buying a gibson les paul need advice

[lerxstcat]

I must take uncannily good care of my guitars, since my 1977 Les Paul Standard has never suffered a broken headstock or any other structural damage. Someone also said that many who play Les Pauls are actually playing copies. WHY does EVERY company have their own copy of some kind of Les Paul then, whether Standard, Custom or one of the double cutaway variations? Because it's basically a great design. Every design has some kind of "flaw" which is simply a feature that isn't to the advantage of the style of play.

The biggest issues with Gibson Les Pauls today is in the quality control. Now I prefer 24-fret Superstrats with locking tremelos, but there is just something awesome about a Les Paul too - if you find the right one. But to me if you break the headstock on a Les Paul it's because you were careless with your guitar. If you're dumb enough to lay a 12-lb. guitar down to rest on its headstock, that is YOU being dumb, not a bad design. I never lay ANY guitar down resting on its headstock, but I treat my instruments with respect.

Gibsons ARE overpriced, and QC is bad. Those are the legitimate concerns about Gibsons. It's why my 24-fret "Les Paul" with licensed Floyd is an Agile for $279, not a Gibson for $4995 that doesn't even have 24 frets like I want. But I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The Agile is basically a Les Paul with the 2 major improvements I want. It exists because the Les Paul also exists. Ad as for the upper fret access, adjust your playing technique a little and that problem becomes minimal, especially with an improved neck joint like the Axcess has. Plus the difficulty that is there is offset by the cool guitar faces you'll make bending the high E string up there!

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Its getting tought to find a clean 79-82 Hamer Sunburst and the prices on them are getting retarded. Maybe the Hamer Specials(same basic shape) but I rarely see them here in Wisconsin . I'd take another little red one if I could find it for a reasonable price. They are REALLY great guitars. I'm with you on that.

I can't tell ya the last time I saw a Hamer guitar. It's been a very long time. A shame, because they are really nice guitars.

[Sephiroth]

I must take uncannily good care of my guitars, since my 1977 Les Paul Standard has never suffered a broken headstock or any other structural damage. Someone also said that many who play Les Pauls are actually playing copies. WHY does EVERY company have their own copy of some kind of Les Paul then, whether Standard, Custom or one of the double cutaway variations? Because it's basically a great design. Every design has some kind of "flaw" which is simply a feature that isn't to the advantage of the style of play.

The biggest issues with Gibson Les Pauls today is in the quality control. Now I prefer 24-fret Superstrats with locking tremelos, but there is just something awesome about a Les Paul too - if you find the right one. But to me if you break the headstock on a Les Paul it's because you were careless with your guitar. If you're dumb enough to lay a 12-lb. guitar down to rest on its headstock, that is YOU being dumb, not a bad design. I never lay ANY guitar down resting on its headstock, but I treat my instruments with respect.

Gibsons ARE overpriced, and QC is bad. Those are the legitimate concerns about Gibsons. It's why my 24-fret "Les Paul" with licensed Floyd is an Agile for $279, not a Gibson for $4995 that doesn't even have 24 frets like I want. But I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The Agile is basically a Les Paul with the 2 major improvements I want. It exists because the Les Paul also exists. Ad as for the upper fret access, adjust your playing technique a little and that problem becomes minimal, especially with an improved neck joint like the Axcess has. Plus the difficulty that is there is offset by the cool guitar faces you'll make bending the high E string up there!

1. Unless you replace the electrics, nut, and tuners in them or pay for the more expensive models, Agiles are junk. You are not getting a guitar as good as a Paul Custom with one of those.

2. Epiphone makes the "Prophecy" Les Pauls which have thin fast 24-fret necks and actual Gibson or EMG pups in them. They're actually pretty OK for the money.

3. I have seen more vintage surviving set-neck Gibsons than vintage surviving bolt-on Fenders. That accounts for something to me about their durability.

But they are over-priced, and it seems like you're getting fewer features on them because they'd rather save any variety for those "special limited run" ones that have an extra grand added just because they're declared limited.

[Torment Leaves Scars]

1. Unless you replace the electrics, nut, and tuners in them or pay for the more expensive models, Agiles are junk. You are not getting a guitar as good as a Paul Custom with one of those.

2. Epiphone makes the "Prophecy" Les Pauls which have thin fast 24-fret necks and actual Gibson or EMG pups in them. They're actually pretty OK for the money.

3. I have seen more vintage surviving set-neck Gibsons than vintage surviving bolt-on Fenders. That accounts for something to me about their durability.

But they are over-priced, and it seems like you're getting fewer features on them because they'd rather save any variety for those "special limited run" ones that have an extra grand added just because they're declared limited.

I saw some video on YouTube of some dude comparing an Agile to an Epiphone, and totally bashing the Epiphone. The humor in all of it was that the guy didn't even play the same things back to back with one another, using each guitar, nor did he bother to do a very good job tuning the Epiphone. Basically, this guy was on a mission to make an Agile look better than an Epiphone.

Personally, I've never played an Agile, because I don't waste my time with mail-order guitars, but the people who have played them praise them like they're the greatest things ever. While I'd love to see what the big deal is, I'm not going to drop $200 out of curiosity.

Anyway, IMO, the Epiphone model not only looked better, but despite being pretty much out of tune, it was clear which guitar had the richer sound, and that was the Epiphone.

My biggest issue with Gibson is the recent quality. I've seen flaw upon flaw on guitars that shouldn't have any upon leaving the factory, not to mention playing a few that just basically "fret out" with some good bends. These issues just aren't representations of good quality control.

A buddy of mine has 4 Les Pauls. He has a Studio, Standard, Ace Frehley model, and I'm not sure what the other one is. They're all older Les Pauls. I wanna say that they were probably manufactured in the early 90s? Not a single one of them have/had the flaws I see on them so often today.

There's nothing I'd like to see more than for Gibson reestablish their reputation for high quality guitars, but, until then, they're not a company I'm going to hand my money over to.

[lerxstcat]

1. Unless you replace the electrics, nut, and tuners in them or pay for the more expensive models, Agiles are junk. You are not getting a guitar as good as a Paul Custom with one of those.

2. Epiphone makes the "Prophecy" Les Pauls which have thin fast 24-fret necks and actual Gibson or EMG pups in them. They're actually pretty OK for the money.

3. I have seen more vintage surviving set-neck Gibsons than vintage surviving bolt-on Fenders. That accounts for something to me about their durability.

But they are over-priced, and it seems like you're getting fewer features on them because they'd rather save any variety for those "special limited run" ones that have an extra grand added just because they're declared limited.

I didn't say the Agiles were as good as a Les Paul Custom, but they do come with 18:1 Grover tuners which are better than the Klusons Gibsons come with. I said it was "basically" a Les Paul with the improvements I want - 24 frets and a licensed Floyd. I haven't played a Prophecy but this guitar is definitely better than an Epi LP Standard and I don't like the cheesy Prophecy inlays. It stays in tune just fine with Grovers and a licensed Floyd, and the pickups are not bad either. So your "junk" appraisal to me is wrong, and it's sitting next to my 1977 LP Standard. The Standard is nicer but my Agiles are nicer then the Epiphones I have played and owned. Your mileage may vary but there are plenty of people on this board who also like them. I watched those testimonials for about 9 years before getting one myself aqnd I got another within 6 months of the first one.

[Vass]

I got an Agile for my brother to knock around on. I wasn't wild about the pickups but as far as playability and looks it was pretty sweet...especially for the price.

I own a 92 LP Studio. Sweet axe, sounds like a million bucks, but has the 59 neck which is a bit fat for me. I was not aware that the Studios of today were different from the older Studios. When I bought it the claim was that they were the same as Standards without binding & maybe some other small things.

And one comment...dude. Kramer owned by Gibson. Yes it is. But I hardly think that is the incarnation a guy with the screen name "Kramer" who registered in 2003 is talking about. What, he's a big fan of the Music Yo Kramers? I'd go as far as to say that NOBODY who spends any time around guitars hears "Kramer" and thinks "Gibson". There is NO comparison between that and Fender buying Jackson....if for no other reason than KRAMER DID NOT EXIST in any meaningful way before Gibson grabbed the name. NO people who worked for Kramer in Neptune NJ work at the "new" Kramer factories. (Heh the guys who worked in the Kramer factory after a period of time didn't work in the Kramer factory either- Half the stuff was made by ESP and assembled between bonghits in the parkinglot with EVH...but that's a different story....full disclosure....I got a bunch of Kramers).

But the fact that you are only aware of "$200" Kramers sold next to Affinity strats...either you're playing dumb or......? Nobody with any sense of guitar history would think "$200 garbage" when they hear Kramer.

Having said all that, I have only had my hands on one fairly newish Gibson LP. Want to say it was a Classic? Maybe a Standard. I was a little pissed off by the way the finish slopped down where the neck met the body. It looked cloudy and thick. The angle was rounded instead of square because there was so much finish in there. Otherwise it felt nice to play. That did make me go "WTF" though to be honest. Something that would be EASILY rectified by looking at it before you bought it though I guess- My buddy didn't really care, he just plays the shit out of it.

[axmann]

Agiles are damn fine guitars, as are Made for USA Dillions, for the money.My buddies Agile Les Paul is immaculate and gorgeous. . We did put in some old Dimarzio's. It rocks. I have a Dillion. I changed nothing, it was well crafted, clean clearcoat with a really nice cloud flame maple top. Grovers, Alinco wax potted humbuckers. Beautiful tone. Very nice. 4 bills, hard to beat.

[Torment Leaves Scars]

I got an Agile for my brother to knock around on. I wasn't wild about the pickups but as far as playability and looks it was pretty sweet...especially for the price.

I own a 92 LP Studio. Sweet axe, sounds like a million bucks, but has the 59 neck which is a bit fat for me. I was not aware that the Studios of today were different from the older Studios. When I bought it the claim was that they were the same as Standards without binding & maybe some other small things.

And one comment...dude. Kramer owned by Gibson. Yes it is. But I hardly think that is the incarnation a guy with the screen name "Kramer" who registered in 2003 is talking about. What, he's a big fan of the Music Yo Kramers? I'd go as far as to say that NOBODY who spends any time around guitars hears "Kramer" and thinks "Gibson". There is NO comparison between that and Fender buying Jackson....if for no other reason than KRAMER DID NOT EXIST in any meaningful way before Gibson grabbed the name. NO people who worked for Kramer in Neptune NJ work at the "new" Kramer factories. (Heh the guys who worked in the Kramer factory after a period of time didn't work in the Kramer factory either- Half the stuff was made by ESP and assembled between bonghits in the parkinglot with EVH...but that's a different story....full disclosure....I got a bunch of Kramers).

But the fact that you are only aware of "$200" Kramers sold next to Affinity strats...either you're playing dumb or......? Nobody with any sense of guitar history would think "$200 garbage" when they hear Kramer.

Having said all that, I have only had my hands on one fairly newish Gibson LP. Want to say it was a Classic? Maybe a Standard. I was a little pissed off by the way the finish slopped down where the neck met the body. It looked cloudy and thick. The angle was rounded instead of square because there was so much finish in there. Otherwise it felt nice to play. That did make me go "WTF" though to be honest. Something that would be EASILY rectified by looking at it before you bought it though I guess- My buddy didn't really care, he just plays the shit out of it.

Well, that's great that some people don't mind spending their hard-earned cash for a slopped up, $2200 guitar, but personally, I do. When I spend a lot of money, I demand not only a high quality product, but a high quality product with attention to detail.

As for Kramer, I just played a Kramer the other day. It was pretty horrible. But, make no mistake, it was NOT the "real" Kramer from the 80s, no, no, this was on of Gibson's bastard children.

When I think of Kramer, I prefer to think of the heyday of EVH, but nowadays, when I see a Kramer, I think, "Wow, what a pile of shit. Nothing more than a shadow of its former glory. Just do the Kramer name honor and put it to rest."

[axmann]

Personally, if you really want a Gibson Les Paul, play it for some time. Look it over, make sure it's worth it to you. You have to play it, not us. Get the frame of mind and say "I'm only going to buy this if it's really worth it" , not just to say hey I got a real Les Paul. Guys, we all know we are way past that. If it looks good, plays good, feels good, then look at the price. Just don't do it to make a Gibson statement. Do it for yourself. I have a wicked clean 1975 Gibson Flying V Limited. I bought it brand new. It still answers all those questions.

[goodwood]

i put a new faded cherry les paul studio on layaway. im getting it for 770.00 with case. i think thats a good deal? i almost got an explorer instead, it was pretty killer too. i tried out alot of guitars ltd ec 1000, gibson explorer,les paul custom, les paul studio, and a brown faded and cherry faded studio. the custom was killer but it was 2800$ the explorer was 1100. almost picked that one but the faded ones were 770$ with case. i kind of liked the look of the brown one more but the cherry one sounds and plays killer \m/\m/.

That's great. I'm glad that you got one that you are really into. I think that is one of the ones with no maple cap, so eventually you may find it a bit 'dark' sounding but then again perhaps that is one of the characteristics of the tone that you liked.

One techie sort of note that I would say to the people who 'want 24 frets on a Les Paul' is that there is a sweet spot for the neck pickup and the 24 fret necks push that neck pickup out of that spot. I called it BS when I first heard someone say it too but more just because I have had 24 fret neck Les Paul style guitars and always got nice tones from the neck pickup - however, nice, useable, etc doesn't take away from the fact that it is indeed out of that sweet spot...it has to do with where the pickup is in relation to the string length and the vibration of the string at that position (physics d00d). For those that are on bridge pickup 90% or even 70% of the time - it doesn't matter anyway and as I stated there are still plenty of good tones on the neck pickup of a 24 fretter.

Anyway...aside from that...

I'm a big fan of the Les Paul Studios and have had about 8 of them - all were good and all but one were random purchases. Every one that I saw for sale used and went to actually try, I bought. The way I see it is I should have ran into a dog by now but whatever right? I would have liked to have kept them all but it seems like whenever I get a 4th one I sell one. I did so until I arrived at having a black one, a white one and a wine red one.

I am a pickup junkie and don't really care for the stock Studio pickups so I swap them. I tend to like to F with the guitars a bit and the white one was a 'shell' or an empty body/neck bought off of eBay so I aftermarketted the heck out of it. The wine red one was an interesting project because I modeled it after a thread that I saw in which someone did a complete refinish on one. For mine I left the wine red top on but I stripped the back and sides.

...and since this thread is severely lacking in photos...



P90 and Mean & Nasty

[Torment Leaves Scars]

That's great. I'm glad that you got one that you are really into. I think that is one of the ones with no maple cap, so eventually you may find it a bit 'dark' sounding but then again perhaps that is one of the characteristics of the tone that you liked.

One techie sort of note that I would say to the people who 'want 24 frets on a Les Paul' is that there is a sweet spot for the neck pickup and the 24 fret necks push that neck pickup out of that spot. I called it BS when I first heard someone say it too but more just because I have had 24 fret neck Les Paul style guitars and always got nice tones from the neck pickup - however, nice, useable, etc doesn't take away from the fact that it is indeed out of that sweet spot...it has to do with where the pickup is in relation to the string length and the vibration of the string at that position (physics d00d). For those that are on bridge pickup 90% or even 70% of the time - it doesn't matter anyway and as I stated there are still plenty of good tones on the neck pickup of a 24 fretter.

Anyway...aside from that...

I'm a big fan of the Les Paul Studios and have had about 8 of them - all were good and all but one were random purchases. Every one that I saw for sale used and went to actually try, I bought. The way I see it is I should have ran into a dog by now but whatever right? I would have liked to have kept them all but it seems like whenever I get a 4th one I sell one. I did so until I arrived at having a black one, a white one and a wine red one.

I am a pickup junkie and don't really care for the stock Studio pickups so I swap them. I tend to like to F with the guitars a bit and the white one was a 'shell' or an empty body/neck bought off of eBay so I aftermarketted the heck out of it. The wine red one was an interesting project because I modeled it after a thread that I saw in which someone did a complete refinish on one. For mine I left the wine red top on but I stripped the back and sides.

...and since this thread is severely lacking in photos...



P90 and Mean & Nasty

Love the matte-black one!

[Sukkoi19]

I just snagged a new Traditional Plus from Guitar Center of all places. I have owned quite a few Les Pauls in my day and never had a bad one. Great guitars with tone like no other. Epiphone Les Pauls...eh not a bad guitar by itself but a direct comparison to a Gibson dramatically reveals the quality, tone and playability difference. My other guitar player has a late 90s Epi Standard Plus Top which I have to take care of for him since he cannot even change strings and it is a nice guitar next to say an Indo Ibanez or JS series but nothing in comparison to any of Gibsons or USA Jacksons for that matter in my opinion.

[lhrocker]

Les Pauls..... did someone mention Les Pauls..... Here's some eye candy. I just sold the natural finish top, but I have a possible replacement...

[Torment Leaves Scars]

I just snagged a new Traditional Plus from Guitar Center of all places. I have owned quite a few Les Pauls in my day and never had a bad one. Great guitars with tone like no other. Epiphone Les Pauls...eh not a bad guitar by itself but a direct comparison to a Gibson dramatically reveals the quality, tone and playability difference. My other guitar player has a late 90s Epi Standard Plus Top which I have to take care of for him since he cannot even change strings and it is a nice guitar next to say an Indo Ibanez or JS series but nothing in comparison to any of Gibsons or USA Jacksons for that matter in my opinion.

Some of the more expensive Epiphones I've seen appear to have better quality than some of their Gibson counterparts, but you're right as far as the tone goes...the Epiphone LP doesn't even come close.

Some of the Epiphones I've played play real nice, and then others are just disasters. I'm honestly thinking it's a matter of where it's bought. For instance, where I take lessons, nearly every single one of the guitars plays like an absolute disaster, regardless of make or model. Regardless which one I grab off the wall, it's always way out of tune, the string action is extremely high, and it's just miserable to play. Oddly enough, when I hit other shops, the guitars always manage to play better. They're always in tune when I pick'em up, and the string action is always lower. The differences are night and day. :think:

[MetalHeadMat]

Sorry, but you haven't said anything to convince me that your not one of those "me-too" Gibson bashers found in droves on the HC forums.

I've seen plenty of Gibsons and none of them had the paint flaws you describe. I'm always in GC's, Sam Asses, pawnshops looking for new guitars. Out of the hundreds of guitars I've gone over, I would have thought I'd seen something like this by now.

Do me a favor and take some pictures and post them.

Feel free to "Post Away". I'm not stopping you.

Here's a good topic for you. Explain to me just why if Gibson is such a bad product line with such bad quality control how they manage stay in business? Explain to me why so many professionals use their products still?

I've seen a few of these Gibson's with paint flaws, and they're horrendous. Either too much lacquer and it globs all over everything, or just uneven paint.

Also, if I owned a guitar store, I wouldn't put out the guitars I'm about to send back to Gibson for inexcusable flaws