gibboman Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Can anyone back up the myth that 2002 Standards were seen as being the best Les Pauls for years? I seem to remember that at the time a guitar mag stated that Gibson could not keep making them this good for the price. I know that I've played a couple 2003 LP's since then, and they don't seem to sound the same or feel the same. It seems that Gibson 'pulled the stops out' to make them really well in an attempt to get some people back from PRS etc. Myth or Fact? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xinnix Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 People will say anything to make their guitars sound like they are more special. I guess owning a Gibson LP isn't enough! Personally I've never heard this. I've owned a 2002 Classic and it wasn't as good as my 2005 Standard Faded? But I'm not going to go around and say 2005 was the best year. Gibson LP's are great guitars but one next to another can be very different. Even when born in the same year and on the same days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepblue Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 I have read a few articles stating that the 2007 historics were the best ever....who can say. The topic is open to all kinds of debate. They are all great in their own way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 There are fine examples from any year/era. But there has been some peaks and valleys in the general quality of Gibson's products over the years. Some would say the Norlin era was a valley. Of course, there's going to differing opinions on when these peaks and valleys occurred, but the fact is, they have. Just take this to mean that you have to examine an individual guitar from any year/era to be sure of its quality - hands on, eyes on, ears on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarGuy503 Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 I think it varies from guitar to guitar and not necessarly by the year. This is why it is important to try before you buy. If you are buying online (ebay) and don't have an opportunity to play before you buy its quite a gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibboman Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share Posted December 4, 2009 People will say anything to make their guitars sound like they are more special. I guess owning a Gibson LP isn't enough! Personally I've never heard this. I've owned a 2002 Classic and it wasn't as good as my 2005 Standard Faded? But I'm not going to go around and say 2005 was the best year. Gibson LP's are great guitars but one next to another can be very different. Even when born in the same year and on the same days? Hi' date=' Sorry if it came across that way, but it was not meant to sound like that. It is simply this, I read that in a mag, pure and simple. It was a British mag right enough. No hidden agendas!!! If I wanted to say something to make a guitar sound 'special' I could have picked any of my guitars. Maybe one i was thinking of selling just create some hype eh!!! However, to say "I guess owning a Gibson LP isn't enough" and then go on about your Classic and Faded, I can only assume that you're correct...owning [i']a[/i] Gibson is never enough. Also, what's this about a guitar being "born"...for crying out loud..are you saying guitars are like babies???, I've seen vids on youtube....and it clearly shows guitars being made by man and machine out of wood and glue etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 I think it varies from guitar to guitar and not necessarly by the year. There's you answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibboman Posted December 7, 2009 Author Share Posted December 7, 2009 There's you answer. Yes, I would reckon so. However, that was not what I was really asking. I was just asking if anyone else on this forum seen the mag artical or heard of it. Every year and model would have good and not so good but it seemed that Gibson had really tried with this year, or so I was led to believe. Anyway, I was just wondering, that's all. Cheers for the replies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xinnix Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Hi' date='Sorry if it came across that way, but it was not meant to sound like that. It is simply this, I read that in a mag, pure and simple. It was a British mag right enough. No hidden agendas!!! If I wanted to say something to make a guitar sound 'special' I could have picked any of my guitars. Maybe one i was thinking of selling just create some hype eh!!! However, to say "I guess owning a Gibson LP isn't enough" and then go on about your Classic and Faded, I can only assume that you're correct...owning [i']a[/i] Gibson is never enough. Also, what's this about a guitar being "born"...for crying out loud..are you saying guitars are like babies???, I've seen vids on youtube....and it clearly shows guitars being made by man and machine out of wood and glue etc. Dude, I said "People" I didn't say you? And it doesn't matter who wrote the article for whatever reason, or where it came from! I was referring to the "People" who write articles like that without any real proof. And you don't know their agendas! Hey, you asked a question and I gave my opinion. As for my two Gibson's that I was comparing, they were my guitars and my opinion of them! Not someone else's! Oh, And for the guitar being born. Wow, You really got me there! I guess my thinking was out of respect for Les Paul guitars. If you see yours as a piece of wood then thats your prerogative. I happen to value mine in a different way. If you're going to ask for peoples opinions then you should be more open to them, or just not post a question in the first place. Oops, I'm sorry. I read your post again and I realize you weren't looking for honest opinions. My Bad. You were looking for people to "back up the myth"......... Go figure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibboman Posted December 7, 2009 Author Share Posted December 7, 2009 Dude' date=' I said "People"I didn't say you? And it doesn't matter who wrote the article for whatever reason, or where it came from! I was referring to the "People" who write articles like that without any real proof. And you don't know their agendas! Hey, you asked a question and I gave my opinion. As for my two Gibson's that I was comparing, they were my guitars and my opinion of them! Not someone else's! Oh, And for the guitar being born. Wow, You really got me there! I guess my thinking was out of respect for Les Paul guitars. If you see yours as a piece of wood then thats your prerogative. I happen to value mine in a different way. If you're going to ask for peoples opinions then you should be more open to them, or just not post a question in the first place. Oops, I'm sorry. I read your post again and I realize you weren't looking for honest opinions. My Bad. You were looking for people to "back up the myth"......... Go figure. [/quote'] Look Xinnix, I don't what to get into a 'keyboard hero' scenario here. Everyone is allowed their opinions and you have made yours clear enough. However I do feel you set out to try and do a 'put down', which was not really an opinion is it? In fact you still have not put forward an opinion on 2002 Standards. So although I value peoples opinions, I do prefer those opinions to stay on the subject matter. So here we go again. Xinnix, Can you back up the myth that 2002 Standards were seen as being the best Les Pauls for years? So it should be a simple yes or no. Or if you have owned a 2002 Standard, or in fact still own one, then there might need to be some more words in the answer which will either back up the myth, or as they say on the TV it's 'busted'. Now here's my opinion for what it's worth. I think my 2002 is a very nice guitar. It has a nice top and plays very well. The neck is not as nice as my gold top RI, but nicer than my Custom. The top is nicer than the custom. The sound between the Custom and my 2002 is different. Both are good, but the custom seems more raunchy if you know what I mean. However saying that I tend to play my melodymaker more these days. It's lighter and I like the P90 and thin body sound. Why did you prefer your 2005 to your 2002. As regards the "born" issue. I value my guitars very much indeed (trust me I've worked very hard to get them) but if the house was burning, I would get the family and dog out first before I worried about a "piece of wood" Take care, and keep strummin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xinnix Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Look Xinnix' date=' I don't what to get into a 'keyboard hero' scenario here. Everyone is allowed their opinions and you have made yours clear enough. However I do feel you set out to try and do a 'put down', which was not really an opinion is it? In fact you still have not put forward an opinion on 2002 Standards. So although I value peoples opinions, I do prefer those opinions to stay on the subject matter.So here we go again. Xinnix, Can [b']you[/b] back up the myth that 2002 Standards were seen as being the best Les Pauls for years? So it should be a simple yes or no. Or if you have owned a 2002 Standard, or in fact still own one, then there might need to be some more words in the answer which will either back up the myth, or as they say on the TV it's 'busted'. Now here's my opinion for what it's worth. I think my 2002 is a very nice guitar. It has a nice top and plays very well. The neck is not as nice as my gold top RI, but nicer than my Custom. The top is nicer than the custom. The sound between the Custom and my 2002 is different. Both are good, but the custom seems more raunchy if you know what I mean. However saying that I tend to play my melodymaker more these days. It's lighter and I like the P90 and thin body sound. Why did you prefer your 2005 to your 2002. As regards the "born" issue. I value my guitars very much indeed (trust me I've worked very hard to get them) but if the house was burning, I would get the family and dog out first before I worried about a "piece of wood" Take care, and keep strummin Well I’m sorry it came off as a put down to you. I agree, I don’t want to get into a meaningless dialog either, but you really should read some of your own stuff? Your post says 2002 Gibson Les Paul’s, which is why I read it. But your question says Standards. So excuse me for interjecting my 2002 Classic because it wasn’t a Standard… The only Standard I’ve owned is my 2005 for what its worth. Are you always so literal and does it really matter? To answer your question. No. I can’t backup that Myth even if I tried. Also, I find it somewhat silly to believe that one model would somehow be superior based on Gibson’s Manufacturing processes. Not that a certain year can’t be better based on better materials and changes to that process, but to think that only "Standards" would be more superior then their predecessors or future generations without those changes is absurd. And as I understand it, there haven’t been a lot of changes until 2008? So, I think that article is a little biased for whatever reason. IMHO I prefer my 05 Standard Faded because of how much it resonates! It’s like no other sold body I’ve ever played! The BB pros are much better & hotter then the 496r/500t IMHO. The 60's neck is much faster and so much easier to play then a Les Paul with the Lacquer finish. And last, the Tobacco Flamed Satin finish is just eye candy to me! Oh, and if the house was burning? I’d tell my family to each grab a guitar on their way out and don’t worry about the dog! He can run faster then any of us and he isn't carrying a guitar! :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibboman Posted December 8, 2009 Author Share Posted December 8, 2009 Well I’m sorry it came off as a put down to you. I agree' date=' I don’t want to get into a meaningless dialog either, but you really should read some of your own stuff? Your post says 2002 Gibson Les Paul’s, which is why I read it. But your question says Standards. So excuse me for interjecting my 2002 Classic because it wasn’t a Standard… The only Standard I’ve owned is my 2005 for what its worth. Are you always so literal and does it really matter? To answer your question. No. I can’t backup that Myth even if I tried. Also, I find it somewhat silly to believe that one model would somehow be superior based on Gibson’s Manufacturing processes. Not that a certain year can’t be better based on better materials and changes to that process, but to think that only "Standards" would be more superior then their predecessors or future generations without those changes is absurd. And as I understand it, there haven’t been a lot of changes until 2008? So, I think that article is a little biased for whatever reason. IMHO I prefer my 05 Standard Faded because of how much it resonates! It’s like no other sold body I’ve ever played! The BB pros are much better & hotter then the 496r/500t IMHO. The 60's neck is much faster and so much easier to play then a Les Paul with the Lacquer finish. And last, the Tobacco Flamed Satin finish is just eye candy to me! Oh, and if the house was burning? I’d tell my family to each grab a guitar on their way out and don’t worry about the dog! He can run faster then any of us and he isn't carrying a guitar! My dog would be too lazy to carry one anyway, she won't even fetch a stick....mind you is that being lazy or being clever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xinnix Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 My dog would be too lazy to carry one anyway' date=' she won't even fetch a stick....mind you is that being lazy or being clever? [/quote'] She must be clever! She seems to know the difference between a stick and a guitar! LOL...... :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurner Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 Funnily enough I just got a 2002 Les Paul Standard and it is amazing! I’ve had half a dozen LPs and SGs and this 2002 beats the others into the ground, a great instrument and I feel blessed! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merciful-evans Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 On 12/4/2009 at 10:17 AM, gibboman said: Can anyone back up the myth that 2002 Standards were seen as being the best Les Pauls for years? I seem to remember that at the time a guitar mag stated that Gibson could not keep making them this good for the price. I know that I've played a couple 2003 LP's since then, and they don't seem to sound the same or feel the same. It seems that Gibson 'pulled the stops out' to make them really well in an attempt to get some people back from PRS etc. Myth or Fact? Neither. So far its hearsay at best. At worst, maybe a sock puppet and bowling pins? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clash19 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 I own 11 Gibson Les Pauls from 1959 thanks to my father before he went and came home from Vietnam to 2012 and my 2002 Gibson Standard Tea Burst with PAF’s is at the top of over 100 Les Pauls I have played in my life . I don’t want people to know this but I am looking for a 2003 in pristine condition . Color doesn’t matter because these guitars are around 8.8lbs , you can tell you are playing a professional guitar . I purchased mine used because a friend who works at Chicago Music Exchange told me these are special guitars . Mine had been worn out in a spot in the back down to the wood but whenever I take it it . The people in the room I hear oh ahh oh ahh . It’s a beautiful lemon Burst or Tea Burst with awesome tiger strips . Just take my word for it You won’t like them so stay away it’s a waste of money . To many problems . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clash19 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 I agree with Gurner This is a special guitar . I paid $1,650 from reverb who was selling it with Chicago Music Exchange . I had my doubts because the back was worn down to the word in one spot the size of a quarter . And there was 20 plus deep buckle marks on the back but the front was perfect Lemon Burst or Ice Tea Burst with awesome tiger stripes . It has “ patent applied for “ on the pickups . I own a 1959 thanks to my father . And 8 other Les Paul Standards from 1990s to 2012 . And the Standard 2002 and 2003 have the Gibson headstock logo in Gold , just like the Reissue models and the original design from the late 50s to the 61 Les Pauls . So Believe Gurner he know what he’s talking about because I own the same year . I have some Reissue that sound similar but this one to me is my main guitar I take on the road . Some of my Vintage guitars never leave my studio vault even my 51 Stratocaster 54 , 56 , 57 Fender Stratocaster . Also vintage amps . And my 45 year old Vox / fuzz wan wan pedal my girlfriend gave me for my 16 birthday . I save and take good care of my things not like my kids who didn’t pay for there **** . A year later it was lost or broken . I value my musical equipment . That’s how I put a roof over my head and food on the table and clothes on my back . So ya stay away from those shitty 2002 Gibson they’re not for you . They are terrible guitars right Gurner 🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸🎸 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merciful-evans Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 I've been talking to myself for years too 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larsongs Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 (edited) Not sure I ever heard that 2002’s were mythologically great. But, Late 90’s & early 2000’s Gibson produced some amazingly good including LP’s… Gibson is doing great work right now.. I wouldn’t hesitate getting a 2022.. Edited April 28, 2022 by Larsongs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Larsongs said: Not sure I ever heard that 2002’s were mythologically great. But, Late 90’s & early 2000’s Gibson produced some amazingly good including LP’s… Gibson is doing great work right now.. I wouldn’t hesitate getting a 2022.. This is a 2002 standard, I wasn't nuts about the stock gibson Burst Buckers, so what's in there now is a Seymore duncan 59 neck and a Jeff Beck in the bridge. These are a bit more gooder than them thar burst buckers was Edited April 28, 2022 by kidblast 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powerwagonjohn Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 I remember people saying 1991 was part of the "good wood" years. It didn't stop me from selling it so I could buy my 2007 Johnny A Custom. Now I am thinking that 2007 was the good wood years or 2009 like my L-4CES. Thanks John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparquelito Posted April 29, 2022 Share Posted April 29, 2022 The best Gibsons have always been born on a Wednesday. 🤔 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Pepper Posted May 6, 2022 Share Posted May 6, 2022 (edited) Myth with some truth thrown in for s-hits and grins. Edited May 6, 2022 by Sgt. Pepper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.