Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Les Paul Supreme


SteveFord

Recommended Posts

The, not sure what to call it on the headstock, is not bad but not great either. Its hard to see buy it looks like it has an access heal where the body and neck meet. And its only 4k. The Who would call that a bargain. 

Edited by Sgt. Pepper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SteveFord said:

It's back again but with a lot of changes.

The main one is the Ultra Modern Weight Relief, I can't tell from the pictures but I think they lost the arched back.

https://www.gibson.com/en-US/Collection/les-paul-supreme

Yes no arched back. 

3 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

The, not sure what to call it on the headstock, is not bad but not great either. 

You mean the "striking new mother-of-pearl inlay inspired by a design from the 1940s that was discovered in the Gibson archives".

It must be from the same desk where they rediscovered and built that tulip body shaped guitar a couple of years back. I wonder if there's any more doodles or bubble gum in there? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it's a totally different animal. I had a 2008 LP Supreme that I had for about a week in 2016:

iWiKvmh.jpg

They got rid of the solid back and added access plates.

11K6mpS.jpg

Also the body on a Supreme was about 1/4" thicker than a regular LP, probably so they could stuff the electronics in without an access plate. Likely a cost savings measure on the new ones so it would use same production jigs as regular LP's. I'm not digging it but then again I really didn't bond with the one I had. Out of the blue someone wanted it and I was able to flip it for $1000 more than I paid for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SteveFord said:

One friend's comment was it seems like a cash grab by Gibson, I don't know why they even called it a Supreme.

 

I wonder if I am smart enough to get a job renaming guitars from old ones they once made, and now are making them again, but are not even close to being the same.

And lord help us if we get a Firebird XI. The X was a fail to end all fails. 

Edited by Sgt. Pepper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

I wonder if I am smart enough to get a job renaming guitars from old ones they they once used, and now are making them again, but are not even close to being the same.

And lord help us if we get a Firebird XI. The X was a fail to end all fails. 

 

Its a reinterpretation of recycling (name) and going green (money). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, merciful-evans said:

 

Its a reinterpretation of recycling (name) and going green (money). 

The X's got recycled to a landfill after being pressed to death by an excavator, and became green money due to a tax write off.

Edited by Sgt. Pepper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/28/2023 at 10:33 AM, merciful-evans said:

You mean the "striking new mother-of-pearl inlay inspired by a design from the 1940s that was discovered in the Gibson archives".

I find it odd that they used a '40's style inlay, but used the newer style Gibson logo font inlay, versus a '40's style font. (below is a pic of one "old style font" that would have looked better, in my opinion) I'm defiantly not a fan of the ultra busy "bunch 'o joints" inlay, btw.

xWJkXTn.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
6 minutes ago, FernDog said:

I just feel for anyone needing to fix a broken switch

If they own a 335, then they already know the struggle is real. 

How damn hard it to rout a control  cavity? Yeah the solid back is fancy, but a control cover is for  function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original was cooler with the carved maple back but I have no idea how the electronics are supposed to be maintained. It must have some hidden way to access the electronics.

 

If I ignore the first version of the Supreme and take the new one at face value I like it. It’s a nice looking guitar. I’m not going to buy one but I think Gibson did a good job. The heel carving from the Axcess is cool

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Dub-T-123 said:

The original was cooler with the carved maple back but I have no idea how the electronics are supposed to be maintained. It must have some hidden way to access the electronics.

 

If I ignore the first version of the Supreme and take the new one at face value I like it. It’s a nice looking guitar. I’m not going to buy one but I think Gibson did a good job. The heel carving from the Axcess is cool

I watched a YT video of what a chore it is to work on. 

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...