comment very personally. Are you truly unaware of the ludacris and hysterical mania that surrounds the 2015 Gibson USA line? Claims that... "The necks are unplayable! The case is junk! The G Force doesn't work! The 24 fret SGs have weak neck joints! The finish is crap! The nut ruins the tone! The thicker fingerboard ruins the toooone! The strap buttons are ugly! The Frets are too low! The PCB robs tooooone! The pickups are too harsh! There's no Tooooone!"

 

Just yesterday I had some nitwit post a massive rant against the 2015 line on one of my Min Etune YouTube videos and it was clear that he didn't own one or understand much about them at all and he was just parroting comments he had read on the internet.

 

"Really we all have the same choice we've ever had when it comes to any given model year."

 

I agree completely.

 

 

"The difference being that Gibson offered no choices, like everyone else, but also, what they did offer was not to the liking of the majority."

 

Again I agree. I said so in my first comments on the 2015 line on my blog about a year ago that the lack of choice would be a problem. The new wide neck guitars should have been offered alongside the more traditional line and let people pick.

 

 

"You're not the majority in this case, and good for you, I don't think that warrants the position that you know etter and everyone else is lying to themselves."

 

I hope you better understand now what I mean. This isn't about you personally but when people try to tell me that the MinEtune or GForce systems are "so inaccurate that they are unusable" when they don't own one and I own three then yes, I DO know better and they are lying to themselves.

 

 

"I must add that there was no way I was going to buy a 2015 Gibson long before anyone knew about the specs. I'm not looking for a guitar at the moment and could not afford a new Gibson right now if I had been."

 

I wasn't looking for one either. Infact I've been selling stuff off for a while now but when I heard about the wider neck I had to see if it would play as well in my hands as my 89 Gibson Country Gentleman which also has a wider neck. The SG special ended up being the first new Gibson I've bought since 1991.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding "choice":

 

During the whole of 2015, I don't recall the 2015 models being the only Gibson's in the store. There were always plenty of 2014's (and more than that), the Memphis line, etc.

 

While for a period they may have only MADE the 2015 USA models, there is/was always plenty of stock that have already been made. As far as I know, Gibson is well aware of this.

 

As it is now, 2015 ain't even over, and from what I have seen, only account for half of the stock in the GC's around here.

 

The Gibson warehouse here in Nashville has guitars going back years. It's not impossible to get a brand new 2012 or 2013 Les Paul in the box shipped straight to your store. That's why they make them in limited runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wonder if the email asking for all the things they've already confirmed with you was from someone with initials SV?

 

 

 

Yes it certainly was. Fine marksmanship! Enjoy that cigar.

 

Seeing Searcy's pics of bass adjustable nut. I see your point about the zero fret being redundant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that sunburst. It looks different to the ones I've seen here, which seem oversprayed at the upper bout, making them dark looking.

 

I certainly prefer the look of yours. The DC special is a straight ahead rock machine, and its minimalism is its charm. I have always loved the DC shape too.

 

 

Thanks, I do love the look of this one as well..

 

And I agree with you on the DC Specials being a straight ahead rock machine! The P90's in this one really scream... [thumbup]

 

 

IMG_2062%20copy_zps0q6qppkh.jpg

 

IMG_2039%20copy_zpsz0e8pdgb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really is good to see some sensible comments about the 2015 after the hysterical rants I have read on so many sites. Even the buyers have been castigated and their intelligence brought into question. Come on now guitar players, it is guitars we are talking about and there is no need to be so vitriolic. I bought a Les Paul Standard earlier in the year partly because I liked the wide neck and the overall feel of the instrument. It sounds and plays great and recently I went to a guitar jam weekend where an internationally renowned teacher did a master class with it and said how much he liked it. Took him a while to get used to the wide neck but he was soon whizzing up and down the fret board. I have had a problem with a tuner, which was replaced under warranty by the shop and I also wrote to Tronical the people who make them. They were very helpful and made some useful suggestions. The resonance of the guitar played acoustically is amazing. When I strum a big chord on the "cowboy" end you can feel the vibrations through your body - much more than my other guitars. The pick ups sound really crisp and not too hot. I have had no problems, so far, with the nut and the robot tuners are so easy to use rather than having a tuner on a pedal board (sometimes in the dark). I haven't noticed the signature or the hologram effecting the tone! The balance is superb. My 2001 Standard is a bit bottom heavy when played on the lap but the 2015 feels very comfortable.

 

When I think of all the people who buy relic'd guitars and swap out perfectly good pick ups or make other changes it makes me wonder why there was such a reaction to this year's version. It is all a matter of taste. I agree that Gibson probably did too many changes in one year and that it would have been safer to have options but at the end of the day the guitars feel good, sound great and play well and if you like the look of them then you have a keeper. Apparently, when Ford brought out his new car people said they would have preferred a faster horse. Gibson have given us humbuckers and I expect players complained about them too.

 

Hope my picture shows up.

 

Good to read all your comments - happy strumming.post-62885-031234200 1446029950_thumb.jpg

 

PS Would be nice to know how to upload a slightly bigger picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...