Tried out the new LPs today

[AlanH]

The differences are not obvious to the novice' date=' that's how they can get away with it. To an untrained eye the appear the same, to someone who builds and repairs guitars for a living, they are as alike as a Fender Strat and Charvel SanDimas. Or an Affinity Strat and Fender Standard.

 

Just because one is too blind to see it does not make it not there.[/quote']

 

Whatever

[deflepfan]

An Epi LP Standard Plain Top in black is $429, a Studio Deluxe is $399 (faded is $349). Not exactly twice the price. And the same Standard guitar in other finishes is only $479, still not even close to double. Yes, you can go a lot higher (Plus Tops, Limited Editions, Tributes, etc.), and the Epi Customs start at only $699.

 

Ron, PMing you.

Sheila

[AlanH]

Sorry Sheila I was comparing the most commonly bought versions of the studio and the standard models only.

 

The usual prices in my neck of the woods are:

 

Epi LP Studio (Black) £240

Epi LP Standard Plus £399

 

If you look at the more fancy studio (i.e. the deluxe), the least fancy standard (i.e. the black) and the slightly less fancy standard (i.e. the plain top), the price differential is incremental at £250, £300 and £350 respectively. This confirms even more to me that it's a bling thing: Gradual increases in cosmetic appointments with steady increases in price between the £240 and £400 entire range.

 

Sorry not to have said exactly what I was comparing.

 

PS. I think your blue studio is a stunning looking guitar!

 

Cheers

 

Alan

[deflepfan]

Sorry Sheila I was comparing the most commonly bought versions of the studio and the standard models only.

 

The usual prices in my neck of the woods are:

 

Epi LP Studio (Black) £240

Epi LP Standard Plus £399

 

If you look at the more fancy studio (i.e. the deluxe)' date=' the least fancy standard (i.e. the black) and the slightly less fancy standard (i.e. the plain top), the price differential is incremental at £250, £300 and £350 respectively. This confirms even more to me that it's a bling thing: Gradual increases in cosmetic appointments with steady increases in price between the £240 and £400 entire range.

 

Sorry not to have said exactly what I was comparing.

 

PS. I think your blue studio is a stunning looking guitar!

 

Cheers

 

Alan[/quote']

Understood. And I love my Studio, whether she's a true LP or not! And that is all that really matters at the end of the day.

Sheila

[hoss49]

I have to agree with Sheila. As long as it feels good and plays good to you that is all that counts.

[robblegrass]

Hi All,

 

Just joined today, so this is my first post.

 

Going back to the first message with regards to the Epi LE '59 LP, well guess what ... I bought one on Sat. It's a beaut. I'm a Bluegrass mandolin & guitar picker but I always loved the sound of a LP. This is my 1st electric guitar. I certianly liked her way more than the Gibson Studio LP's.

 

I was really interested in the Ultra 11 too. But my buck went on the '59. Well I get home & plug her in, and low and behold if you can't bend the 1st & 2nd strings past the 12th fret. She would just cut out & go dead. What a piss off!! The neck & action are fabulous it's just that she ain't playing "out of the box" like it should.

 

So yesterday I head back to the store & I have to drop off my new guitar so that the obvious problem can be fixed. Who knows when I'll get a call. Piss me off again. I really don't know how to play "electric" But I'll learn. One thing I did learn tho' is that you can't spend enough time in a store trying out the wares before you buy.

 

Thanks for all of the insightful comments on the Epi '59 LP.

 

Robblegrass

[Xaj]

Hi AlanH,

 

I am sorry you had a poor experience with a 59 Standard, but I have one and I can honestly tell you it is a really great guitar. Obviously, when they are in display in the store they may not have the best setup in the world.

But after a setup, she's a dream to play.

 

Mine had a pretty good setup when I got her in January.

I played her and was really impressed by the finish and the sound and even the action.

After a couple of weeks, I get a bit of fret buzz, but I wasn't worried.

I took her to my favorite luthier and asked him to set it up, and that really blew me away.

He raised the bridge very slightly, a little touch to the truss rod, played around with intonation and... well, I'll have to take my Gibson Les Paul Standard to him so he does the same, because at the moment the 59 is playing way better.

 

I really love this guitar.

If you are interested in one, go for it.

Then have it set up, you won't be dissapointed.

 

 

Cheers

[ken361]

you always gotta perform some kind of a set up.

[Hector Arcadius]

Just my point of view on the ''What is a REAL Les Paul guitar'' issue.

 

If the Gibson Les Paul Studios are not real Les Pauls then certainly an Epi cannot produce a ''real'' Les Paul, no matter what (different congstruction methods). Or any other brand. But then... the Gibson 2008 Standards are certainly not Les Paul since they are chambered, among others. The Traditionals are? Of course not, because they are weight-relieved. Perhaps the Classics? With that skinny neck? Hell no!

 

So, the Gibson 1959 Re-Issues are ''real Les Pauls'' only...? Of course not. They were different from the '57 Les Paul which were goldtop only, they were the real Les Pauls. But... wait a minute! They had humbuckers! The real Les Pauls had only P-90s!So...

 

 

We could go like this for hours... Get my point...?

 

 

As far as I am concerned (and I don't have / want to persuade anyone else in here), I have a REAL Les Paul. It's a 2008 Gibson Les Paul Studio, it's chambered (my Epi SG Special out-weighs it!!!) , it has no binding, no maple top, with pickups that I might ending up swapping. And I freaking love it.

[Guest icantbuyafender]

Just my point of view on the ''What is a REAL Les Paul guitar'' issue.

 

If the Gibson Les Paul Studios are not real Les Pauls then certainly an Epi cannot produce a ''real'' Les Paul' date=' no matter what (different congstruction methods). Or any other brand. But then... the Gibson 2008 Standards are certainly not Les Paul since they are chambered, among others. The Traditionals are? Of course not, because they are weight-relieved. Perhaps the Classics? With that skinny neck? Hell no!

 

So, the Gibson 1959 Re-Issues are ''real Les Pauls'' only...? Of course not. They were different from the '57 Les Paul which were goldtop only, they were the real Les Pauls. But... wait a minute! They had humbuckers! The real Les Pauls had only P-90s!So...

 

 

We could go like this for hours... Get my point...?

 

 

As far as I am concerned (and I don't have / want to persuade anyone else in here), I have a REAL Les Paul. It's a 2008 Gibson Les Paul Studio, it's chambered (my Epi SG Special out-weighs it!!!) , it has no binding, no maple top, with pickups that I might ending up swapping. And I freaking love it. [/quote']

 

'bout damn time someone said it.

[hoss49]

I love my tibute!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[matiac]

I still want one of those Epiphone Les Paul Standard Mahoganys...got to play one, and I MUST have one, entire guitar is satin finished, one piece neck, dunno what it's got for pickups, but they sounded pretty sweet out of that Mesa 5:50 Guitar Center was gracious enough to let me use...I want that guitar.

[Pennyman]

I love my tribute!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

[AS90]

The differences are not obvious to the novice' date=' that's how they can get away with it. To an untrained eye the appear the same, to someone who builds and repairs guitars for a living, they are as alike as a Fender Strat and Charvel SanDimas. Or an Affinity Strat and Fender Standard.

 

Just because one is too blind to see it does not make it not there.[/quote']

 

 

You are so full of crap! I have had lots of Gibson Les Pauls over the years, I do all my own work on them and know them inside out. You come up with rubbish like this to make yourself seem more knowledgeable than everyone else but most of the time you are just plain wrong!

[peeper]

Whatever you say you genius of lutherie. You're problem is you are too stupid to see past the marketing hype to the truth.

They are NOT the same guitars, not built on the same line as Standards, and are put together entirely different, out of different parts. But your right, they're the same after Gibson finishes painting Les Paul on them, that negates all the structural differences in the two instruments.

 

Get bent

[AS90]

Whatever you say you genius of lutherie. You're problem is you are too stupid to see past the marketing hype to the truth.

They are NOT the same guitars' date=' not built on the same line as Standards, and are put together entirely different, out of different parts. But your right, they're the same after Gibson finishes painting Les Paul on them, that negates all the structural differences in the two instruments.

 

Get bent [/quote']

 

And now we see your true colours! What a nice person.

 

So my Studio with full sized mohogony body, ebony fret board, Gibson USA hardware and pickups is put together "differently" using "different parts"? Why? And what are these "different parts"? When every other manufacturer is standardising their processes, why would Gibson build what is essentially the same guitar slightly differently in a much more expensive way?

 

 

Actually, don't bother answering that, all your posts are negative and belittling and contain utter nonsense anyway.

[AlanH]

OK, I've done some detailed, close up comparisons of my studio deluxe and my standard plus which I've separated in to sections A), and C) below. I used a steel ruler for the measurements.

 

A) The obvious differences with the studio (which most people usually cite) are:

 

-No binding on body or neck

-Black speed knobs

-Plain top vs flamed burst

-Tulip tuners (although regular studios have grovers just like the standards)

-The model name on the truss rod cover (doh!)

-Note the studio deluxe has the same trapezoid inlays as the standards, whereas a regular studio has dot inlays.

 

The less obvious differences with the studio are:

 

-Thinner cap (approx 3mm vs 6mm on the standard; the cap on the standard is more figured compared to the slightly flatter (but still figured) studio. This necessitates using slighly differently curved pickup rings.

-Shorter heel at the neck join (measuring the flat underside = approx 15mm vs 20mm on the standard)

-Less depth to the heel by approx 3mm (has to be thinner because of the thinner cap)

 

C) The identical features of both are:

 

-Thickness of the body (exactly 40mm for each)

-Quality of woods (fretboard, body and neck)

-Hardware quality (stop bar, t-o-m bridge, jack, switch, pickups, strap buttons, pick guard)

-The words Epiphone Les Paul Model on the headstock

 

So, if we take the price of a studio (at £240-£250) vs. that of a standard in black (at £300 without the extra fancy burst and flame cap features which would cost another £100 on top of that)....

 

......the £50-£60 extra seems reasonable for the relatively minor differences shown in A) and above while still retaining the important details in C) which, IMO, actually matter with respect to sound, playabilty and feel.

 

As I stated earlier the studio weighs just shy of 8.5lbs and the standard just a touch over 8.5lbs. On playing unplugged, the Standard has a very slightly darker, fatter tone whereas the Studio has a little bit more attack/brightness. I believe this is due to the differences in the caps. Both guitars sustain equally well.

 

Take an Epi LP studio and you have a perfectly funtional, gigable imported Les Paul copy costing £240:-

-If you want neck and fretboard binding plus a thicker, slightly more contoured cap you pay £60 more.

-If you then want a burst finish you pay another £50 on top of that

-If you also want a flame finish that will cost a final extra £50

 

Alan