Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

I love the smell of roasted Gibson in the mornings


Rabs

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is slightly annoying.. They are all so nice... That tobacco 59 is totally my type of thing....

 

YET... YET.. id still never pay that much...

 

Good luck to anyone who can afford one I say..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would venture to guess that the roasted aroma is not the woods of the guitars, but the marijuana baked into the brownies or other baked goods that the geniuses who came up with this "bright idea" were consuming at the time. [confused]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is slightly annoying.. They are all so nice... That tobacco 59 is totally my type of thing....

YET... YET.. id still never pay that much...

Good luck to anyone who can afford one I say..

I do like the colour of the faded tobacco-'burst very much (but not the pinstripiness of that particular top).

The single-p'up LP fits my definition of 'Useless'; a guitar with only a bridge p'up(*) and no tone knob into the bargain? Not the guitar for me.

And in my soft-padded little world a Special should only ever have P-90s. 'Buckers are plain wrong. Sorry.

 

But the interesting bit is the line of text you quoted............eusa_think.gif............

 

I'd actually seen (on the 'net) a few guitars from that 'Roasted' series several months back and at the time there was a long-ish spiel which explained how the roasting process...blah...moisture...blah...wood...blah...VINTAGE...blah-de-bloody-blah...

Perhaps it does make a difference; I don't know. From what little I remember about the prevailing hard-sell Gibson measured the moisture content of original guitars and compared their readings to those subsequently taken from both un-roasted and roasted body-blanks(?) and the levels from the roasted ones did approximate those from the older instruments. Hey Ho.

 

If I can be bothered I'll try to find the guff I read back then to check that my recollections are reasonably accurate!

 

The prices? Well; what do we expect.

All I'll say on the matter is that for the price of the '50s Special you could probably buy an original - and then you really would have "tone that's authentically vintage".

 

Pip.

 

(*) The Esquire is an exception to this rule for obvious reasons......

 

EDIT : I haven't found the written stuff about the Roasted series but here's someone from Music Zoo talking a little about them. It is a very nice looking guitar! Skip to 1:50 if you don't want to listen to a pretty half-assed (but quite nicely played) version of La Grange;

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSKTR28_cAg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is slightly annoying.. They are all so nice... That tobacco 59 is totally my type of thing....

 

YET... YET.. id still never pay that much...

 

Good luck to anyone who can afford one I say..

 

same here. I think thats beautiful. but I tell you , I would LOVE to have a Rabswood guitar. a doublecut ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

same here. I think thats beautiful. but I tell you , I would LOVE to have a Rabswood guitar. a doublecut ...

 

The tobacco one is very pretty and would fit in nicely with my collection but far too pricey for me at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like the colour of the faded tobacco-'burst very much (but not the pinstripiness of that particular top).

The single-p'up LP fits my definition of 'Useless'; a guitar with only a bridge p'up and no tone knob into the bargain? Not the guitar for me.

And in my soft-padded little world a Special should only ever have P-90s. 'Buckers are plain wrong. Sorry.

 

But the interesting bit is the line of text you quoted............eusa_think.gif............

 

I'd actually seen (on the 'net) a few guitars from that 'Roasted' series several months back and at the time there was a long-ish spiel which explained how the roasting process...blah...moisture...blah...wood...blah...VINTAGE...blah-de-bloody-blah...

Perhaps it does make a difference; I don't know. From what little I remember about the prevailing hard-sell Gibson measured the moisture content of original guitars and compared their readings to those subsequently taken from both un-roasted and roasted body-blanks(?) and the levels from the roasted ones did approximate those from the older instruments. Hey Ho.

 

Hmmmm, well I guess technically there could be something in it..

 

But as with most things when talking about electric guitars I think we are talking tiny detail. I think theres a big chance if someone cant get a good tone from a Standard LP, then spending an extra how ever many thousands of dollars or pounds on one of these probably wont make much difference.

 

Because as we have talked about.. Those guitars that recorded all that amazing music we love wernt that old at the time of recording. Now, was the wood they used to make the original 59s really old already and dried.. I donno.. This is the problem, there arnt many real facts about all of this, this is why people argue over it all the time, cos no one really knows or has any real proof.

 

Some people don't even think the wood makes a difference on an electric guitar at all and will argue about that all day long.

 

What I do know is that my "normal" priced Gibsons sound great and I love them.. And they were made of normal woods, nothing fancy or magical?? Achieving "authentic tone" and the like are just buzz words to make people feel better about spending so much cash on something that in reality isn't worth that much. (well IMO of course)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prices seem fine to me. I would be interested in seeing if you could notice any difference. Seems torrified style of tops are more common with guitars these days. Guess it's the new thing...

The pricing structure appears to be a bit strange.

A '58 Historic flame-top Standard can be had for just under $6k but a '59 - essentially the same instrument - costs almost $9k. Why the $3k difference?

A '57 style Junior (single P-90 two knob flat-top dot inlay unbound neck etc.) costs $6165.....which is $200 more than the aforementioned '58 Standard R-I. ......blink.gif.....

I agree that, in the case of the '58 R-I, whilst not cheap $6k for something this 'special' (perhaps!) isn't unduly loopy.

The '57 Junior, OTOH, costs as much if not more than the usual asking price for an actual '57. How's that pricing deemed sensible?

 

I'd like to try one out for myself but as they were/are made exclusively for The Music Zoo there's precious little chance of that happening.

I have a hard time believing Hide Glue makes a whole lotta difference but drying out the timbers to a much greater extent? Possibly.

 

In any event I finally found one of the bits of text which I had read sometime last year. It was written to accompany The Music Zoo's announcement of the range in November 2015.

Here it is in full;

 

"Go ahead; tweak the finishes to be as thin as possible, swap your pickups for the closest to the original PAF's, use the purest nickel strings you can find. Do you know what we've all been leaving out in the chase to reach the holy grain of tones? The wood. The woods used in original 1950's Gibson Les Pauls (and many other vintage guitars of that stature) were made from trees that were from old growths forests – trees that were already 100's of years old, if not more. These woods were sturdy, and had matured long enough for the excess moisture to dry away. An ingredient that was essential in the tone of the guitars that we all know and lust after. Flash forward to 2015, after years of Historic Reissues and most recently the Historic Selects – The Music Zoo and the Gibson Custom Shop have worked together to bring you the new Music Zoo Exclusive Roasted Reissue '59 Les Paul. These guitars are Historic Select Les Pauls whose wood (mahogany, maple, and rosewood) have undergone a thermal treatment process. This process takes all of the excess moisture out of the wood, giving the wood increased durability in weather changes, dimensional stability (reduced chances of swelling or shrinking), and gives the wood a beautiful brown color. On a molecular level – the roasted wood is almost identical to that of 350 year old lumber: the same lumber used in those original vintage Les Pauls. Last but not least, the process is entirely green. There are no additives, chemicals, or anything artificial that is being used in the roasting process.

 

Add in these qualities of the roasted wood to all the specs that come with the Gibson Historic Select Series, and you've got one hell of a Les Paul. The articulation and punch of these guitars have to be heard. There's a roundness that the treatment gives to the wood where the bass sits just right, the treble on both neck and bridge pickup cut but aren't shrill, and call us vain…but we love the way the brown tint of the wood comes through the burst finishes and shows off the figuring and grain even more so than usual. The weights of these guitars are also all extremely comfortable, and most are coming in around the mid 8lbs mark. The Music Zoo Exclusive Roasted Reissue '59 Les Paul – try one and see for yourself."

 

For those of us who are gluttons for punishment here's the link to the original page with accompanying pics.

FWIW and IMO the guitar in the lower two snaps is absolutely gorgeous....msp_love.gif....

 

https://www.themusic...asted-les-pauls

 

Pip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm, well I guess technically there could be something in it......

...and absolutely everything else you said in that post but I edited it for reasons of space....

 

First-off, I suspect we both have very similar thoughts on everything you mention.

 

I'll try to address your excellent points in order;

 

Yes. Technically there could be some 'basis in fact' in the roasting yarn.

I don't know for certain, of course, and it would be pretty difficult to prove empirically. Still; I will go against my usual scepticism and say I'll give the notion some credence.

 

The original '59s. Clapton's "Beano" being only 5 or 6 years old and so on. Yes. Did the age of the timber contribute much? How dry was it when it was used? How old were the trees anyhow? Did anyone really check?!?

Echoing Buzz Lightyear's marvelously impossible "To Infinity...and Beyond!" motto The Music Zoo makes mention of;

"trees that were already 100's of years old, if not more..."...msp_laugh.gif...

 

I think that the actual lumps of wood used in construction matters a fair bit but you'll know better than do I on that subject, Rabs!

 

Lastly we come to the Pixie Dust.

I won't talk yet again about my own LPs but rather LPs in general.

IMX it is very possible to find a great USA-line LP. It's much easier, though, to find an absolutely fantastic CS LP and especially so if we consider the CC range.

Why should this be the case? I don't know. But I'm not the only one here who has noticed this apparent trend.

 

Pip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and absolutely everything else you said in that post but I edited it for reasons of space....

 

First-off, I suspect we both have very similar thoughts on everything you mention.

 

I'll try to address your excellent points in order;

 

Yes. Technically there could be some 'basis in fact' in the roasting yarn.

I don't know for certain, of course, and it would be pretty difficult to prove empirically. Still; I will go against my usual scepticism and say I'll give the notion some credence.

 

The original '59s. Clapton's "Beano" being only 5 or 6 years old and so on. Yes. Did the age of the timber contribute much? How dry was it when it was used? How old were the trees anyhow? Did anyone really check?!?

Echoing Buzz Lightyear's marvelously impossible "To Infinity...and Beyond!" motto The Music Zoo makes mention of;

"trees that were already 100's of years old, if not more..."...msp_laugh.gif...

 

I think that the actual lumps of wood used in construction matters a fair bit but you'll know better than do I on that subject, Rabs!

 

Lastly we come to the Pixie Dust.

I won't talk yet again about my own LPs but rather LPs in general.

IMX it is very possible to find a great USA-line LP. It's much easier, though, to find an absolutely fantastic CS LP and especially so if we consider the CC range.

Why should this be the case? I don't know. But I'm not the only one here who has noticed this apparent trend.

 

Pip.

Yes exactly.. Saying the trees were old growth says nothing.. All trees were old growth back then before they started artificially growing them with growth hormones or what ever they use to make them grow faster these days. So the tree was 300 years old, when did it get cut down, that's the important part cos they will only start to dry once they are fully dead or cut down. So I don't like the wiffs of that.

 

And I do have to agree the CCs I tried were all really nice and I dint quite know exactly why either.. I can only assume more time was spent on them by more experienced people who just make sure every detail is perfect.. Id imagine (I have no actual idea) that in the USA line that timelines for the processes are pretty tight and they don't get as much time with each guitar so they stick to a process which gets the job done but could be slightly better? That's about all I can put it down to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[/i]I think that the actual lumps of wood used in construction matters a fair bit but you'll know better than do I on that subject, Rabs!

 

Lastly we come to the Pixie Dust.

I won't talk yet again about my own LPs but rather LPs in general.

IMX it is very possible to find a great USA-line LP. It's much easier, though, to find an absolutely fantastic CS LP and especially so if we consider the CC range.

Why should this be the case? I don't know. But I'm not the only one here who has noticed this apparent trend.

 

Pip.

Well ok.. This part of your answer...

 

I do think it does make a difference what wood is used.. BUT I think those differences can be easily compensated by using the guitar and amp controls and using pedals.. So those differences although they do exist get smaller the further you go away from being acoustic.. So once you amplify an electric guitar they get smaller because of the amps EQ, once you add any sort of gain and reverb or effects they get even smaller.

 

Yes theres the viewpoint that starting with a good rounded sound is better.. But its not an essential thing its just like a side fact if a guitar sounds good acoustically or not. And the acoustic test id say is more applicable when you are testing out the sustain... If it rings unplugged you know its going to be good plugged in.

 

Take this guitar I built.. The body is compact and thin (about 30mm), its made of solid oak with a neck through... Everything I know about what its meant to sound like is that its a heavy hard wood and so should produce a brighter response.. YET I did this vid I was playing through my Boss digital 4 track using the built in effects and the guitar as a result goes from fat sounds to thin sounds.. Does that have anything to do with the wood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I think those differences can be easily compensated by using the guitar and amp controls and using pedals....

Not IMX. Not completely.

There's that last 5% which cannot be found if it's not in the guitar to begin with.

 

Pip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The theory of drying the wood out before it is coated in 8 or more layers of finish makes some sense to me, but the increase in price doesn't. I bought a new Standard a few months ago, made from new wood, not dried out and it sounds good to me and the price was about $2500. These are suggested at $6000 to almost $9000 and I'm pretty sure they won't sound 3 to 4 times "better" than the one I bought.

 

I suppose when you have been making the same models for 60 years you have to come up with new marketing ideas to keep things fresh and try to draw in new customers. [sneaky]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...