The Year is 1960

[boles]

Let’s go back in time to the year 1960 and we have no knowledge of the future.

 

We’re all meeting regularly to discuss our guitars and the 1960 Gibson Les Pauls are just starting to make their way into the hands of players.

 

In the frame of 1960, what would we be saying about our Gibson Les Pauls in real time of the moment?

 

Would the ‘57 gang be making fun of the new, thinner-necked, ‘60 guitars much in the same way the new 2008 Les Paul Standard has been derided by some today as, “not a real Les Paul?”

 

Would we be buying Les Paul guitars because of the man or because of the guitar?

 

Would there be more or less arguments between Fender lovers and Gibson defenders? Were the camps more or less separate in 1960 compared to today? Were the camps divided by aesthetic, intellect, or musical style?

 

Would there be a sense in 1960 that a ‘59 or a ‘60 was better than a ‘57 and destined for greatness 50 years later -- or would the ‘57 “old timers” still rule the devotion and set the context of the debate?

 

How long does it take for a newer Les Paul model to be perceived by fans and players as a better instrument than those guitars that have preceded it? 40 years? Immediately? Never?

[Thundergod]

In the frame of 1960' date=' what would we be saying about our Gibson Les Pauls in real time of the moment?

[/quote']

 

 

You can go to the dusk tiger and dark fire section to see what people would be saying about the les paul in 1960

[deepblue]

In 1960 I was still jumping from nut to nut.

[dem00n]

My mom was like 6.

My dad was like 20.

[NeoConMan]

Would the ‘57 gang be making fun of the new' date=' thinner-necked, ‘60 guitars much in the

same way the new 2008 Les Paul Standard has been derided by some today as,

“not a real Les Paul?”

 

How long does it take for a newer Les Paul model to be perceived by fans and

players as a better instrument than those guitars that have preceded it?

40 years? Immediately? Never?[/quote']

I'm calling apples and oranges here.

There are few - if any - of the same market forces at work today.

And Gibson isn't anything like the company they were in 1960 - Ted McCarty ---> Henry J?

 

BWAHAHA..... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

Did they make mistakes?

Sure, and they acted immediately to fix them as they thought best - 2 years is the longest model run.

How did they know what was best? They asked players.

They sat on the design from old Les for a couple years.

Didn't really use much of his design.

The first trapeze tail rendered it impossible to palm mute.

 

The neck on the Les Paul had changed nearly every year of production anyway.

Fretless Wonder? Anybody remember that term?

1958 was huge.

1959 they decided to put big frets on it, dramatically altering the way it felt and could be played.

1960 they simply decided to slim it down - not the earth-shaking decision you're making it out to be.

Problem is, the crazy new finishes and different cosmetic treatments still didn't sell guitars for them.

 

Gibson was making lots and lots of guitars, doing very well, thank you.

The market they had yet to crack was the electric solid body.

There was plenty of evidence that "guitar music" was just a fad, and Fender's runaway electric sales would

turn into an embarassing and costly albatross when the fickle public moved on to the next big thing.

 

They maintained a business model to appeal to more educated, sophisticated buyers wanting nicer gear.

They let Fender have the bright colors and cheap prices to attract the kiddies.

 

Gibson figured the one thing they had to do was to cut costs.

A new model separate from the heavy, expensive, and slow-selling Les Paul was a corporate reality.

They had done everything they could, it wouldn't move, so along comes the SG.

 

THERE is your Dusk Tiger, Robot, Dark Fire, and yes - your new 2008 Standard.

Complete with weak neck joint.

 

And the SG guys will hate me for this, but part of what drove many of the SG sales -

What else was there in the Gibson solid-body electric line?

 

And arguments between Fender lovers and Gibson defenders has been around since 1950....

 

 

$.02 from some guy on the internet.

[AXE®]

My mom was like 6.

My dad was like 20.

 

Your dad is 70 years old?

 

And moms is 55?

[NeoConMan]

Explains a lot with the apparent lack of supervision, especially where computer access is considered.

[ksdaddy]

I was in the oven until Aug 27. My dad had a late 40s J45.

[dem00n]

Your dad is 70 years old?

 

And moms is 55?

Around that.

 

 

Explains a lot with the apparent lack of supervision' date=' especially where computer access is considered.[/i']

 

Do you want me to judge how ****ed up your child is? :)

[NeoConMan]

Do you want me to judge how ****ed up your child is? :)

Do you want me to put a foot in your ***?

 

The one thing he does know is when to STFU.

 

Listen and learn.

 

Or keep right on yak, yak, yak, yakkin'........

 

(Note absence of {biggrin} accompanying my statement.)

[dem00n]

Do you want me to put a foot in your ***?

 

The one thing he does know is when to STFU.

 

Listen and learn.

 

Or keep right on yak' date=' yak, yak, yakkin'........

 

(Note absence of {biggrin} accompanying my statement.)

[/quote']

Same to you sir.

 

Good day!

[charlie brown]

1960?? A LOT fewer musicians (professional or otherwise)...("Rock" was dead (for all practical purposes),

a lot less guitars made (of any brand), and...a LOT more for kids to do, daily, than to sit at a computer,

praising or dissing guitar makes, models, manufacturers. Not nearly the "disposable income," for such luxuries,

in those days...save the "well heeled!" And...the less than well heeled, were forced to buy Sears, Montgomery Ward,

(Danelectro), Stella, Kay and Harmony (at best)...then, the Japanese "Teisco," etc. Gibson, Fender, Gretsch or Ric's,

were a real Luxury, and (usually) limited to successful entertainers (regional, or National).

 

Beyond that, Neo pretty much nailed the rest.

 

CB

[milod]

Well, in 1960 I was still a high school band trumpet player who wanted to be a jazz trumpet player.

 

I heard very little about electric guitars in the community where I lived, and there were more than a couple of pretty decent musicians around playing everything from Sousa to current pop/rock.

 

You've gotta figure that there hadn't been the time for folks to have such strong feelings about this or that kind of electric guitar in the sense of "I love Gibson and hate Fenders" or vice versa. Heck that's a half century ago, folks.

 

Three years later I got my first guitar.

 

Times already had changed. The big deal then tended more to be "folkie vs. rocker" and electric vs acoustic. Archtops were pretty much simply considered "electrics" and non-electric ones weren't all that popular any more. A few country folks I knew simply were pleased as punch that they made enough pickin' that they could afford a Fender or Gibson. The particulars seemed less important than a "known brand." But as I've said before, there was so much crap creeping into the country that it was "good guitars" vs "crap imports which were okay to learn on but you always hoped to make enough playing that you could buy the name brand."

 

Kids my age who had the wherewithall for either a Gibson or a Martin were considered very lucky, but honestly until around '65 I didn't hear much about this or that brand being "the" guitar. That seemed to arrive with the Beatles.

 

That mentality seemed to swell in the later '60s into the sorta thing we hear today.

 

But - that's basically what I saw from just a young guy's personal perspective.

 

m

[The Mick]

dem00n grew a pair of brass.

[NeoConMan]

More like "pot metal"...

[Riffster]

I have always wonder the initial question myself from the consumer perspective rather than the historical view.

 

I mean the Les Paul was a jazz guitar and a signature model. I am just glad they put a bridge pickup in there.

 

Look at the electronics, the neck pickup controls are on top, probably because a jazz player would use the neck pickup more. Gotta love how the bridge pickup is simply dubbed Treble.

 

Anyway Les Paul had been around only 8 years at the time so there was no way to know it would become such an icon, I am not sure how many players really discussed these guitars, they sold a few hundred by 1960. I mean look at all the changes they made in 8 years to get the guitar to sell. That is crazy to think about.

 

Me? if I was alive then and was a guitar player probably I would have been with the rest of the world and not buy a Les Paul. I just don't have that kind of vision.

[NeoConMan]

That's worth mentioning....

 

I remember the first time I played a real deal Les Paul Custom.

 

After growing up on Strat-style guitars it was weird.

 

I thought the control layout was the stupidest thing I ever saw.

Still do.

[boles]

Thanks for all your answers.

 

I probably didn't make my initial inquiry clear enough -- we're all time traveling back to 1960 together as we are now -- but without our experiences with any Les Pauls older than 1960.

 

I was hoping to get a less literal perspective on how what we know is based only on what we experience -- and how history translates into what we believe we know now -- and how today there is more of a longing for the 59/60 LPs than, say, the modern 2008 Standard.

 

With that clarified -- I'm sure there was some grumbling about the neck change in the 1960 model compared to the '57 based on what we know about human behavior -- and the preternatural want to resist change. That 60's neck might not seem much different to us now, but back then, it was likely a significant difference -- just like the asymmetrical neck on the 2008.

[NeoConMan]

The slim 60 neck is my preference by far, it's on all 6 of my current Gibsons.

Lotsa players tell me how much they hate it, and laugh because somebody as big as me likes them.

 

The 2008 has many features that were available before in the aftermarket, and few bought them.

 

The neck profile has been changed so many times on the Les Paul, and Gibson was MARKETING something

new to draw attention to it. I don't know of a single Les Paul owner who ever wanted the new profile.

 

The 2008 Standard was a marketing move, and an attempt to get new customers in.

People who already owned Les Pauls could get whatever they wanted in the 2007 line.

 

Besides the neck profile, what do you feel Gibson really offers with the 2008 Standard?

[KL]

You can go to the dusk tiger and dark fire section to see what people would be saying about the les paul in 1960

 

Does anyone ever go there?

[Blackie]

No SG's..........I aint going back then.........Good Day !

[cookieman15061]

Do you want me to put a foot in your ***?

 

The one thing he does know is when to STFU.

 

Listen and learn.

 

Or keep right on yak' date=' yak, yak, yakkin'........

 

(Note absence of {biggrin} accompanying my statement.)

[/quote']

 

Cmon Neo the kids all right. He puts up with a lot of crap but he's harmless enough and loves guitars like the rest of us.

 

It's just a guitar forum.

[NeoConMan]

He's alright - if he keeps it related to guitars.

It's when he strays, wanting to regale us with his intellect & wit while lacking any raconteur-ability,

that I have no use for him - or any other teen.

 

Join the conversation, effectively contributing - or stay out completely, listen and learn.

[Blackie]

..............................what you like the forum hall monitor .............I aint got a note ........uh oh.........

[boles]

The slim 60 neck is my preference by far' date=' it's on all 6 of my current Gibsons.

Lotsa players tell me how much they hate it, and laugh because somebody as big as me likes them.

 

The 2008 has many features that were available before in the aftermarket, and few bought them.

 

The neck profile has been changed so many times on the Les Paul, and Gibson was MARKETING something

new to draw attention to it. I don't know of a single Les Paul owner who ever wanted the new profile.

 

The 2008 Standard was a marketing move, and an attempt to get new customers in.

People who already owned Les Pauls could get whatever they wanted in the 2007 line.

 

Besides the neck profile, what do you feel Gibson [i']really[/i] offers with the 2008 Standard?

 

 

 

I agree the 2008 is really just about the new neck -- which I currently happen to prefer over most of my Fender necks and my '57 LP VOS -- and you're right that these changes are more marketing gimmicks than solving a problem or offering an bettered feature set, but that's how you have to tempt a free market. Red is never enough. We have to name all the hues and tones and give them all pretty names to help sell the entire spectrum of that color.

 

What other guitars in the Les Paul line other than the 2008 have the asymmetrical neck? Since I prefer that neck shape -- though a '60s neck did feel pretty fine when I borrowed my friend's LP for a day -- Gibson might have struck a chord, with me at least, that I didn't know needed ringing... until I felt the addicting vibration in my hand. My 2008 Standard has the greatest sustain of all 8 of my guitars. Is that luck or by design?

 

Gibson seems to like to throw things against wall to see what sticks a lot more than Fender does -- and I sort of respect that effort to change things up and wonder what might make a better guitar experience. How do we know we might not find something better if something different isn't ever offered? After half a century of guitar making, I like it when "What If?" actually hits the streets for pocketbook voting instead of being voted down in a backroom boardroom.

 

I think the Gibson robot guitars are a little freakish right now -- but I wouldn't mind having one -- and I know the "ugly innovation" promise of today will somehow lead us on to the next great thing in guitars later.

 

That said... I'm looking to buy my third LP... and I thought I was set on just getting a 2008 Standard goldtop to backup my favorite... but then I see...

 

1. The Les Paul Supreme

2. 60's VOS

3. LP Tribute

4. LP Standard Traditional Pro

5. The 50'th Anniversary '59 Antiquity Burst

 

...and my head is swimming in confusion about feature sets and such and so on -- and that's the greatest danger to this sort of ongoing, tsunami-like Gibson innovation: You drown the marketplace so much with too many options that people like me are made numb and are too confounded to buy for the want of missing out on something newer and better.