Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

If Les Pauls are so great, then why...

2456

Comments

  • #32
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Welease wrote: »
    Oh absolutely.. on radius, size, shape etc.. Some guitars just don't suit..

    I was just talking about guitars that do suit.. If you know how to setup a guitar then in many cases the perceived difference between a good LP (or any guitar) and a poor LP can be non existent (although as with all things involving natural materials.. there can be poor instruments).

    I've literally played beautifully set up very set up LPs that sound sooooo vanilla and bland and have no ... vibe...

    For instance, some LPs vibrate the bodies, when you play, others don't, no matter how hard you pluck or strum... Some sustain for days, others don't.

    It's seemingly nothing to do with the "bits" and everything to do with how they're put together.

    Plus, I genuinely think the standards at the Nashville factory are very inconsistent. Some of the binding is soooo poorly done... esp in the late 90s... just pathetic really. Esp for a 2K guitar.


  • #33
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    stetyrrell wrote: »
    Nope, they're all mass produced, and the quality control is terrible. You pay for the name, not the quality sadly.

    The basic woods are still more expensive though no? Even if mass produced the more complicated one is going to have more to go wrong.


  • #34
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Ravelleman wrote: »
    I just bought me a sweet Robbie Krieger SG the other day actually.

    Elaborating on the psychological factors I was talking about, I think one of the other great appeals of the Gibson brand might actually be the very fact that their instruments are so variable and frequently so frustrating.

    Many people on fora such as this one seem to enjoy the process of looking for a nice Gibson - the one that speaks to them above all others. People seem to like the slight roughness between the binding and the neck, the sticky nitro that checks over time, the care that the have to put into bring out the best of the guitar and maintaining, the delicate necks and other uniquely Gibson features. It's almost like esoteric knowledge that one discovers and cherishes.

    When people compare Gibsons with other brands, frequently far-eastern imports, they see personality in the instrument. They project their values and emotions on to the instrument and see something more organic than the Chinese copy with its abalone binding, exotic burls and inch thick poly coating.

    People like the search; the struggle because it's all an experience. Perhaps buying a Xaviere or an Agile just isn't the same.

    I honestly think that's mostly BS. Not that you're saying something that's not well observed, but that the search for one good guitar out thousands makes that one good one somehow more emotionally resonant, intrinsically.

    I would say you actually have a much better chance of finding a "decent" LP, as they are legion, to finding a Yamaha SG2500 in decent nick.

    That reality though doesn't translate into people, other than guitar nerds, wanting to pay 10K for the (IMO) superior Yammy.

    Those Yamahas are, just to compare brands, also completely hand made and the wood is all hand chosen. In the 80s, when they were produced at their highest standard, they only made about 250 a year. Max.

    So, they're very rare.

    But the value ascribed to them is completely out of whack. No matter how many glowing reviews you read they still sell for a lot less than a pretty lame LP.


  • #35
    firefly08
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 854 ✭✭✭firefly08


    Nope, they're all mass produced, and the quality control is terrible. You pay for the name, not the quality sadly.

    Well Gibson says they're made by hand. They describe the process in detail here.

    If anyone has information to suggest this isn't true, don't hold back!

    I think old-school companies like Gibson get a bad rap over prices and people seem to think it's all because of the name. The bottom line is, if someone could make an identical product for less, they would, and there is no way on Earth that the name would protect Gibson. Sure, there would always be a few people with more money than sense who would stick with the brand name, but people like that are vastly outnumbered by those who want value for money.


  • #36
    ball ox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 699 ✭✭✭ball ox


    firefly08 wrote: »
    Nope, they're all mass produced, and the quality control is terrible. You pay for the name, not the quality sadly.

    Well Gibson says they're made by hand. They describe the process in detail here.

    If anyone has information to suggest this isn't true, don't hold back!

    I think old-school companies like Gibson get a bad rap over prices and people seem to think it's all because of the name. The bottom line is, if someone could make an identical product for less, they would, and there is no way on Earth that the name would protect Gibson. Sure, there would always be a few people with more money than sense who would stick with the brand name, but people like that are vastly outnumbered by those who want value for money.

    {Enter bacchus fanboys stage left}

    :P


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    firefly08 wrote: »
    Well Gibson says they're made by hand. They describe the process in detail here.

    If anyone has information to suggest this isn't true, don't hold back!

    I think old-school companies like Gibson get a bad rap over prices and people seem to think it's all because of the name. The bottom line is, if someone could make an identical product for less, they would, and there is no way on Earth that the name would protect Gibson. Sure, there would always be a few people with more money than sense who would stick with the brand name, but people like that are vastly outnumbered by those who want value for money.

    There's a lot wrong with this post.

    "The bottom line is, if someone could make an identical product for less, they would"

    They do, there's a LOT of guitars out there better built that sound as good, new on the shelf, for significantly less.

    "and there is no way on Earth that the name would protect Gibson"

    Brand protect companies that release shoddy products all the time. It's called brand loyalty. Add to that, Gibson is one of the "big boys". Their stuff is in almost every shop, meaning they can 1) produce in bulk and keep prices low, and 2) have decent sales no matter the quality, esp at this point in their "life".

    "Sure, there would always be a few people with more money than sense who would stick with the brand name..."

    You say that, but the number of LPs on Adverts (and everywhere else) shows that a LOT of people both buy AND sell these... that's not true with all guitars... even really expensive ones.

    "people like that are vastly outnumbered by those who want value for money"

    "People" want a lot of things, but that doesn't negate the fact that Gibson has been criticized by people who "know" guitars for their prices for years and years.

    My advice to people, regarding guitars and amps, is try EVERYTHING you can. You'll find extreme value, esp in the used/vintage market, if you can avoid the whole, "brand loyalty" nonsense!


  • #38
    firefly08
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 854 ✭✭✭firefly08


    "The bottom line is, if someone could make an identical product for less, they would"

    They do, there's a LOT of guitars out there better built that sound as good, new on the shelf, for significantly less.

    This comes up a lot - let's be clear: to make a meaningful comparison, of the quality, it has to be the same. If it sounds "as good" but different, it's not comparable, because the appeal of different sounds is subjective. If it looks and feels "as good" different, then that's not comparable either. My point is that if you set up shop in the US and make a guitar just like a Les Paul with the same materials and workforce, it will cost you the same as it costs them. Then you'll realize that you're in the same boat as them; you can't afford to sell it for any less than they do - but, they have a long established reputation and you don't. So what do you do? You make it different, because at least then your product might appeal to those that don't particularly like Gibsons. But now it's not comparable any more!

    The only guitars I've seen that are almost indistinguishable from Gibsons are ESPs (in fact I believe they have been sued by Gibson because of this). But guess what? They don't cost any less (at least over here in the US). The only reasons they sell anything at all are because (a) there are always people who hate Gibson and (b) James Hetfield.
    Brand protect companies that release shoddy products all the time. It's called brand loyalty

    Well I know a lot of people think this, but I personally don't. Not completely; brand names are worth a little premium, but not as much as people think.
    My advice to people, regarding guitars and amps, is try EVERYTHING you can. You'll find extreme value, esp in the used/vintage market, if you can avoid the whole, "brand loyalty" nonsense!

    I agree with that 100%.


  • #39
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    darrenw5094 wrote: »
    They look cool though. I can't picture this gason with another guitar. Well, maybe a BC Rich Mockingbird.;)

    Slash2011%284%29.jpg

    Just like Strats, the LP has it's own distinctive tone though.

    Curious you used this picture. The LP slash originally used wasn't a Gibson.

    It was a Replica.
    http://www.krisderrig.com/Kris-Derrig.php


  • #40
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Maybe it because I've never owned an expensive (500+) guitar. But I always found I've like one guitar over another even if they were pretty much identical in spec.


  • #41
    Grolschevik
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,472 ✭✭✭Grolschevik


    My first -- and now my second -- guitar was a (late '70s) Pearl Les Paul copy. Fantastic guitar, great sound, Di Marzios.

    My second guitar -- now my first -- was a 1998 Les Paul Standard. As I've mentioned before here, I went through a dozen or more before I found the right one for me in the shops.

    They are both great guitars. However, they play differently; they sound different; they have different woods. I play the Gibson by choice because of the feel of the neck. A different neck to the Pearl, but one that I am more at home with.

    I won't sell either of them ever, even though I have considered selling the Pearl on a number of occasions.

    However, the Gibson is beautiful to look at. The Pearl is not.

    Just my opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Gaspode
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,054 ✭✭✭Gaspode


    And just yesterday I was reading the read in a very similar vein (Guitarist Ireland group on FB) but strats were the object of derision/adulation.

    Personally I dont think brand matters, it's down to how the individual guitar feels to you.
    I've not played many Gibson LPs, but those I did I didn't think were worth their price, and were a tad heavy for my liking.

    They're purty though compared to Strats.


  • #43
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    I actually would prefer a junior or a special to a standard,
    But goldtops and black LP customs are beautiful in there own right

    Not a sunburst LP fan at all!


  • #44
    Ravelleman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 CMod ✭✭✭✭Ravelleman


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    I honestly think that's mostly BS. Not that you're saying something that's not well observed, but that the search for one good guitar out thousands makes that one good one somehow more emotionally resonant, intrinsically.

    I would say you actually have a much better chance of finding a "decent" LP, as they are legion, to finding a Yamaha SG2500 in decent nick.

    I don't think the comparison here is really valid. If you refer to my previous post I talk about other psychological factors that people experience when they buy an instrument from an iconic brand with a history like Gibson's. So it's a combination of history, search and other factors that ultimately leads to the experience that comes from owning a Gibson - what I think is one of the big pulls of the brand. The fact is that Yamaha doesn't have that history, no matter how much people might enjoy theirs. I also don't think that they're very easy on the eye, but that's a different matter entirely.

    If we all wanted to play 'superior' instruments we'd all have some kind of rationalised, double cut away, 24 fret guitars made from futuristic materials that are scientifically proven to resonate more than any type of wood, which are covered in phase switches and coffee makers. But obviously it doesn't work like that.

    The Yammy works for you and that's great but I'm just talking about the appeal of one brand - Gibson - and it certainly has a lot despite how the haters be hatin'. The rareness and quality of the instrument don't necessarily translate into something moving or exciting.


  • #45
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Ravelleman wrote: »
    I don't think the comparison here is really valid. If you refer to my previous post I talk about other psychological factors that people experience when they buy an instrument from an iconic brand with a history like Gibson's. So it's a combination of history, search and other factors that ultimately leads to the experience that comes from owning a Gibson - what I think is one of the big pulls of the brand. The fact is that Yamaha doesn't have that history, no matter how much people might enjoy theirs. I also don't think that they're very easy on the eye, but that's a different matter entirely.

    If we all wanted to play 'superior' instruments we'd all have some kind of rationalised, double cut away, 24 fret guitars made from futuristic materials that are scientifically proven to resonate more than any type of wood, which are covered in phase switches and coffee makers. But obviously it doesn't work like that.

    The Yammy works for you and that's great but I'm just talking about the appeal of one brand - Gibson - and it certainly has a lot despite how the haters be hatin'. The rareness and quality of the instrument don't necessarily translate into something moving or exciting.

    My point was, is, that that psychological aspect is nonsense.

    Projecting worth onto something simply because it was hard to find doesn't actually make it valuable; likewise something being amazing doesn't make it valuable if no one wants it.

    Gibson heads have created a cult of Gibson, which like all cults, is full of delusion and self-aggrandisement.


  • #46
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    firefly08 wrote: »
    This comes up a lot - let's be clear: to make a meaningful comparison, of the quality, it has to be the same. If it sounds "as good" but different, it's not comparable, because the appeal of different sounds is subjective. If it looks and feels "as good" different, then that's not comparable either. My point is that if you set up shop in the US and make a guitar just like a Les Paul with the same materials and workforce, it will cost you the same as it costs them. Then you'll realize that you're in the same boat as them; you can't afford to sell it for any less than they do - but, they have a long established reputation and you don't. So what do you do? You make it different, because at least then your product might appeal to those that don't particularly like Gibsons. But now it's not comparable any more!

    The only guitars I've seen that are almost indistinguishable from Gibsons are ESPs (in fact I believe they have been sued by Gibson because of this). But guess what? They don't cost any less (at least over here in the US). The only reasons they sell anything at all are because (a) there are always people who hate Gibson and (b) James Hetfield.

    Well I know a lot of people think this, but I personally don't. Not completely; brand names are worth a little premium, but not as much as people think.

    I agree with that 100%.

    A few things.

    Apple made a huge mess with antennas on a recent iteration of their phones. It made the phone drop calls like mad. People still bought them in droves. It had almost no detrimental effect on their business. A different business without the same brand loyalty probably wouldve suffered much more. It's ok to believe brand loyalty isnt a big deal, but it's a belief not based on anything I've ever seen or heard.

    As for things having to sound like Les Pauls.... On this very thread there's people saying how multiple les Paul's sound different from each other. To look at Adverts, people claim there Les Paul sounds different. And guess what, it's not BS.

    Many guitars can cop a Les Paul sound. It's no big amazingly unique tone.


  • #47
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Value, Like Beauty, Is In The Eye Of The Beholder...Or another way, It's not the destination, but the journey that counts.

    Cult of a brand isn't unique to Gibson either.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k9P62cC-_c

    The iPhone isn't the only phone to suffer from the Grip of Death. People all bought those phones too.

    Many guitars can get Les Paul "like" tones. Yet you can almost always pick a LP out on a record, as distinct from other guitars. Ditto a strat or a tele, or a SG or flying V for that matter. Mind you I generally can't tell many modern guitars apart that well. Some of that might be how CD's are mixed though. Certainly Live a good LP is very distinctive.


  • #48
    Ravelleman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,635 CMod ✭✭✭✭Ravelleman


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    My point was, is, that that psychological aspect is nonsense.

    Projecting worth onto something simply because it was hard to find doesn't actually make it valuable; likewise something being amazing doesn't make it valuable if no one wants it.

    I have to disagree with you there.

    This whole process is something that emerged after the Second World War and has been written about by a lot of sociologists.

    Projecting worth on to something doesn't change its inherent value but certainly increases its worth in the eyes of the owner. And that's what marketing is all about. Even though it may not be the best quality or value on the market, people still want it and will pay for it.


  • #49
    firefly08
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 854 ✭✭✭firefly08


    Apple made a huge mess with antennas on a recent iteration of their phones. It made the phone drop calls like mad. People still bought them in droves. It had almost no detrimental effect on their business. A different business without the same brand loyalty probably wouldve suffered much more. It's ok to believe brand loyalty isnt a big deal, but it's a belief not based on anything I've ever seen or heard.

    For that to be applicable in this discussion, there would have to be another product that is:

    -the same as the iPhone, including price, but without the call dropping problem

    OR

    -the same as the iPhone, including the problem, but at a lower price.

    Then Apple's sales might have suffered. But there is nothing else the same as an iPhone. I've seen them all. You may say the others are the same for all intents and purposes, but a great many people don't agree with you. (I personally think some of the alternatives are better, but it turns out the majority don't agree with me either in this case.)

    Actually even though I'd never buy their stuff, Apple is a good example of the kind of thing I'm talking about: they have a long established name and a great reputation, but yet their brand name does not command much of a premium. Can you buy another laptop carved from a solid block of aluminium at a lower price elsewhere?


  • #50
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    firefly08 wrote: »
    For that to be applicable in this discussion, there would have to be another product that is:

    -the same as the iPhone, including price, but without the call dropping problem

    OR

    -the same as the iPhone, including the problem, but at a lower price.

    Then Apple's sales might have suffered. But there is nothing else the same as an iPhone. I've seen them all. You may say the others are the same for all intents and purposes, but a great many people don't agree with you. (I personally think some of the alternatives are better, but it turns out the majority don't agree with me either in this case.)

    Actually even though I'd never buy their stuff, Apple is a good example of the kind of thing I'm talking about: they have a long established name and a great reputation, but yet their brand name does not command much of a premium. Can you buy another laptop carved from a solid block of aluminium at a lower price elsewhere?

    That's a silly example. I can buy (and video editing suites are now full of) a PC that's as powerful as any Mac, for a good 40% less in many cases. Macs have developed a cult and people pay a huge cult tax for them. ESP apple branded accessories which are often 2-3 times the cost of a non-Apple branded equivalent.

    And people still unquestioningly line up to buy them.


  • #51
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Face it, you're wrong about the grip of death antenna issue. Its on many phones.

    You can also buy a PC that's as expensive or more expensive, if you buy a premium, business or workstation product line. People still buy them aswell. Its never been solely about the benchmarks. If you think it is, you don't understand the product and/or market.

    The only real issue here is for someone who says branding doesn't matter, you're very brand sensitive. Each to their own.

    http://cigarboxguitars.com/community/musicians/seasick-steve

    http://www.celebrityrockstarguitars.com/rock/zztop.htm


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    ednwireland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,716 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    errrr i bought one recently (cos i always lusted after one its an epiphone) but i dont gig, now i see the error of my ways :o


    NOT! love it and it looks cool :D

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



  • #53
    Ardent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,365 ✭✭✭Ardent


    I bought an LP late last year and very happy with it. Beautiful to play and to look at. Not into Fenders, they remind me of country music and the Beach Boys!

    I don't agree whatsoever with this whole buying guitars online lark. I think I spent a week going through every single LP in Dublin within my price range. And they all sounded and played differently! Some of more expensive ones were total pigs! In the end I went for the pick of the lot - the one that had the best balance between bright clean tones and balls-out distortion. No way would I buy 1500+ EUR guitar online.


  • #54
    Doc_Savage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 677 ✭✭✭Doc_Savage


    There is a cult of gibson, but it wasn't made by "Gibson heads" it may well be that they propagate the scenario, but they cannot be blamed for it.

    The Les Paul is an icon! it was there at the beginning and was favoured by many of the pioneers of the electric guitar, NOTHING can change that fact! There were a few other manufacturers that achieved a similar cult status and their guitars are the other most imitated around. but if you make a copy of an Icon it's still a copy, it will never be an icon, and can never garner the same following as the genuine article. Thats why gibson make the Les paul at a million different price points and finish levels, because no one else can make the Les paul and call it a Les paul without being an imitation. They have the iconic status and are willing to cash in on it... nothing more nothing less...


  • #55
    Malice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,075 ✭✭✭✭Malice


    Ardent wrote: »
    I don't agree whatsoever with this whole buying guitars online lark. ...
    No way would I buy 1500+ EUR guitar online.
    That seems very short-sighted but I guess it's your loss frankly if you're going to avoid online retailers. What happens if you want something out of the ordinary?


  • #56
    kevin65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 537 ✭✭✭kevin65


    Malice wrote: »
    Ardent wrote: »
    I don't agree whatsoever with this whole buying guitars online lark. ...
    No way would I buy 1500+ EUR guitar online.
    That seems very short-sighted but I guess it's your loss frankly if you're going to avoid online retailers. What happens if you want something out of the ordinary?
    I would have to agree with Ardent. I never have and probably never would buy a guitar online. Want to play it first to see if I really like it and check for any issues. Anyway, part of the whole experience for me is visiting shops and trying out potential purchases.


  • #57
    kevin65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 537 ✭✭✭kevin65


    You guys should have posted this discussion on the MLP forum. Would be interesting to see the 'lively' discussions that would ensue!


  • #58
    zafo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 276 ✭✭zafo


    I love my Gibson SG and my Korean Maison Les Paul copy. Didn't pay a premium for either.


  • #59
    Malice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,075 ✭✭✭✭Malice


    kevin65 wrote: »
    I would have to agree with Ardent. I never have and probably never would buy a guitar online. Want to play it first to see if I really like it and check for any issues. Anyway, part of the whole experience for me is visiting shops and trying out potential purchases.
    Same question to you then: What happens if you want something out of the ordinary?
    Of my guitars that are probably considered out of the ordinary, only one of them was bought in an Irish shop. Of the others, two were imported from Japan and two came from USA. Where would I even begin to try to purchase any of them in Ireland?
    kevin65 wrote: »
    You guys should have posted this discussion on the MLP forum.
    What's the MLP forum?


  • #60
    ednwireland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,716 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    Malice wrote: »
    What's the MLP forum?

    mylespaul forums

    http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/les-paul/

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



  • Advertisement
  • #61
    hidinginthebush
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,679 ✭✭✭hidinginthebush


    Ardent wrote: »
    I don't agree whatsoever with this whole buying guitars online lark. I think I spent a week going through every single LP in Dublin within my price range. And they all sounded and played differently! Some of more expensive ones were total pigs! In the end I went for the pick of the lot - the one that had the best balance between bright clean tones and balls-out distortion. No way would I buy 1500+ EUR guitar online.
    kevin65 wrote: »
    I would have to agree with Ardent. I never have and probably never would buy a guitar online. Want to play it first to see if I really like it and check for any issues. Anyway, part of the whole experience for me is visiting shops and trying out potential purchases.
    Malice wrote: »
    That seems very short-sighted but I guess it's your loss frankly if you're going to avoid online retailers. What happens if you want something out of the ordinary?

    I'm with Malice on this. Being a lefty, going to guitar shoops in Ireland is the most boring and uninspiring exercise I can think of, especially when it comes to buying something that isn't a LP or Strat. There simply aren't enough leftys out there it seems for shops to stock anything from gibsons, epiphones, fenders and then a load of €200 electrics. I've happily bought guitars and amps online, and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.


Advertisement