daveinspain Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I keep hearing there are good and bad Les Pauls every year. So what does that mean, no sustain, bad workmanship, wont stay in tune, no mojo??? Isn't it more the setup that makes the Les Paul play better or worse? Ok, I know there are some factors that will make the guitar resonate more or less like the type of neck joint or where the stop bar sits but has anyone ever picked up a Les Paul and said " what a piece of sh*t "? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCI Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I've never picked up a really bad Les Paul, but there are certainly ones that are superior to most of them like any other brand or model of guitar. For me, it really comes down to how much they vibrate and shake when you play them; I like a lot of tactile feedback from my guitars and can't stand ones that feel dead in my hands. My Custom Shop Custom is an amazing player, but there are a couple of workmanship issues with it like the fretboard isn't perfectly aligned with the neck (off just a hair) and there is some minor chipping in the finish around the posts for the stop tail piece; neither of those issues effect performance, but I could see where they'd bug the heck out of someone else like a collector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturn Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I think it's all relative. People expect a lot from a LP because of the name and price, so theres a lot more nit-picking. I've never seen a LP that I would call a POS. I have seen a few with terrible setups though. I blame that more on the store. Even if it did come from the factory like that, couldn't one of the "professionals" take a few minutes to set the action and intonation before hanging a $4000 Custom on the wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 there are a couple of workmanship issues with it like the fretboard isn't perfectly aligned with the neck (off just a hair) and there is some minor chipping in the finish around the posts for the stop tail piece Things that that, I don't care about. I'm actually glad to hear that your fretboard isn't perfectly aligned with the neck because it reinforces the fact that the guitar was made by hand. Personally, I go by tone & feel. If it feels and sounds great, it's a great guitar. I've picked up a few LPs, including a couple R9s, that didn't do anything for me. They felt lifeless. Those are the ones I put right back on the rack. They're definitely not all made equal...that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCI Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 No, they don't effect performance at all and I don't think about that stuff when I'm playing the guitar. But, it does bug me that a really expensive Custom Shop guitar has what I consider to be some sloppy mistakes in it's construction. I can forgive the fretboard issue as it's very minor, but there's really no excuse for the chips in the finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I'm not really a fan of the Les Paul or any other solidbody design but... Since the LP has more woods in it, there's obviously more opportunity for variation of "quality" in terms of guitar sound. Let's face it, even the most beautiful woods are just that: "woods," plural. One piece of Mahogany is not the same as another. Etc., etc. We're not talking about building a nice bookcase or table, but a musical instrument. Variations in wood "quality" in terms of sound will differ not only among species, but also among differing cuts from a given tree. I'm guessing that glues, etc., also will affect things even were all LPs to have been built by robots to "perfect" specifications. Even then, consider that different woods will react differently to weather, etc. So... I guess I'd be more surprised if everyone felt there was a unity of responses from an LP with a given set of wood types. Age obviously also will affect things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Skirting the issue. The fact is Gibson has, several times in past, had well documented problems with quality. Many would note they are now just coming out of a period (around 2004) of some quality problems. In fact the most recent debacle is the Dark Fire - more a less, a Lester. The list of problems with that project is overwhelming. Gibson has Dark Fire customers in Europe still waiting for delivery on orders placed in December of 2008. Ouch! The lesson here: hands on inspection, play, then buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight959 Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 No' date=' they don't effect performance at all and I don't think about that stuff when I'm playing the guitar. But, it does bug me that a really expensive Custom Shop guitar has what I consider to be some sloppy mistakes in it's construction. I can forgive the fretboard issue as it's very minor, but there's really no excuse for the chips in the finish. [/quote'] I had that issue with My Goddess... Took it to have it set up and the guy took the posts out and sorted it. Took a very steady hand with a razor blade from what I understand. She looks perfect now.... Like it should have in the FIRST PLACE... Its one of those common issues.. Flight959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCI Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I'm not really a fan of the Les Paul or any other solidbody design but... Since the LP has more woods in it' date=' there's obviously more opportunity for variation of "quality" in terms of guitar sound. Let's face it, even the most beautiful woods are just that: "woods," plural. One piece of Mahogany is not the same as another. Etc., etc. We're not talking about building a nice bookcase or table, but a musical instrument. Variations in wood "quality" in terms of sound will differ not only among species, but also among differing cuts from a given tree. I'm guessing that glues, etc., also will affect things even were all LPs to have been built by robots to "perfect" specifications. Even then, consider that different woods will react differently to weather, etc. So... I guess I'd be more surprised if everyone felt there was a unity of responses from an LP with a given set of wood types. Age obviously also will affect things. [/quote'] +1,000,000 Wood varies and that's all there is to it. Since wood varies, so do guitars made out of wood which is why I try them out first before buying. You can get lucky buying online but it's just throwing too much to chance for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Okay, as a guest on a "Gibson" brand forum, I don't care to get too far into quality issues in some ways, other to note that isn't it a good thing that some moderator doesn't feel its his corporate duty to delete criticism or lose his own job? That in itself speaks well of Gibson as well as several other firms that are major makers or distributors. But it's no secret that American guitar makers in general had some difficulties in the 1960s and 1970s for a host of reasons. Some problems were from skyrocketing demand. Some problems were from major changes in corporate ownership or leadership. Some problems were from what I see as a rapidly increasing sophistication among guitar buyers that hadn't existed in a smaller marketplace. Heck, Harmony went under. Even with what I think were relatively ugly pieces, they were very functional and actually sounded quite good. But they were produced in a world of lower expectations and "lost" when expectations soared. Gibson filed lawsuits at least against whoever owned Ibanez at the time for some incredibly well-made clones of exceptional quality in the 1970s - resulting in some Ibanez instruments being referred to as "patent infringement" designs. Oddly Ibanez currently has somewhat similar problems with clones of that company's designs coming out into the marketplace. If Gibson again has had quality problems there are a number of variables involved. Heck, you read various feedback forums such as this one on almost any manufacturer's website and you'll find complaints. Frankly I find it refreshing that companies such as Gibson allow such criticism of products. Don't take this as a paean for the Gibson company at all, just an overview of life in today's world. As far as guitar quality goes, by the way, I look back at the range of highly-rated instruments and Japanese-made crap of the 1950s and I can't believe the overall increases in quality of guitars. I don't think you can buy anything as bad as some of the crap I saw on "budget" buying trips in the 1960s. So... Yeah, Gibson should have better quality control than most guitarmakers - even in its imported Epiphone line, for example - because a Gibson customer expects exceptional quality. On the other hand, we're talking even in the acoustic field of incredibly complex bits of construction that overall is of better quality than 40 years ago and yet with much more demand and, in ways, lesser quality of woods available. I love my Jeep, too, given where I live. In ways its quality is far above my 1986 Jeep. But... when something goes wrong, the "quality" of engineering makes any repair incredibly expensive. Now, as well as 40 years ago, I guess you pays your money and you takes your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight959 Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 If Gibson again has had quality problems there are a number of variables involved. Heck' date=' you read various feedback forums such as this one on almost any manufacturer's website and you'll find complaints. Frankly I find it refreshing that companies such as Gibson allow such criticism of products. [/quote'] Agreed. I was astonished at some of the slating remarks on the Gibson site when the 1959 50th anv model was released. There was a ton of negative comments... Flight959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 flight959 .... <grin> You say you're from the UK, but... isn't the Cross of St. Andrew just a ... uhhhh ... wee bit different than the Union Jack and noting a culture from which might come some magnificent Islay malts? <grin> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duende Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Hi Milod he is Scottish, I am English. Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarge Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I hated my first Les Paul. It was a vintage mahogony studio. I do my own basic setups (Neck and bridge adjustments, no fret dressing) for all my guitars and I could not get this thing to have no Fret buzz. It also wouldn't stay in tune, and even when it did I wasn't crazy about the tone. So what did I do about it? I sold it and bought another Les Paul. A DC studio off Ebay. When it arrived I was scared to death. I loved the tone, but there was fret buzz, the intonation was horrid and when I bent strings at the highest frets sometimes they would mute from hitting the higher frets. At first I thought it was a problem with Fret ware. I sat down and looked over it. The guy who sent it to me had way to much relief in the neck. And to compensate for it he just lowered the bridge. I setup the relief properly and set the Bridge now it is freaking amazing. The intonation sounds great even though it is a non adjustable wrap around bridge. To be fair to the Vintage Mohagony, I didn't give it a fair chance. All it probably needed was some graphite in the nut and to have the frets dressed and 2 of my three problems would have been fixed. But in the end I think the maple tops add something to the tone that I just can't do without. Every time I picked up one of the maple top Les Paul's, the maple really brought out the crunch in the tone. And I especially loved the DC standard. It was a DC Standard at GC that made me want a Les Paul In the end I could only afford a maple top DC studio, but I love it nonetheless. I think Gibson's are great, but from my experience and speaking with other owners many brand new ones come off the line needing a setup and fret's dressed. Once you get that done, you have a killer guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velouria Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 In my experience which I'll admit isn't as vast as a lot of members here (I've owned maybe 30 different electrics and only 10 or so have been what people consider to be 'high end') , it doesn't matter what company, model or price range you look at, there's going to be studs and duds, either that singular instrument works for you personally or it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrktwn Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Yes. I had one. A 1980 Deluxe. Wine Red. Too heavy to play standing for longer than 45 minutes, not much high end response from the thing. Dead sounding. Felt alright to play when sitting down and unplugged, though. I had it for like 6 months. I think I set a personal record for shortest ownership of an instrument. It sucked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender 4 Life Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Bought mine new over 20 years ago, and it was a players dream, except for being damnably heavy(14.1 lbs naked). The tones,sustain,and playability were PERFECT. The neck p'up produced ultra sweet, full tones that could cover any tone a rythym player could want,Rock Country,Blues Jazz, whatever. The bridge p'up had a biting twang that was almost as stinging as a Flying V's or SG's and would deliver lead and-or- solo tones that many only dream of. It is/was by definition a good,no, a GREAT LP. About 7 yrs. ago, the reverb springs in my massive old('65) 105w concert stack sagged, and touched each other. This burned the insulation off about half the wiring in the LP, as well as frying one volume pot., & the 3-way switch, (it also gave ME quite a jolt, but I pulled the plug as quickly as I could) After taking it to 3 different repairmen, 2 of which were "authorized" it's STILL not producing the tones that it did origionally, so i'm most likely going to do an "electronics rebuild" myself (not my 1st) to get it back "up to snuff". The meaning of all this is, that there are so many variables, and it's all so relative anyhow, that a bad LP can always be improved upon, and a good LP can always be damaged. Whether it STAYS good, or bad, is up to the owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight959 Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 flight959 .... <grin> You say you're from the UK' date=' but... isn't the Cross of St. Andrew just a ... uhhhh ... wee bit different than the Union Jack and noting a culture from which might come some magnificent Islay malts? <grin> [/quote'] I'am Scottish, that's why the Scots flag is flying in my Avatar.... Iam proud to be Scottish and British.. The union jack is just a combination of the St Andrews Cross, St Georges Cross and the St Patrick's Cross... Flight959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted April 12, 2009 Author Share Posted April 12, 2009 Bought mine new over 20 years ago' date=' and it was a players dream, except for being damnably heavy(14.1 lbs naked). [img'][/img] Holy Sh*t!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Deadhead Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 "But it's no secret that American guitar makers in general had some difficulties in the 1960s and 1970s for a host of reasons. Some problems were from skyrocketing demand. Some problems were from major changes in corporate ownership or leadership. Some problems were from what I see as a rapidly increasing sophistication among guitar buyers that hadn't existed in a smaller marketplace." Gibson had some terrible QC problems in the 60"s. I went to every Gibson dealer in SW Ohio in 1968 trying to find a replacement for a stolen 61 SG, and everyone I picked up was a POS. Crappy necks, frets, finish with runs in it , P/U's not working, bad noisy pots were some of the most frequent issues. Fender and Gretsch were just as bad. Overall now, QC is much better, not only for Gibson but for all the major builders. That being said, some guitars just feel better and sound better than others. When I bought my Lester, I went through evryone they had in the store before I found the "One". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.