Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Bought a new Les Paul Standard 50s - is this acceptable for QC?


Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

 

Just bought a new Les Paul Standard 50s with a AAA rated top. Love the guitar from far away, but I am not sure how to interpret the QC issues - is it something I should keep and accept or try to exchange for another one?  I spoke to the dealer and they offered either an exchange or a partial refund (not sure how much) - I'm just afraid that the exchanged one won't be much better.

There's unpolished varnish by the fretboard on the top, some leftover glue/filling compound underneath the varnish underneath the fretboard... Your thoughts?

https://postimg.cc/gallery/DLkpdzH

 

LP1.png

LP2.png

LP3.png

LP4.png

LP5.png

LP7.png

LP8.png

Edited by lithdoc
Link to post
Share on other sites

This wouldn't really bother me.  Look at what companies like Collings are selling Les Pauls for and you will get the idea of what it costs to make a relatively flawless guitar.  For a little over 2k the Standards are fairly inexpensive instruments and with the amount of handwork done on them there are always going to be cosmetic issues.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep it, as long as it plays well and sounds good.  

When I bought my ES 175 some years ago there were a couple of small similar issues.  Over time (and with a bit of careful polishing and TLC) the marks have almost disappeared and are unnoticeable.

Edited by jdgm
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your gonna get 10 guys to say send it back and 10 guy to say its okay.

You need to decide if only that Gibson is good enough.

Edited by Sgt. Pepper
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Bit of a cosmetic issue for me, I'd exchange, as this is little too much for a guitar at this price point and with an AAA top. 

Even if some say "you can barely see it, or the sound matters", I knew it is there and it would bother me. If that was a $500 Epi and it played well, I'd keep it. But for a $2500 Gibson, I'd like to have the top to actually have a top-notch finish, would be a bit more lenient on the backside. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sunking101 said:

It's up to you whether you deem it unacceptable at that price point. The flaws in your photos are fairly standard for Gibson. My R7 which cost roughly double isn't perfect either.

Ditto man my R7 GT isn’t perfect cosmetically but it is a perfect guitar if you get what I’m saying 😉 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe me zooming in on these pictures on my phone isn't giving me clarity to see what the problem is.

If it's just a bit of lacquer on the fretboard its probably pretty minimal. 

Lacquer will wear off the fretboard easy enough over time

Sure there's "worse" QC than this

Edited by Eracer_Team
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2021 at 5:56 AM, Sgt. Pepper said:

Your gonna get 10 guys to say send it back and 10 guy to say its okay.

You need to decide if only that Gibson is good enough.


Agreed. 
I'm one of the 'send it back' guys though. 

I wouldn't drop over $2,000 on a guitar and settle for flaws that would niggle/nag in my brain for the life of the guitar. 

But then again, I wouldn't drop over $2,000 on a guitar that I hadn't handled, fondled, and played with my own hands either. 
I like and trust Sweetwater a LOT, but I have learned that if I'm going to spend over $700 on anything, I want to hold it and inspect it personally first. 

I'm weird that way. 

😐

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.

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...