Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums
BenderOfStrings

2019 Les Paul Tributes...Gibson, we have a problem

Recommended Posts

I'm pretty sure it's 9 hole, which is what my 2017 Tribute has in it. And, even at that, it's still 9 pounds. I agree that a "budget guitar" should be under $1000.00, even if a Gibson. I would think that since they're making the necks, fretboards and trapezoid fret markers anyway, it wouldn't be that much more of an expense. But, I guess if it sells or doesn't sell, they'll rethink things next year, or not. My Tribute is on the right and it plays every bit as well as the other three and sounds just as good. In fact, it's even louder and better sounding when not plugged into an amp than the other three.

 

The things that made my Tribute what it was in 2017 was what made me buy it. The things on the 2019 Tribute are what would make me not buy it. Not that it matters much in the larger scheme of things.

 

40337653_1789904701116639_1028117971257524224_o.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=a023fd92ba22ec116366300b2fe3e045&oe=5C1C54A0

 

Ah! Of course. More extensive weight relief would up the price.

 

Everything else in your post, I agree as usual. The minds of Flying V and Tribute players seem to think alike :)

 

Yeah, I love my 2017 Tribute too. It's excellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure it's 9 hole, which is what my 2017 Tribute has in it. And, even at that, it's still 9 pounds. I agree that a "budget guitar" should be under $1000.00, even if a Gibson. I would think that since they're making the necks, fretboards and trapezoid fret markers anyway, it wouldn't be that much more of an expense. But, I guess if it sells or doesn't sell, they'll rethink things next year, or not. My Tribute is on the right and it plays every bit as well as the other three and sounds just as good. In fact, it's even louder and better sounding when not plugged into an amp than the other three.

 

The things that made my Tribute what it was in 2017 was what made me buy it. The things on the 2019 Tribute are what would make me not buy it. Not that it matters much in the larger scheme of things.

 

40337653_1789904701116639_1028117971257524224_o.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=a023fd92ba22ec116366300b2fe3e045&oe=5C1C54A0

 

Damn, those are SEX! Thanks for posting!

 

It's funny but when I was a youngster I didn't like the look of the gold tops at all. However now I think they look killer!

 

I just think sometimes Gibson tinkers way too much with their lineup. With the 2018 Tributes, they had a winning formula! Like I said in a previous post, Gibson struck the absolute best balance between quality and affordability. All they really needed to do with the 2019 models was offer it in more finishes. It's almost as if their motto is "If it ain't broke, fix it until it is."

 

Also, this is off topic but why did Gibson decide to stop going to NAMM?

Edited by BenderOfStrings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, this is off topic but why did Gibson decide to stop going to NAMM?

 

Couldn't afford the bus tickets.

 

They do however plan to rectify the situation until next year by making millions off the 2019 Flying Umlaut model, where you get a neck and two dots for $7999.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guitars, left to right:

 

2018 Classic - No weight relief - brute at 11 pounds, sounds killer, I feel it after a few hours of playing with the band.

2017 Standard - Ultra modern weight relief - I think 8.5 pounds or something like that. Sounds killer.

2018 Traditional - No weight relief - I think it's around 9 pounds - amazing sound.

2017 Tribute - 9 hole weight relief - 9 pounds, sounds killer unplugged or plugged in.

 

I don't think weight relief is as much an issue as people claim. I haven't noticed any major differences in sound or sustain other than the pickups in the guitars. The 9 hole weight relief Tribute with P90s sounds very similar to the non-weight relieved Classic with P90s. It could be that I'm almost 53 and stood for too many years in front of Marshall/Randall stacks. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think weight relief is as much an issue as people claim.......It could be that I'm almost 53 and stood for too many years in front of Marshall/Randall stacks....

Nibs, Trolls, U2, P'G on/off and now Weight-relief? We really ARE going for the Grand Slam......laugh.gif......

 

As (probably) most of us here know by now and as been discussed pretty much ad nauseam the practice of Weight-Relief was introduced to the Les Paul range in late 1982 and guess what? NO-ONE COULD TELL THE DIFFERENCE. The 9-hole W/R guitars do not sound intrinsically different from solid-bodied instruments. As is now well known it wasn't until someone saw his LP going through an x-ray machine that the 9-hole method was even known to exist (outside of the Gibson plant / workforce). Furthermore from that date until the introduction of the 2013 Traditional EVERY USA-Line Les Paul was weight-relieved in some manner.

 

The Chambered guitars seem to be an exception to the 'They All Sound The Same' statement. The general consensus posted by those who have examples of both always seems to be that they are found to be slightly brighter and with a snappier response but with marginally less 'meat' to their tone, all else being equal, than either the solid-bodied or weight-relieved Lesters.

 

Having a preference for one style over any other is purely a matter of personal preference. Some don't like the concept of W/R; others prefer the easier-on-the-shoulder mass of the chambered guitars.

Personally I don't mind any of the styles as long as the guitar balances perfectly, sounds superb and doesn't give me a hernia. I've played a few chambered guitars which were far too light (IMO) to balance well but I put that down more to their having those nasty overweight Grover machines instead of slim-fit Klusons. Equally, though, I've also played several chambered guitars which have been fantastic. In fact one of the nicest-playing LPs I've ever tried was a bone-stock entry-level Studio Faded model.

 

Pip.

Edited by pippy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nibs, Trolls, U2, P'G on/off and now Weight-relief? We really ARE going for the Grand Slam......laugh.gif......

 

Might as well have it all! We didn't mention truss rod covers or "poker chip" yet though. Oh, wait, I just did. Oh crap.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This recent chat about W/R and Weight - and seeing Michael's quartet with their model names, dates and vital statistics had me checking up on my baby (Sonny Boy Williamson II; Arr. Mayall) more to refresh my memory than anything more important.

 

What the Hey; It's Friday and I haven't posted snaps of the herd for a while. Here they are (again) this time in weight order with their respective weights posted with them;

 

1995 '1960 Classic' - 8lb 14.5oz.

A_Lo-_Res_Honey_Chair.jpg

 

1995 1960 Re-Issue - 8lb 15oz.

A_Lo-res_Marmalade_Throne.jpg

 

1993 1959 Re-Issue - 9lb 2.5oz.

A_Lo-_Res_Jam_Chair.jpg

 

1991 '1960 Classic' - 9lb 3oz.

A_Lo-_Res_Treacle_Case.jpg

 

A variation of just four-and-a-half ounces between the lot of them.

Odd (perhaps) to see the Classics are both the heaviest and the lightest with the RI's in the middle.

Also the difference between the heavier pair - and also the ligher pair - is merely a-half-of-one-ounce in both instances.

 

Pip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A variation of just four-and-a-half ounces between the lot of them.

Odd (perhaps) to see the Classics are both the heaviest and the lightest with the RI's in the middle.

Also the difference between the heavier pair - and also the ligher pair - is merely a-half-of-one-ounce in both instances.

 

Pip.

 

Beautiful guitars. I've seen them before and love seeing them again. Thanks for sharing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Chambered guitars seem to be an exception to the 'They All Sound The Same' statement. The general consensus posted by those who have examples of both always seems to be that they are found to be slightly brighter and with a snappier response but with marginally less 'meat' to their tone, all else being equal, than either the solid-bodied or weight-relieved Lesters.

 

 

Pip.

Yes... I have two chambered guitars.. One is the 2010 Standard which comes it at just over 9lbs and to me is THE perfect weight it still feels substantial but not heavy. The 60s tribute comes in at more like 7.4lbs but then I do think they are a bit thinner than a Standard..

 

Both however sound amazing and I actually like the light weight of the tribute.. I think the dark p90s on the tribute help the sound though, I have a feeling if it had hummers it would be overly bright.

 

I made this vid a while back as I was interested to see if I could hear much difference between the guitars.. I did this recording straight in to my digital 4 track here too so theres no amp, just all guitar.

 

To my ears the most noticeable difference is the bridge pickup on the Classic that's clearly louder than the others (which isn't really surprising with the ceramic pickups). Apart from that they mostly just sound like Gibsons :D

Edited by Rabs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beautiful guitars. I've seen them before and love seeing them again. Thanks for sharing!

Thanks for the kind words and the forbearance in my indulgence for posting the same hoary old snaps yet again.

It was looking closely at your own clutch of Lesters and their individual specs which really drew me in to this post.

 

I particularly love your Gold Tops.

I've long hankered after a '56 style LP mainly because I don't have a P-90 guitar and much as I love the original - and unplayable - '52 GTs the '56 model had the most practical "user" specs. It was also (not that it matters to many) the version played by Danny Kirwan who must be one of my absolute favourite guitarists of all-time. Sublime phrasing. Your 2018 Classic is a Damn-Near-Perfect recreation and an affordable option to an R6 but 11lbs is, quite frankly, unattractive. Your 2017 Tribute would also be Damn-Near-Perfect as an alternative to a playable 1952 Re-Issue if the post-holes for the bridge and stop-tail could be disguised...

 

However I must emphasise that IMO neither of your instruments are lacking in any regard whatsoever and I heartily congratulate you on your GT pair. Gorgeous creatures both.

 

msp_thumbup.gif

 

Yes... I have two chambered guitars.. One is the 2010 Standard which comes it at just over 9lbs and to me is THE perfect weight it still feels substantial but not heavy. The 60s tribute comes in at more like 7.4lbs but then I do think they are a bit thinner than a Standard......Both however sound amazing and I actually like the light weight of the tribute.. I think the dark p90s on the tribute help the sound though, I have a feeling if it had hummers it would be overly bright.

I made this vid a while back as I was interested to see if I could hear much difference between the guitars.. I did this recording straight in to my digital 4 track here too so theres no amp, just all guitar.

To my ears the most noticeable difference is the bridge pickup on the Classic that's clearly louder than the others (which isn't really surprising with the ceramic pickups). Apart from that they mostly just sound like Gibsons :D

I hadn't seen that comparison set before, Rabs, and found it very interesting indeed.

 

I've only listened to the clip on my crappy PC's speakers but my initial impressions were firstly how much more focused / less wide ranging was the sound of the 2010 Standard compared with the other guitars; secondly how different the Classic sounded in comparison to the rest.

I really MUST listen to them all several times through 'phones and take notes as I go along.

Thanks for posting!

 

msp_thumbup.gif

 

Pip.

Edited by pippy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I hadn't seen that comparison set before, Rabs, and found it very interesting indeed.

 

I've only listened to the clip on my crappy PC's speakers but my initial impressions were firstly how much more focused / less wide ranging was the sound of the 2010 Standard compared with the other guitars; secondly how different the Classic sounded in comparison to the rest.

I really MUST listen to them all several times through 'phones and take notes as I go along.

Thanks for posting!

 

msp_thumbup.gif

 

Pip.

Yeah it is interesting.. And im not saying in any way by my lackadaisical statements that there are no differences between them, rather that to me while I do hear some differences, they all sound like what I think a Les Paul should sound like :)

 

Mostly I think its down to the pickups.. They are all stock so two different sets of P90s, the ceramic twins and the 2010 Standard has Burstbucker Pros which have alnico V magnets in them.. And since we are at it has what they call an Enlarged Neck Tenon ( http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/2008-Les-Paul-Standard/Features.aspx ).. Its why I love them all, they each bring something just slightly different yet are all Les Paul enough to keep me happy.

 

Ohh and by the way, if anyone notices my inconsistency of calling my Standard a 2008 or 2010.. Theres a good reason for that.. If you remember (and you probably will) a 2010 Standard was one of their robot guitars... What I actually have is a 2008 Standard spec'd guitar made in 2010.. What I was told was that these had been on a back order or something and Gibson were still making them in 2010 which I know as I have one :) So when I made that video I was calling it a 2008.. Now to avoid confusion in my head of when it was made I call it a 2010 Standard. So there :)

 

(edit)

I was just reading about what the enlarged neck tenon is. Interesting

 

New Enlarged Neck Tenon

The 2008 Les Paul Standard sports a revolutionary enlarged neck tenon designed by Gibson’s team of pioneering engineers. The expanded neck tenon features an innovative interlocking joint that allows the neck to be dropped into the body from the guitar’s top side, as opposed to sliding the neck in from the rim. When the glue is added, a solid unyielding bond is created that maximizes the wood to wood contact between the neck and the body, offering increased stability and superb transfer of vibration for enhanced tone, improved sustain, and superior resonance. It is also the largest neck tenon in the history of the Les Paul. :o

 

Which would look something like this

sqLcLBi.jpg

Edited by Rabs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the kind words and the forbearance in my indulgence for posting the same hoary old snaps yet again.

It was looking closely at your own clutch of Lesters and their individual specs which really drew me in to this post.

 

I particularly love your Gold Tops.

I've long hankered after a '56 style LP mainly because I don't have a P-90 guitar and much as I love the original - and unplayable - '52 GTs the '56 model had the most practical "user" specs. It was also (not that it matters to many) the version played by Danny Kirwan who must be one of my absolute favourite guitarists of all-time. Sublime phrasing. Your 2018 Classic is a Damn-Near-Perfect recreation and an affordable option to an R6 but 11lbs is, quite frankly, unattractive. Your 2017 Tribute would also be Damn-Near-Perfect as an alternative to a playable 1952 Re-Issue if the post-holes for the bridge and stop-tail could be disguised...

 

However I must emphasise that IMO neither of your instruments are lacking in any regard whatsoever and I heartily congratulate you on your GT pair. Gorgeous creatures both.

 

msp_thumbup.gif

Pip.

 

Thank you for the compliments as well. The 2018 Classic has no weight relief but I've played some that weren't nearly as heavy. I think a lot of them are between 9 and 10 pounds. I agree about the 1956 Les Pauls. I wanted one for a while and got the Tribute first and it turned out to be a fantastic guitar. The Classic is almost like an R6 and I just had to have it for its sound and feel. And, the discount I got for that guitar from Sweetwater made it very desirable as well. I considered putting period correct volume/tone knobs, pointers, truss rod cover and tuners on it. It's a really nice sounding guitar with the band and really cuts through. The clean sound is fantastic out of those P90's. It'll definitely cause some shoulder ache after a few hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I sure hope you're not a Gibson representative. Because if Gibson thinks an 1,100.00 guitar is a "budget" guitar then they are more out of touch than I realized. NO guitar that costs north of a grand should be called a budget guitar...ever!

 

 

 

 

Considering that USA line production tops out at $3800 and Memphis at $4500 (per our hosts pages) not to even mention custom shop, where does the $1100 guitar fall? Top of the line or bottom? Looks like $1100 is a budget (near the bottom of the line) GIBSON and as such cant have all the bells and whistles. You dont have to like it, but it is what it is, want a sub $1000 guitar shaped like an LP with traps on the fingerboard, there are other options. Its all a matter of perspective, I once knew a guy who had a Jeep Grande Cherokee to drive around his dog as he didnt want it in his Mercedes or Rolls. The Jeep was his budget vehicle, didn't matter it was worth more than the truck I was driving at the time.

 

that's my 2 cents

 

Johnny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guitar was a real value piece for the last two generations. And I also dont understand why they did it. These guys are in trouble obviously and things like this are one reason why [flapper]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2018 at 12:37 PM, BenderOfStrings said:

For the last few years I have loved the Tribute Les Pauls. Of all the Gibson Les Paul models, I thought the Tribute line was the "perfect storm" of quality, beauty, and affordability. However I have to say the 2019 model is disappointing to say the least.

 

First I'll start with the good. I'm very pleased that Gibson has expanded the number of finishes from two to four which are Cherry, Iced Tea, Honey, and Tobacco (though I find it odd that Gibson's own website only shows Tobacco and Iced Tea as options, while the other two are available on every retailer's website). The finishes are very nice. So kudos to Gibson for offering more variety. Also, Gibson switched from the metallic top hat knobs to the standard gold knobs. I think this was the right choice as well, as I find they are more eye-pleasing. I'm also glad you stuck with the 490R/498T pickup combination. I'm a huge fan of that tone.

 

Now for the bad. For starters, why, oh why, oh why Gibson did you switch from the traditional trapezoid inlay to that horrendous dot inlay??? Come on Gibson! I'm sorry but, if it says Gibson Les Paul, it should have trapezoid inlay! The dot inlay looks so wrong on this model! Save that for your LPJr's! But for a traditional Les Paul, it HAS to have the trapezoids! That is an immediate deal-breaker for me! Also, why did you go back to weight-relieving it?? My very favorite thing about going from the 2017 model to the 2018 model was that it wasn't weight-relieved. Again, WHY did you do this?? And finally, you removed the pickup covers, which ruins the whole aesthetic of the guitar IMO. Of course, covers can be added after the fact, so this isn't a huge deal. However the other things cannot be fixed. You INCREASED the price of this model and you DECREASED it's value IMO. This was a misstep that I hope you will consider rectifying for the 2020 models.

It looks like your complain made Gibson to do changes and they released a new Tribute model with trapezoid inlays and pickup covers 🙂

Edited by Chinasky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always viewed the 2019 Studio Tribute as an evolution of the Faded rather than the Tribute. The ultra modern weight relief, the dot inlays, the uncovered pickups and the maple necks were traits of the 2017 and 2018 Faded. The Modern Collection Tribute I see it as a mesh between the 2017-18 Tribute and faded. The maple neck and weight relief akin to the Faded, and the covered pickups, finish style and trapezoid inlays a nod to the 2017-18 Tribute. 
 

edit: Although I prefer having the Faded in the lineup, it created a lot of confusion because of the 2016 Studio Faded. I’ve seen a few used 2017 Faded being sold as Studios. If the goal was to simplify the lineup, I think the new modern collection is the right balance. 

Edited by pauloqs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2018 at 2:39 PM, MichaelT said:

My guitars, left to right:

 

2018 Classic - No weight relief - brute at 11 pounds, sounds killer, I feel it after a few hours of playing with the band.

2017 Standard - Ultra modern weight relief - I think 8.5 pounds or something like that. Sounds killer.

2018 Traditional - No weight relief - I think it's around 9 pounds - amazing sound.

2017 Tribute - 9 hole weight relief - 9 pounds, sounds killer unplugged or plugged in.

 

I don't think weight relief is as much an issue as people claim. I haven't noticed any major differences in sound or sustain other than the pickups in the guitars. The 9 hole weight relief Tribute with P90s sounds very similar to the non-weight relieved Classic with P90s. It could be that I'm almost 53 and stood for too many years in front of Marshall/Randall stacks. 🙂

This is absolutely correct, my Les Pauls are split 50% Weight relived and 50% solid, it makes no difference, only some of them make me look like Quasimodo at the end of a gig! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would def.  never want a maple neck on a Les Paul (-$500.00).  And the dot inlays are super-lame (-$200.00).  At the same time, at $1,100., they're going to make some compromises.  Like other guys have said before, Gibson tends to make lots of compromises on their value models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2018 at 11:41 PM, Rabs said:

Yeah im not so keen on the dots either.. I love my 60s Tribute which is actually chambered (about 7lbs or so) but is such a fun guitar to play because of that.

 

Also don't like that they are doing the new ones with a maple neck.. I don't like the inconsistency of the colour and grain between body and neck.

Qhyh13l.jpg

 

Maple may look odd, but you can't really see it while playing. I was also very happy to have that on my 13 LPJ when I bumped the headstock into a wall. 

And for those with more than one Lester, it's one of the things that really have an influence on how the guitar sounds and behaves, wich to me is a good thing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr. C.O. Jones said:

 

Maple may look odd, but you can't really see it while playing. I was also very happy to have that on my 13 LPJ when I bumped the headstock into a wall. 

And for those with more than one Lester, it's one of the things that really have an influence on how the guitar sounds and behaves, wich to me is a good thing.

Yeah I agree. Its only a personal OCD thing  🙂

Maple necks are way more stable.. I know that from much experience..   Even on my personal guitars..  The only one I have with a maple neck is my little Pignose travel guitar and its the only one I have never had to make any sort of truss rod adjustment too (and is one of the oldest guitars I have)  [thumbup]

Share this post


Link to post
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...