Actual value in a new Gibson? Can it be?

Johnny Storm

Gibson Les Paul, P90s. Goldtop, €749 on Thomann. Seems like value to me.
What's wrong with it?

goblin59

a lot of these gibson's are actually chambered (ie semi hollowed) so they don't sound near the same as a proper full bodied gibson.
The quality I'd say (this is based on a personal view) is then also comparable to the difference between a mexican made fender and an american fender.
To be honest though this probably means just little niggly bits might be a bit off compared to the 2000euro gibsons, like quality of the wire used and the fact it doesn't have made in america written on the body/neck somewhere.

Any one with one of these guitars and a 2000 euro one feel free to correct me though

Alanstrainor

I want! I'm in the unusual position to actually have some cash in the bank account and some p90's is what i've been gasing for!

Someone tell me why i shouldn't buy this baby. It'd be a nice keep my Edwards LP Gold top company!

goblin59

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Someone tell me why i shouldn't buy this baby. It'd be a nice keep my Edwards LP Gold top company!

because this exists!

http://www.thomann.de/ie/duesenberg_starplayer_tv_outlaw.htm

also went through a p90 stage and hollow body, but the price tag of this has set me back from owning one can play the other series by them though in music maker in dublin

Ravelleman

I've never understood the Doozy thing. €1600 strikes me as being way too much for a Korean made guitar, regardless of how much production quality by our South-East Asian friends has come along.

Regarding the Les Paul Tribute, one of the big turn offs is the multi-piece body, frequently with visible join lines between pieces.

A lot of people have been saying that the finish is really thin and it wears vey quickly. Some people obviously like that; some don't.

A lot of people make a big deal about the fact that non-Historic Les Pauls are chambered. I really think it's much of a muchness. If you want to go back 25 years and buy yourself a Les Paul that weighs 13lbs go ahead and look for one.

I always think Les Paul players in Ireland are really funny. Everyone always makes reference to the 'good ones' before they changed them... Before the pre-2002 Les Pauls were the good ones. Now the pre-2008 Les Pauls are the ones to look for.

People just throw these terms out without ever knowing what the actual difference is. It's all psychological. Or else everyone has those golden ears that appear to exist only on the internet.

If you try one and like it I don't see the problem. The ghost of Les Paul won't come back and shoot lightning at you if you have a chambered Les Paul.

goblin59

Ravelleman wrote: »

I've never understood the Doozy thing. €1600 strikes me as being way too much for a Korean made guitar, regardless of how much production quality by our South-East Asian friends has come along.

where did you get the made in korea from?

all of them are made in hanover, germany.


But the difference in the pre 2002 (or 2008 i forget which) is that theyre all chambered. Im sure gibson have worked out how to hide the sound difference, but the sustain would still have changed and it would have the same weight that alot of old school players are use too.

Ravelleman

Try searching Duesenberg + Korea on google. 108,000 results!

They're made in Korea and assembled in Germany.

Alanstrainor

I don't really get the whole chambered vs not debate. I think it's all about the grass being greener on the other side, rather than there being a drastic difference in tonality.

goblin59

To be honest if we were to continue this part of the conversation based on duesenberg i think we should open a frech topic instead of turning this one off its original topic.

But alot of the first results i came across were speculating about if they were made in korea. only a few actually said parts were manufactured there, but then these quotes were then told they were wrong further up by distributers and similar that they were all done in either germany or else some parts were made in italy (like the input jack)

Either way as my main point was when i first mentioned this particular guitar was that for a les paul style guitar with p90's my personal preferance would be towards this.

dfkorg

Ravelleman wrote: »

I've never understood the Doozy thing. €1600 strikes me as being way too much for a Korean made guitar, regardless of how much production quality by our South-East Asian friends has come along.

I must ask this question, as I ran into it a lot during my time with Vox. Why are Koreans any less skilled at manufacturing than those in Europe, the US or Mexico? The question I was asked so often is "hand wired in England or Vietnam?" My response was "Why, can English people wire amps better than the Vietnamese?"

Take a look in your respective driveways to see what continent your cars come from and on your tv cabinet to see where your televisions come from. I my time in the auto industry (working at one point with 4 European manufacturers) they envied the quality of cars like Kia and Hyundai, which were being made for substantially less than their own.

nickcave

dfkorg wrote: »

Why are Koreans any less skilled at manufacturing than those in Europe, the US or Mexico?

I guess the point really is that the cost of labour is lower in SE Asia. If people are paying top buck for a guitar or an amp, I think it's a pretty valid question to ask.

Welease

dfkorg wrote: »

I must ask this question, as I ran into it a lot during my time with Vox. Why are Koreans any less skilled at manufacturing than those in Europe, the US or Mexico? The question I was asked so often is "hand wired in England or Vietnam?" My response was "Why, can English people wire amps better than the Vietnamese?"

Take a look in your respective driveways to see what continent your cars come from and on your tv cabinet to see where your televisions come from. I my time in the auto industry (working at one point with 4 European manufacturers) they envied the quality of cars like Kia and Hyundai, which were being made for substantially less than their own.

Its not generally a quality of the worker issue.. For guitars (not exclusively though, because a fine guitar can come from anywhere), many manufacturers setup factories abroad to produce lower priced models, as part of the cost reduction they would use lower grade woods and parts, cheaper finishes etc. This is why people wanted to know the origins of the product.. and for example why a US Fender costs considerably more than a Mex Fender.

It was never 100% true for all products, and probably even less so nowadays.. but for a lot of brands its still a good indicator.

punchdrunk

Ironic isn't it that two of the most prominent people in fender in "the good ol'days" were...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Tavares

http://www.fender.com/news/index.php?display_article=19

Miklos

I'd love one of those, they do seem like tremendous value and I've heard they're monsters.

Grolschevik

[QUOTE=Johnny Storm;70733746

Gibson Les Paul, P90s. Goldtop, €749 on Thomann. Seems like value to me.
What's wrong with it?[/QUOTE]

It's a Studio.

goblin59 wrote: »

a lot of these gibson's are actually chambered (ie semi hollowed) so they don't sound near the same as a proper full bodied gibson.

Nearly all Les Pauls have been chambered/weight relieved for decades. It's not an issue.

See:
http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/gibson-les-pauls/50210-gibson-les-paul-101-a.html

Where it says, among other things:

"Weight-relief started around 1982/1983. Every Gibson USA Les Paul between 1982 - 2007 is weight-relieved. They do not have solid-body construction. Weight-relief is also known as "swiss cheese holes" and refers to the nine holes drilled out of the body in order to reduce the weight of the guitar.

"Chambering officially began for 2007 but the late 2006s are also chambered. Any Les Paul made after October 2006 maybe or likely is chambered. Every 2007 and newer Gibson USA Les Paul is chambered, except for the Les Paul Traditional. The Les Paul Traditional has swiss cheese holes. Chambering is essentially hollowing out the body. Again, this is in order to reduce the weight of the guitar.

"Gibson's Custom Shop makes regular production guitars and historic reissues. The regular production guitars, such as the Les Paul Custom, are also weight-relieved. They do not have solid-bodies.

"The historic reissues are solid. All historic reissues, be it Standards or Customs, are solid. The exception being the chambered reissues. Chambered reissues are often referred to as Cloud 9 guitars. They are identified by their serial number, which begins with CR. chambered-reissue.org

"So,

A 2003 Les Paul Classic is weight-relieved
A 2008 '57 reissue is solid
A 1995 Les Paul Standard is weight-relieved
A 2009 Chambered '58 reissue is chambered
A 2008 Les Paul Studio is chambered
A 1987 Les Paul Custom is weight-relieved
etc."

Paolo_M

Grolschevik wrote: »

It's a Studio.



Nearly all Les Pauls have been chambered/weight relieved for decades. It's not an issue.

See:
http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/gibson-les-pauls/50210-gibson-les-paul-101-a.html

Where it says, among other things:

"Weight-relief started around 1982/1983. Every Gibson USA Les Paul between 1982 - 2007 is weight-relieved. They do not have solid-body construction. Weight-relief is also known as "swiss cheese holes" and refers to the nine holes drilled out of the body in order to reduce the weight of the guitar.

"Chambering officially began for 2007 but the late 2006s are also chambered. Any Les Paul made after October 2006 maybe or likely is chambered. Every 2007 and newer Gibson USA Les Paul is chambered, except for the Les Paul Traditional. The Les Paul Traditional has swiss cheese holes. Chambering is essentially hollowing out the body. Again, this is in order to reduce the weight of the guitar.

"Gibson's Custom Shop makes regular production guitars and historic reissues. The regular production guitars, such as the Les Paul Custom, are also weight-relieved. They do not have solid-bodies.

"The historic reissues are solid. All historic reissues, be it Standards or Customs, are solid. The exception being the chambered reissues. Chambered reissues are often referred to as Cloud 9 guitars. They are identified by their serial number, which begins with CR. chambered-reissue.org

"So,

A 2003 Les Paul Classic is weight-relieved
A 2008 '57 reissue is solid
A 1995 Les Paul Standard is weight-relieved
A 2009 Chambered '58 reissue is chambered
A 2008 Les Paul Studio is chambered
A 1987 Les Paul Custom is weight-relieved
etc."

+1 on the chambering.
Both mine are chambered and they're still massively heavy.
I wouldn't fancy having a solid block of '58 Les Paul strapped to me for a 2 hour show. Wouldn't mind one for home use all the same!!

fguihen

I considered one of these, done some reasearch and found out they are made from factory scraps. Check that out:



and



Aparently there are a few people who one these with a two piece back but the majority are made like butcher blocks.

Fine, depending on the price, but not on an 800 euro guitar.

bad2dabone

i'd be pretty sick if I found out my 800 euro guitar was a factory scraps job. I love Gibson and I really really want a Les Paul but stuff like this makes me think I'll spend my money on a different brand.

Until I have les Paul Custom money

Alanstrainor

I have to say that would put me off. I did notice it in some pictures i found on the net.

gerarda

fguihen wrote: »

I considered one of these, done some reasearch and found out they are made from factory scraps. Check that out:



and



Aparently there are a few people who one these with a two piece back but the majority are made like butcher blocks.

Fine, depending on the price, but not on an 800 euro guitar.

Ugly as sin.......

rcaz

bad2dabone wrote: »

I love Gibson

Why do you love a massive money-grabbing corporation who have little or no regard for the quality of their produce?

bad2dabone

El Pr0n wrote: »

Why do you love a massive money-grabbing corporation who have little or no regard for the quality of their produce?

You're quite right in pointing that out!

I love the guitars they have made - the weight of history behind them - and the classic music produced with their instruments., I should have stated that, as I've no affinity towards the corporation and certainly they're trading on the fine guitars they produced in the past (and still do at higher end - and super high prices).

To shaft customers with those "butcher blocks" is pretty shoddy, esp for €800 notes. Much better value on offer elsewhere.

Ravelleman

The multi-piece body is what I was talking about before.

I don't think it's right to highlight this as an example of how Gibson have no regard for the quality of their product.

It is what it is - cheap - and Gibson know it. So should potential buyers.

The fact is that all companies use multi-piece bodies on their cheaper models to cut costs. Owners of MIM Fenders should expect to find 4-5 pieces stuck together with a veneer over the top. The only difference is that solid finishes hide it better.

Gibson guitars are naturally more expensive to make than Fenders so it figures that they have to do this, even at a high price point.

The fact is that a MIA goldtop Les Paul for under €800 is simply too good to be true. At least true to the idea of a Les Paul that most people have in their head.

darrenw5094

I understand the deal with the 4 or piece back etc. But it won't have much baring on the overall sound. If you want one to play the hell out of, Rock N'Roll style, then it will probably be fine.

I still think the Tokai LS80 MIJ is the best value LP around.

http://cgi.ebay.ie/Tokai-Love-Rock-LS80-Electric-Guitar-CS-1022331-/330451629646?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item4cf073b64e

Paolo_M

fguihen wrote: »

I considered one of these, done some reasearch and found out they are made from factory scraps. Check that out:



and



Aparently there are a few people who one these with a two piece back but the majority are made like butcher blocks.

Fine, depending on the price, but not on an 800 euro guitar.

I kinda like it, but €800 is far too much.
I'd pay €400 and would be quite proud of it, assuming that it plays well.


Wonder would they accept some good 'oul Irish horse trading on it?!?

Squidgy Black

The only thing I would say, is how many people actually complained about the Les Paul studio's tone and didn't think it was the bee's knee's until they actually saw the picture of the multiple pieces?

I reckon very few ever noticed it until it was pointed out to them :rolleyes:

darrenw5094

stetyrrell wrote: »

The only thing I would say, is how many people actually complained about the Les Paul studio's tone and didn't think it was the bee's knee's until they actually saw the picture of the multiple pieces?

I reckon very few ever noticed it until it was pointed out to them :rolleyes:

Yep......like who the feck will be looking at the back of it anyway. Probably still sounds fine the way it is.

nickcave

darrenw5094 wrote: »

Yep......like who the feck will be looking at the back of it anyway. Probably still sounds fine the way it is.

Yeah, that's it. It probably does sound fine. But why pay €800 for a guitar that just sounds fine? You'd expect a quality instrument for that price. Gibson Studios don't represent good value.

For example, a similarly-priced Edwards will also sound fine, but will have an all-solid single piece mahogany body. Also quality mahogany is lighter, naturally. So it won't be chambered or swiss-cheesed, or made up of leftover chunks from the premium models. So which is better value?

Alanstrainor

I suppose i'm expecting a lot from it. Having an Edwards and a Bacchus, and seeing the over all quality of those compared to the finish of the Gibson.

I may still buy it yet! I'd definitely want to play the yoke first though. Hopefully xmusic will get them in...

Squidgy Black

Perfect Pitch have the regular studio models. There's a white one in the window for 999, that's cheaper than thomann.

I think these'd be more of an order-in thing, maybe if you ring a few stores and ask them if they'd be able to and get a quote off them.

Waltons are the main Gibson dealer, they have a much wider range of Gibson stock than other stores, ask them.

Alanstrainor

Crasp wrote: »

Argh, you'd have to play a Les Paul though

What?

rcaz

Crasp wrote: »

What's the good in value for a new guitar if it's one of the ugliest ever made?

The next few posts should be good... :pac:

Grolschevik

Crasp wrote: »

What's the good in value for a new guitar if it's one of the ugliest ever made? Was hoping to see a nice SG for good money

El Pr0n wrote: »

The next few posts should be good... :pac:

Ah, sure everyone's entitled to their opinion, and at least this opinion is confined to aesthetics rather than sound or build quality...

darrenw5094

Crasp wrote: »

What's the good in value for a new guitar if it's one of the ugliest ever made? Was hoping to see a nice SG for good money

Jaysus man. This is a LP thread. You don't like LP's. Why post that here?;)

Grolschevik

darrenw5094 wrote: »

Jaysus man. This is a LP thread. You don't like LP's. Why post that here?;)

Let's start a real argument!

Personally, I find it offensive that you're all only discussing Les Pauls in this blatantly Les Paulocentric thread. The OP is implicitly insulting, degrading and dancing-on-the-granny's-grave of all the other musicians in the world who choose to play a different instrument, or even a different guitar. Personally, I play a vintage Rolf Harris endorsed stylophone, and I think it's BS that people who can play the guitar (I think) look down on my retro-themed musicianship. Though I also have 57 fuzz boxes, and they're way cool.

How's that?:D

Paolo_M

Crasp wrote: »

I was so close to putting in that they sound ****e... but I'd be lying, they don't... they can sound great.

Good of you to make the leap and admit that!!

If a Les Paul sounds bad it's entirely down to user error.

Ravelleman

Crasp wrote: »

What's the good in value for a new guitar if it's one of the ugliest ever made? Was hoping to see a nice SG for good money

There is the 60s SG Special Tribute, which runs at €699. That might float your boat.

rcaz

Paolo_M wrote: »

If any guitar sounds bad it's entirely down to user error.

FYP

Everything does something well. Joy Division had their own distinctive bass sound 'cause playing that high up on the neck was the only way to get the cheap bass they were using to sound good, apparently.

damonjewel

El Pr0n wrote: »

FYP

Everything does something well. Joy Division had their own distinctive bass sound 'cause playing that high up on the neck was the only way to get the cheap bass they were using to sound good, apparently.

Interesting.. but as a joy division fan I have to question this; as I guess you are talking about Unknown pleasures. I reckon probably there's only 4 songs on that album where the bass plays the higher registers, and I'd say that the joy Division Bass sound relied more on Martin Hannett' production skills than the cheap gear

I would have thought by the next album they could afford decent gear

My 2 roubles

Grolschevik

Christ... I'm off to play with my Stylophone. I may be some time...

Seziertisch

El Pr0n wrote: »

FYP

Everything does something well. Joy Division had their own distinctive bass sound 'cause playing that high up on the neck was the only way to get the cheap bass they were using to sound good, apparently.

That was what originally inspired the technique, but afaik said bass (a Rick copy) was no longer around for the recordings.

His main bass in the studio was/is a Yamaha BB1200, basically a souped up P/J bass with a neck through design. A similar model (I think a BB1100) sold sometime fairly recently on adverts for suprisingly little money (500 Euro or thereabouts).

Also, I don't think the bass on the Joy Division recordings sounds like a Rick (or a copy of one). Rick basses have a pretty distinctive sound.

Welease

Grolschevik wrote: »

Christ... I'm off to play with my Stylophone. I may be some time...

Only because Rolf Harris played one.. you're such a brand whore

Squidgy Black

http://www.adverts.ie/guitar-bass/harley-benton-electric-rock-blues-guitar-and-accessories-for-sale/470324?ct=1#comments

Just buy this lads, it's a super rare collectors piece, and such a bargain!!!!
:rolleyes:

Paolo_M

Grolschevik wrote: »

Christ... I'm off to play with my Stylophone. I may be some time...

I was so close to putting in that Stylophones sound ****e... but I'd be lying, they don't... they can sound great.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

That was what originally inspired the technique, but afaik said bass (a Rick copy) was no longer around for the recordings.

His main bass in the studio was/is a Yamaha BB1200, basically a souped up P/J bass with a neck through design. A similar model (I think a BB1100) sold sometime fairly recently on adverts for suprisingly little money (500 Euro or thereabouts).

Also, I don't think the bass on the Joy Division recordings sounds like a Rick (or a copy of one). Rick basses have a pretty distinctive sound.

I should probably refrain from talking about bands I don't know very much about on in the internet :pac:

Miklos

Ravelleman wrote: »

There is the 60s SG Special Tribute, which runs at €699. That might float your boat.

Now that's what I'm talkin' about. I'll have one in white please.

Squidgy Black

[IMG][/img] SG by mynameistyrrell, on Flickr:eek:

Ravelleman

I don't see the big appeal of the Tribute SG though to be honest.

I'd rather hold out for an SG Classic.

With fretboard binding.

And glossy nitro.

And woods of a more than probably less dubious quality.

Squidgy Black

SG Classic's are discontinued in europe now though.

And they were almost twice the price.

Ravelleman

Buy from the States. Shop cleverly and there's many a deal to be had.

You could definitely get an SG Classic into Ireland for under €900 shipped and taxed.