capmaster Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 OPEN LETTER To all those at Gibson USA who made and were responsible for the make of this one Les Paul Standard 2012 Premium Plus Honey Burst with the serial number 109320561 comprising full weight without any relief: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DEEPLY LOVE THIS GUITAR! I bought this incredible and unique piece of luthier's art last Saturday at Musikhaus Thomann, Treppendorf 30, D-96138 Burgebrach, Germany. I have to point out that I prefer a fully massive over a weight relieved Les Paul body, and so I gratefully accept the way this guitar fails to meet the related model's specifications. It could have been that you had to downgrade and sort out this full weight body at the Custom Shop since shaping of the top had revealed unexpected occlusions in a timber assumed to be of AAAA grade. It also could have been that Billy Gibbons rejected it as Pearly Gates remake for that reason. Three years later you may have taken it off the shelf during a clean up I suppose, decided again that it was a crying shame to throw it away, and finally sent it to stock guitar production to save it from the waste bin. Finally, you made a dream of a guitar from it that luckily found its way to me at an affordable price as Les Paul Standard 2012 Premium Plus in Honey Burst finish. Among all those weight relieved Les Pauls there was this one very different from the five guitars of the same model I had got to know before. I knew in an instant that I had to have exactly this one. It has a nice flamed maple top, although looking closely revealed some dark traces, presumable of resin or other albumen structures, or even color grains on it. Obviously this instrument has the full weight. Later my son reported that I had shaken my head saying over and over "this can't be real... there must be something wrong..." while I was checking if the serial number on the headstock's back matched what's written on the quality checklist, and what the sticker on the cardboard box says. Indeed, it all matched, but I still couldn't believe what I saw and held in hand. Its look really was reminding me of the Billy Gibbons Pearly Gates Limited Les Paul Standard remakes which also had been made without weight relief. The looks of timber and finish obviously are very sensitive to the directions of light and view. On the close up pictures, the dark traces especially on the treble side near the controls are clearly to see. Those minor shortcomings don't trouble me anyway. In fact, it would have been a crying shame to throw this nice guitar body away, and I really love the instrument you got out of it. The neck is very sturdy and only needs a slight turn of the trussrod nut to balance the .011" Optima Electric Chrome string set I put on. My first Les Paul guitar plays and sounds great, its response and resonance are driving me to tears. With an appropriate neck strap the weight is not a problem for me, and due to its four push-pull pots it is a true sound pit. I replaced the stock amber top hat knobs with golden speed knobs since they are much easier to grasp when wanting to pull the pots' switches. Additionally, same as my other three Gibsons, I equipped it with a TP-6 fine tuning tailpiece. Of course, I keep the original parts. THANK YOU VERY MUCH ONCE AGAIN, AND BE SURE I WILL BE THANKFUL FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmer Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Now go and make some noise on it! Very nice post +1 from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 19, 2012 Author Share Posted July 19, 2012 Now go and make some noise on it! Very nice post +1 from me. OK, but I got to get accustomed to these ups and downs in my feelings. This guitar truly amplifies my heartfelt emotions, and so I often shiver and shake, and run out of tears... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Nice looking guitar. Congratulations. I'm confused, however. What makes you think it isn't weight-relieved? Just the actual weight of the guitar? 'Heavy' doesn't equal 'Solid'. Surely you realise that many Trads and 2012 Standards (and 1960 Classics as well, for that matter) are just as heavy - and many even heavier - than the solid-bodied R-I's? And all the P-G stuff. Is there a factual story there or are you just making it all up? Perhaps someone from Customer Service can verify for us that the guitar was, indeed, intended to be a P-G but got waylaid for a few years. That would certainly be interesting to read. Anyhow, as I said; nice looking guitar. Enjoy! P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 19, 2012 Author Share Posted July 19, 2012 Nice looking guitar. Congratulations. I'm confused, however. What makes you think it isn't weight-relieved? Just the actual weight of the guitar? 'Heavy' doesn't equal 'Solid'. Surely you realise that many Trads and 2012 Standards (and 1960 Classics as well, for that matter) are just as heavy - and many even heavier - than the solid-bodied R-I's? And all the P-G stuff. Is there a factual story there or are you just making it all up? Perhaps someone from Customer Service can verify for us that the guitar was, indeed, intended to be a P-G but got waylaid for a few years. That would certainly be interesting to read. Anyhow, as I said; nice looking guitar. Enjoy! P. There's no factual information I got beside weight. It's just my imagination how it could have happened, based on what my senses said comparing this one to all the others I held in hand that day and a week before. The top looked completely different than that of about a dozen translucent finished Standard 2012 Premium Plus, and it was so much heavier than these all and about another dozen of other stock (not custom) Les Paul guitars from Studio to Traditional. Its weight is approx. 4.6 kgs (10.14 lbs). If it was a weight relieved one it would have to contain lots of water what at least I don't hope. I had a new modern weight relieved one of the same model with another finish for a week that I returned due to a poorly set up peghead/nut, and it weighed about 3.5 kgs (7.72 lbs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StijnV Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Can you please post a picture of the serial number? A USA 2012 LP Standard would have the new modern weight relieved body; see picture attached. Kind regards, Stijn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 There's no factual information I got beside weight. It's just my imagination how it could have happened, based on what my senses said comparing this one to all the others I held in hand that day and a week before. The top looked completely different than that of about a dozen translucent finished Standard 2012 Premium Plus, and it was so much heavier than these all and about another dozen of other stock (not custom) Les Paul guitars from Studio to Traditional. Its weight is approx. 4.6 kgs (10.14 lbs). If it was a weight relieved one it would have to contain lots of water what at least I don't hope. I had a new modern weight relieved one of the same model with another finish for a week that I returned due to a poorly set up peghead/nut, and it weighed about 3.5 kgs (7.72 lbs). Yeah if its just based on weight then you cant really tell.. Some of the weight relevied guitars (like my 1960 Classic) weight up to 11lbs... and I also have a 2008 Standard that weighs 9.5lbs... so you cant really tell from that. But.. its a great looking guitars you got and if your happy with it, all of those details dont even matter :) Just enjoy it for what its is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 19, 2012 Author Share Posted July 19, 2012 Can you please post a picture of the serial number? A USA 2012 LP Standard would have the new modern weight relieved body; see picture attached. Kind regards, Stijn Sorry, it took me a while since I had to delete an L6S picture due to insufficient upload memory space, and later had a communication breakdown which made it necessary to start anew. Here's the back of the headstock pictured: Please don't blame anyone for having made or approved this fine guitar without weight relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Sorry, it took me a while since I had to delete an L6S picture due to insufficient upload memory space, and later had a communication breakdown which made it necessary to start anew. Here'e the back of the headstock pictured: Please don't blame anyone for having made or approved this fine guitar without weight relief. If you want more space for pictures you can use www.photobucket.com its free and alot of us use it.. Just copy the IMG link in your post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Please don't blame anyone for having made or approved this fine guitar without weight relief. Don't panic. That's not going to happen. The weight-relieved instruments are generally slightly heavier than the recent solid-bodied ones. The current Standard re-issues - which are the solid-bodied ones - seem to be almost always in the 8 1/4 - 9 1/4 lbs range. If yours, as you say, weighs over 10 lbs it's extremely unlikely to be solid. Why all the worry about how it's made, though? Surely if it plays and sounds (and even looks) fantastic that's all that matters? I have two of each (W-R and Solid) and there is less than 1/4 lb between the four of them from lightest to heaviest (from about 8 lb 14oz to 9 lb 2oz). My re-issues are older (mid-90s) ones which were generally heavier than those of today. I'd bet anything no-one hearing the guits played could tell which was which. It really, really doesn't matter how it's made. As long as it's agood one that is all that matters. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Please don't blame anyone for having made or approved this fine guitar without weight relief. No offense, but I'm sure the blank for your Standard started out at about 18 pounds and everyone at work sighed mightily when they got it down to ten! Enjoy long time and in good health, and enjoy it for what it is. Gibson makes great guitars, should be no surprise there. Doesn't have to be some story made up about it, they just made a good one that day. I have three of them currently that are pretty fantastic. You are not alone! rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I could care less about chambered, weight relieved, or all solid. It doesn't matter at all to me. i don't quite get why ppl on this board go off about it. anyway, nice looking guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btoth76 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Hello Capmaster! Congratulations! The term You used - "heavenly" - is probably the best to describe this guitar! Enjoy with good health! Cheers... Bence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 . What a beautiful guitar. The top is gorgeous. Kind of half way between flame and quilt. And the finish is fantastic. Congrats on your beautiful new Standard. . B) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vega1 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Nice, love the honey burst finish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEDREW Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 MAN! that is a nice one...congratz!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Sweet top. Enjoy the guitar but don't think there is no weight relief just because it's 10 lbs. That just means it was a boat anchor of a piece of wood to begin with. And I'm happy to see you found one that brings tears to your eyes. Me, I just salivate at the mouth now when I find my next guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 Yesterday evening I had the first chance to play my new Les Paul during a rehearsal of my quartet. Of course, I had to take the opportunity to use all settings provided by the push/pull pots, and this was a real proof of the great versatility of this instrument. To be honest, I am a big fan of this flexibility. For another important reason, this rehearsal and at the same time multitrack recording session was an inspiring, exciting and impressive event for my pals and me. Sometimes I had to smile and shake my head during playing and singing... Here's the reason for it: Never before I experienced such a great sustain of an electric guitar. This Les Paul guitar is blowing away anything I ever played. Bent thirds, amplified with a clean transistor sound, last for five to six seconds and stay cutting through without the use of a compressor, despite of another lead guitar, a bass guitar and a drum set playing on. Pumping my wah stays clearly audible through the decay of a chord for four or five seconds with no need to hit the strings again, using a clean sound in this case, too. So my new Les Paul casted a Weimann Blues Bird out of the related song at the first try. I own this Weimann Blues Bird since 1985. It's a German made semi-solid with a through neck and two Seymour-Duncan P90s, and its sounds last longer than that of two Les Pauls I never owned, but regularly played in the past. However, they both had a maple neck, one was a late 1970s Custom in Ebony finish with an ebony fretboard, and the other one an early 1980s Deluxe Gold Top with rosewood fretboard. My Weimann was beyond them both - a bet about sustain compared to a Les Paul Deluxe with a maple neck was the reason for luthier and Blues guitar player Lothar Weimann to design this extraordinary guitar. I admit that I don't know what strings had been on the Les Pauls. No need to say that the Weimann's sounds last longer than that of all my other guitars including Gibson 1978 S-G, 1973 L6-S and 2011 L6S. The sustain of my new Les Paul Standard 2012 with an Optima Electric Chrome Roundwound .011" set with plain G3 is clearly beyond that of the Weimann Blues Bird with a .012" set of same brand and make with wound G3. Comparison of direct and undistorted signals, recorded via DI split directly from the guitar jack, confirmed my perception of my Les Paul's marvellous performance during playing and singing myself. By the way, I had my 2011 Gibson L6S and my 1986 Ibanez RG 430 with me, too, but I left them alone, and even did without the great whammy bar of the Ibanez when it actually had been required... However, there is a somehow annoying detail: The white plastic of my new Les Paul's truss rod cover is broken as well as that of my 2011 L6S. The black layer is OK in both cases. The laminated bell cover of my 1978 S-G, and the black one of my 1973 L6-S are still intact. I believe there's a trouble with the material nowadays as I tighten the screws about the same on all my instruments. I don't know where to get a spare one with "L6S" engraved, so I ordered a blank one for it, and one with "Standard" engraved for my Les Paul at Thomann. They will be delivered today. Despite of it, this Les Paul Standard 2012 is an incredibly good instrument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codename Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Mine has the same dark lines in it also . But they only show at certain angles so I think it's in the grain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.