FennRx Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Older does not mean better in every case. The older guitars that the collectors and cork sniffers lust for are the survivors that made the cut. To say that every Les Paul Gibson made in '59 was a gem is folly. I'm sure there were a few turds made that year. It's a shame that the cork sniffers and collectors seem to drive the popular opinion on modern Gibsons. The newer Gibsons are as good as they ever were. It seems that lots of folks see Gibsons now as collectibles and money hedges - and judge all of the new guitars against the ethereal standard the collectors use. While the new Gibsons might be collectible and lusted after in the future' date=' they are first and foremost built to [b']PLAY![/b]. I don't imagine the folks at Gibson sitting around in '59 thinking that those Les Pauls will be worth megabucks 50 years later. They just built them to play. well said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibson CS Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I read an article years ago about a guy who bought a Les Paul. Hung it up in a special sound proof room. Then he pumped loud music into the room 24/7....His reasoning was that he could tighten up the cells of the wood with sound vibration. Therefore aging it much sooner.....sweeten it I guess you could say. I dont know if this was an urban myth....but I swear I read it about 10 years ago. The things people do to find their holy grail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
95vette Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I've got a '72 LP Deluxe, a 2001 Standard, a 2007 Standard, and a LP GT. I play the 2007 the most. I don't really like playing the '72 anymore. I keep it for sentimental reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.