Mmmmm.....pancakes

[FennRx]

straight out of 1976 baby.

 

 

and then a little something else for me and the wife. she liked the color.

[myspace.com/jessenoah]

straight out of 1976 baby.

 

 

 

no waffle tuners for your pancakes?

lol

 

 

ace would be proud of that one

[L5Larry]

Here's it's older brother from 1975.

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if they EVER had any "Les Paul Standard" serial number decals made.

[FennRx]

thats nice larry! now i know what mine looked like before all the mods!

 

mine has dimarzios w/ two coil tap toggles and american grovers. switch tip and pickguard were replaced with these hideous metal ones...im guessing the speed knobs were originally reflectors?

 

i bought her today from GC. i'm sure i got ripped off, but i found an affordable Norlin with some of the hated traits like the pancake and huge headstock. its not vintage, but she's old and has clearly seen plenty of action....lots of mojo in this one- not surprisingly she plays great. good tone, not as good as my R9, but very satisfying.

[SRV-Zeppelin]

Your pancakes should go well with GuitarJunkie's "mapleburst" R8... nothing like a little Quebec maple syrup!

[Boston004681]

:-& :-& :-& :-& :-& =P~ =P~ =P~

[Tim Plains]

I love both of them!

[KSG_Standard]

Did you swap out the mini-HBs for those pups? I had a '74 sparkle red deluxe with mini-HBs in it, I liked the way the guitar looked, but I HATED the mini's.

[FennRx]

Did you swap out the mini-HBs for those pups? I had a '74 sparkle red deluxe with mini-HBs in it' date=' I liked the way the guitar looked, but I HATED the mini's.[/quote']

 

the original owner routed the guitar for humbuckers and did other mods....the coil tap toggles and the grovers are cool, the metal pickguard and switchtip have already gone away.

[L5Larry]

the original owner routed the guitar for humbuckers and.

 

That's not necessarily true, it might have been a Standard from birth. I guess when Gibson first brought back the Standard in 74/75 the did not have any "Standard" serial number decals, so they just used the "Deluxe" decals. One book I have states they were "mislabeled", but for whatever reason many, if not all, of these early reissue Standards has serial number decals that said Deluxe.

 

One way to know if yours started out as a Deluxe would be the signature on the headstock face. If it says "Model" under Les' signature, it was built as a Standard, the Deluxes said "Deluxe" in the small print. Other than that and the mini's, the two models were indentical anyway.

[FennRx]

 

That's not necessarily true' date=' it might have been a Standard from birth. I guess when Gibson first brought back the Standard in 74/75 the did not have any "Standard" serial number decals, so they just used the "Deluxe" decals. One book I have states they were "mislabeled", but for whatever reason many, if not all, of these early reissue Standards has serial number decals that said Deluxe.

 

One way to know if yours started out as a Deluxe would be the signature on the headstock face. If it says "Model" under Les' signature, it was built as a Standard, the Deluxes said "Deluxe" in the small print. Other than that and the mini's, the two models were indentical anyway.

[/quote']

 

ah....then it is a 76 Standard, not a Deluxe. thanks for the info!

[rmngretsch14]

I've been misled by your title, and now I'm hungry--damned you FennRx

[lucy-guitar]

](*' date=') =P~ =P~ =P~ =P~ =P~ =P~ =P~ [/quote']

+1.000.000

[Out_Of_Control]

I also have a '75 Standard. I consider it my Keeper!

 

Very nice :)

[solacematt]

I too crave pancakes, and damn that's nice :)

[L5Larry]

I also have a '75 Standard. I consider it my Keeper!

 

Maybe your not aware of the rule around here, until you post pictures, it doesn't exist. We'd love to see it.

[littlekenny]

wow, that's nice. If you dont mind me asking, how much did it cost?

[mildperv]

General rule of thumb: If you pop the neck pick up out and there is a small strip of wood left at the bottom of the fingerboard then you have an original humbucker route. If the route is flush with the bottom of the finger board, it was originally a Deluxe (minis).

[Bram]

thats nice larry! now i know what mine looked like before all the mods!

 

i bought her today from GC. i'm sure i got ripped off' date=' but i found an affordable Norlin with some of the hated traits like the pancake and huge headstock. its not vintage, but she's old and has clearly seen plenty of action....lots of mojo in this one- not surprisingly she plays great. good tone, not as good as my R9, but very satisfying.[/quote']

 

A Gibson Les Paul Standard or Custom older than 23 years = vintage.

 

An R9 is not comparable with a Norlin Les Paul...they're both way different animals. The Norlin is probably a lot

heavier in weight compared to the R9 (that's my guess). Weight has a lot to do with the tone, but that doesn't

mean that 'lighter' is always a good thing. In my world there's no such thing as 'better'...I'd probably choose the

R9 for blues/rock and the Norlin for heavy rock/metal. I appreciate a naturally dark sounding Les Paul as much as

a bright, open sounding Les Paul. 'Dark' doesn't mean that the tone is lifeless or dull, as long as it has a balanced

eq with corresponding sweet spots and sustain.

[FennRx]

vintage in the gibson LP world is 1952-1960 (and 68-69 depending on who you ask).

 

a 1985 Les Paul is most definitely not considered vintage by serious LP aficionados.

 

and in my world there is a "better." my Historic definitely sounds better than my Studio...but maybe thats what i tell myself to justify the cost.

[L5Larry]

wow' date=' that's nice. If you dont mind me asking, how much did it cost?[/quote']

 

Mine cost $500 brand new in 1975. Bought it from Mel Bay himself. Just thought I'd rub it in a little.

[Bram]

vintage in the gibson LP world is 1952-1960 (and 68-69 depending on who you ask).

 

a 1985 Les Paul is most definitely not considered vintage by serious LP aficionados.

 

and in my world there is a "better." my Historic definitely sounds better than my Studio...but maybe thats what i tell myself to justify the cost.

 

Whatever 'vintage' is in the Gibson LP world; 60's/70's/80's/(90's) solid bodies become very rare these days. They're not the industrial standard anymore (because of the introduction of chambers inside the Les Pauls body). You gotta pay lots, lots of money for a Gibson solid body and even than it wouldn't be an easy job to find an acceptable one.

 

To clear things up: my 1988 Les Paul Standard just eats my 06 Studio Premium Plus/07 Standard Faded for breakfast (any of those cheap, crappy new Les Pauls: solid body or not). It's unbelievable sweet with great power/sustain and a naturel compression that I just love. Nothing dull, it has a HUGE tone. But then again my Studio is a lifeless/dull piece of crap and the Faded sounds great for what is it, but just doesn't sound as sweet/warm as the 1988 Standard. 'Sweetness' is some-

thing very hard for Gibson to put in their guitars these days.

[FennRx]

 

Whatever 'vintage' is in the Gibson LP world; 60's/70's/80's/(90's) solid bodies become very rare these days. They're not the industrial standard anymore (because of the introduction of chambers inside the Les Pauls body). You gotta pay lots' date=' lots of money for a Gibson solid body and even than it wouldn't be an easy job to find an acceptable one.

 

To clear things up: my 1988 Les Paul Standard just eats my 06 Studio Premium Plus/07 Standard Faded for breakfast (any of those cheap, crappy new Les Pauls: solid body or not). It's unbelievable sweet with great power/sustain and a naturel compression that I just love (while still being clear and crisp). It has a HUGE tone. But then again my Studio is a lifeless/dull piece of crap and the Faded sounds great for what is it, but just doesn't sound as sweet/warm as the 1988 Standard. 'Sweetness' is something very hard for Gibson to put in their guitars these days.

 

[/quote']

 

what PUs does your 88 have? are they the circuit board ones that people always say are terrible? i bet they are...just shows the diversity between each instrument, even when they are from the same year, run, etc.

 

one thing i will say in Gibson's favor, though (i personally think) the new Std is blah, i have been impressed with the handfull of Traditionals i have played.

[Flight959]

Nice very nice,

 

Is the back of the neck painted like that or is it wear?

 

Regards

 

Flight959

[Bram]

 

what PUs does your 88 have? are they the circuit board ones that people always say are terrible? i bet they are...just shows the diversity between each instrument' date=' even when they are from the same year, run, etc.

 

one thing i will say in Gibson's favor, though (i personally think) the new Std is blah, i have been impressed with the handfull of Traditionals i have played.[/quote']

 

Yep, even with the 'circuit board ones' (stock EMG 85's) this 88' had that sweet, huge tone. I personally changed them to passive pickups (medium/high output Alnico 5) and the character of that particular Les Paul remained for 95% the same; it just looks way nicer than it did with the EMG's.

 

I agree with the Traditionals, they look very solidly build to me. I haven't play one myself, but maybe I'll do someday (for fun, not to buy). I don't need a Les Paul or any guitar at the moment (two Les Pauls with both a way different tone are enough for me). The Beauty and the Beast...