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

MilanPan!c · 30-01-2012 08:02PM

seachto7 wrote: »

What do you think of guitars made in India, Indonesia, or China? (as opposed to Mexico or Japan)

I don't know about any really nice examples from any of these countries, but that's prolly just my ignorance.

firefly08 · 30-01-2012 08:59PM

I think some of the guitars made in China these days have surprising quality. The days of made in China = junk are gone, for guitars and a lot of things. They can make stuff to a high standard, although then the price, while still lower than the US or Japan made equivalent, it not as low as you might expect for something made over there.

The other day I played this Dean ML and I though it was great, every bit as well made as my Gibson (although a different style altogether). The price was only a little bit lower ($700 while the Gibson is $800) but it goes to show made in China does not necessarily equal low quality.

I also have a Yamaha flamenco guitar made in China, again it was as good for me as the others I saw while being a little cheaper than most. I think the other ones I saw were made in Spain.

Seziertisch · 30-01-2012 10:00PM

firefly08 wrote: »

I think some of the guitars made in China these days have surprising quality. The days of made in China = junk are gone, for guitars and a lot of things. They can make stuff to a high standard, although then the price, while still lower than the US or Japan made equivalent, it not as low as you might expect for something made over there.

The other day I played this Dean ML and I though it was great, every bit as well made as my Gibson (although a different style altogether). The price was only a little bit lower ($700 while the Gibson is $800) but it goes to show made in China does not necessarily equal low quality.

I also have a Yamaha flamenco guitar made in China, again it was as good for me as the others I saw while being a little cheaper than most. I think the other ones I saw were made in Spain.

Agree 100%, the quality of some of the beginner and mid-priced instruments coming out of Asia is very impressive.

Squidgy Black · 30-01-2012 11:03PM

Yeah the Asian imports are really stepping up their game. Take for instance, the Squier classic vibe series, some absolutely amazing guitars for around 300 euro that are competing with USA made guitars, and they're all produced in China. Even the basic model squiers are better than they used to be.

BostonB · 31-01-2012 12:26AM

I thought the Classic Player 60's (Mexico) was lovely. A step up from the other mex strats I played. I wished I'd bought one at the time. Pickups (custom 69 pickups) were great on it. I had a Korean PRS SE Single Cut for a while and that was really nicely made. Pickups were so so though.

Squidgy Black · 31-01-2012 12:30AM

BostonB wrote: »

I thought the Classic Player 60's (Mexico) was lovely. A step up from the other mex strats I played. I wished I'd bought one at the time. Pickups (custom 69 pickups) were great on it. I had a Korean PRS SE Single Cut for a while and that was really nicely made. Pickups were so so though.

Yeah the PRS SE's get great reviews. I have an ESP LTD EC-401 with seymour duncans, it's made in Indonesia but basically ESP's equivalent to the Les Paul Studio (with the eclipse series being the standard model). It blows any Studio i've compared it with out of the water, bound neck and maple top.

gerarda · 31-01-2012 12:35AM

I wonder if things keep going the way they are going for guitars coming from China, Indonesia etc (ie, the quality going steadily up) could Gibson's days be numbered or will there stuff ever drop in value?

Doc_Savage · 31-01-2012 01:57AM

gerarda wrote: »

I wonder if things keep going the way they are going for guitars coming from China, Indonesia etc (ie, the quality going steadily up) could Gibson's days be numbered or will there stuff ever drop in value?

as i said before, gibson are an icon, they were there at the start of the electric guitar! value for money and competition are offset by this! If the companys new efforts continue to get more mediocre and the company goes bust then the prices for older ones will only soar....

Ravelleman · 31-01-2012 12:56PM

firefly08 wrote: »

The other day I played this Dean ML and I though it was great, every bit as well made as my Gibson (although a different style altogether). The price was only a little bit lower ($700 while the Gibson is $800) but it goes to show made in China does not necessarily equal low quality.

$700 for a Chinese made guitar is really quite high. I wouldn´t pay more than $500. There are so many options out there for similar prices. Considering that some established and high quality made in America brands like Hamer and G&L can be had for $850 or so both second hand and new, depending on how well you look, $700 for an instrument made in China sounds pretty outrageous.

Ravelleman · 31-01-2012 01:00PM

efla wrote: »

Recently sold an LP, as my weak hands were unable to sustain a bar chord of any description above the third fret. Never could adjust to the radius.

I always thought of 12" radii as being pretty easy to play. Nice and flat.

BostonB wrote: »

I thought the Classic Player 60's (Mexico) was lovely. A step up from the other mex strats I played. I wished I'd bought one at the time. Pickups (custom 69 pickups) were great on it. I had a Korean PRS SE Single Cut for a while and that was really nicely made. Pickups were so so though.

I had a Mexican Robert Cray Strat that is comparable in quality to the Classic Players series (´Custom Shop´pickups, American hardtail bridge etc). I think I paid roughly $650 for it in Manny´s in New York a few years ago. It was a nice guitar alright but my G&L is by far the better S-style guitars, only for a few notes more. And it came with a plush G&G tolex case.

BostonB · 31-01-2012 01:17PM

I don't like the G&L head stock tbh. For a long time I lusted after a ESP strat. I'd be more a superstrat kinda guy though. Charvel Sam Dimas or similar. Had a Jap Charvel Tele for a long time.

ednwireland · 31-01-2012 01:57PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8WrBOwX6yU

dont put seymour duncans in your tele

firefly08 · 31-01-2012 03:40PM

$700 for a Chinese made guitar is really quite high. I wouldn´t pay more than $500. There are so many options out there for similar prices. Considering that some established and high quality made in America brands like Hamer and G&L can be had for $850 or so both second hand and new, depending on how well you look, $700 for an instrument made in China sounds pretty outrageous.

Well that comes back to the original argument I suppose...I doubt I could find something that I'd consider the equal of that guitar for much less. There was a sub $500 version of essentially the same guitar, but it was junk by comparison. There are American made versions but they cost more.

I wouldn't put a cap on what I'd pay just because of where it's made. Although I personally wouldn't buy it anyway since we already send enough of our money to China.

BostonB · 31-01-2012 03:57PM

ednwireland wrote: »

dont put seymour duncans in your tele

Mine was like this except in black.

http://images.tekky.net/cm7_f2.jpg

But I did put a SD into the bridge

Squidgy Black · 31-01-2012 05:35PM

ednwireland wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8WrBOwX6yU

dont put seymour duncans in your tele

Great playing and all, but that tele sounded like sh1te

Ravelleman · 31-01-2012 08:05PM

BostonB wrote: »

I don't like the G&L head stock tbh. For a long time I lusted after a ESP strat. I'd be more a superstrat kinda guy though. Charvel Sam Dimas or similar. Had a Jap Charvel Tele for a long time.

I know, the headstock makes the guitars sound crap.

G&L did a lot of superstrats in the 1980s. But don´t check them out - they all have those headstocks.

il gatto · 31-01-2012 11:25PM

I don't understand the Gibson/Fender divide. I lean towards Gibson as I like the sound, the neck and overall feel. I don't dislike Fender as a result and when I have spare cash and can justify it, I'll buy a nice Strat as a counterpoint (tonewise) to my LP. It's like someone asking whether you're a cat or dog person. Stupid question and people who have a ready answer are equally as stupid. They all have they're own personality and should be judged on heir own merits. Fortunately even though guitars are much the same, it's nothing a good setup usually can't fix. You don't need to play dozens of Les Pauls to find a good one, just to find one set up to your taste. Even the tone is affected by how the pick ups are set.
As for the price, the materials and process are different. Carved maple top, glued neck. Fender are not reticent about charging lots for guitars. It's just not justifiable because of the Strat/Tele's nature. Look at their Rory Gallagher, Knopfler models.
LPs are common now, but for the people here younger than myself (34), Les Pauls were not common 15 or 20 years ago. I was playing a few years before i saw one, another few years before I held one (damn lefty:mad:) and another few before I owned one. People didn't have the money and even then, music shops didn't stock them. I had to order mine from London. Turned out set up perfectly and it just suited me. I was concerned having never played one. Turns out they just suit me.
Alot of people who'd lusted after them as teens bought them in the last 10 years. Soem have stopped playing, some are cash strapped and some people buy and sell. Personally, I hate parting with stuff (old car and Land Rover behind the house). Some people get bored and trade up, down or sideways. I wouldn't read too much into it.
And the Yamaha SG is a cool guitar (even if it is based on a Gibson SG;)).
Personally, I dislike Aria/Ibanez/Esp spiky super strat style guitars. Metal guitars for want of a better word. As such, I always find fault when playing them. Same goes for people who dislike Gibson or Fender.
If you don't like them, don't buy them. If you think they're overpriced, buy secondhand, buy down the range or buy something else. For me, it was money well spent. YMMV.

MilanPan!c · 01-02-2012 10:30AM

il gatto wrote: »

Fortunately even though guitars are much the same, it's nothing a good setup usually can't fix. You don't need to play dozens of Les Pauls to find a good one, just to find one set up to your taste.

Sadly this is NOT true.

Not only are there a huge number of sub-standard ones made throughout the 80s and 90s, but there's entire YEARS of production that people consider substandard.

Check this out:

http://www.google.ie/search?q=%22good+years%22+%22les+paul%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a

That will lead you to dozens of discussion wherein LP enthusiasts trash entire years of production. And as someone else on the thread noted, some LPs have things like sawdust under the finish, which can def not be sorted via a setup. I can't really imagine anyone choosing a Les Paul with a ****e finish to be "for them". And that's just one issue.

Here's a quote from a Gibson dealer about how they got a lot better in 06

"I'm a Gibson dealer, and used to call my local rep all the time to complain, or have him try to fix things...

No more mother of toilet seat inlays with poorly cut edges and lots of filler.
Same thing with the binding.."

Good years for LPs?

Again, a setup wouldn't fix those sorts of issues.

Here's another quote from a LP fanatic who seems to know his LPs:

There was still good wood out there during the Norlin years. A lot of the guitars were heavy but it was still good resonant wood. Even pancakes have their place.

For me, the 'golden era' of affordable (not $10,000+) Gibson is the late 70's Kalamazoo stuff. I haven't liked anything that came out of Nashville. The only reason why Nashville opened was to give Gibson a place to have cheap labour, *Michigan being a unionized workforce of skilled luthiers* and I think it really shows in the quality of the instruments during that time period.

Kalamazoo was in danger of having its doors locked forever, and they knew it, so they made the best the could possibly make to prove a point... The only problem is that in the 80's, the world became all about big business, meaning cheaper and faster was preferred to quality... So Kalamazoo had their doors closed anyway in 84.

The entire decade of the 80's is full of dog Les Pauls. There are some good ones, but they are harder to find. 90's got a little better, and the 00's is the best I've seen from Gibson in my life span *so far* and there are still plenty of dogs.

10 years full of dog LPs

il gatto wrote: »

And the Yamaha SG is a cool guitar (even if it is based on a Gibson SG;)).

The Yammy SG has the same body shape as the Gibson SG, but other than that it's much more like an LP.

Best of both worlds! Plus the sustain, the wood choice the finish and the electronics are typically better than most LPs I've come across.

Bluefoam · 01-02-2012 01:35PM

I'm beginning to think Les Paul was a bit of a nut-case. Check this vid out, 4min 30sec in he shows that he has a four track attached to his guitar that records each track & allows you to add another track over it while listening back to the original track...

Ravelleman · 01-02-2012 01:47PM

ednwireland wrote: »

dont put seymour duncans in your tele

That does, indeed, sound like ass.

Bluefoam wrote: »

I'm beginning to think Les Paul was a bit of a nut-case. Check this vid out, 4min 30sec in he shows that he has a four track attached to his guitar that records each track & allows you to add another track over it while listening back to the original track...

Hardly surprising, given that the man was one of the pioneers of multi-track recording! What an awesome guy.

ohigg84 · 01-02-2012 02:23PM

Les Pauls are nice guitars, but sg's are my favourite..

Light, sexy, sound is awesome, especially those '57 humbuckers, or the p90s on my sg standard..

SG is the best guitar ever I think.. Thats just me.. And Angus..:D

ednwireland · 01-02-2012 02:32PM

ohigg84 wrote: »

SG is the best guitar ever I think.. Thats just me.. And Angus..:D

ahhhh went off angus after monsters of rock 1984, would never watch ac/dc after that (terrible gig), anyway next gig should be albert lee

Ravelleman · 01-02-2012 02:47PM

ohigg84 wrote: »

Thats just me.. And Angus..:D

Ugh, this is one of the things that would put me off SGs.

ohigg84 · 01-02-2012 04:02PM

Eh,are you kidding?

ohigg84 · 01-02-2012 04:05PM

ednwireland wrote: »

ahhhh went off angus after monsters of rock 1984, would never watch ac/dc after that (terrible gig), anyway next gig should be albert lee

That was just sound, wasn't the bands fault.
Ah well, your opinion.
AC/DC deliver the goods, they're an awesome band.
Over 200 million albums sold.. Must be doin something right.

BostonB · 01-02-2012 04:16PM

I think of the Yamaha as a Les Paul variant. An SG is very different sound. I associate it with Angus, Hendrix, Doors, Cream, and most of all Tony Iommi.

Ravelleman · 01-02-2012 05:07PM

ohigg84 wrote: »

Eh,are you kidding?

Nope. I have an SG but it´s a Robby Krieger 50th model. I guess you can tell me where that puts me in the SG idol groupings. That being said, I didn´t buy it just because of the Robby Krieger association - it´s a great guitar in its own right.

Never been a fan of ACDC. So many cooler SG players out there than Angus Young, or so it seems to me.

ohigg84 · 01-02-2012 06:32PM

Ravelleman wrote: »

Nope. I have an SG but it´s a Robby Krieger 50th model. I guess you can tell me where that puts me in the SG idol groupings. That being said, I didn´t buy it just because of the Robby Krieger association - it´s a great guitar in its own right.

Never been a fan of ACDC. So many cooler SG players out there than Angus Young, or so it seems to me.

I played that model too, really cool, love the vibrato unit.
Ah well, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but you could say Angus is really the only true guitarist that has always remained faithful to and is associated with, one type of guitar.

Hendrix was mainly a Strat player but he did switch to Les Pauls, Flying V's and that white custom SG for blues playing.

Clapton was an exclusive gibson fan right up to '69/70 I believe..

Robbie Krieger wasn't an exclusive sg player, he played les pauls too and a tele and strat.

Tony Iommi maybe associated with the SG, but it has been documented that his actual main guitar was a strat during his ealy days, but he had the sg as a back up guitar. The strat's pickup wasnt woking one particular day and he picked up the sg.. The rest is history.

Frank Zappa had two sg's I believe, but they weren't actually 'Gibson' bodied.

Frank Marino uses sg's a lot, but he also uses Les Paul's too, I think he is a great player.

Eric Johnson uses sg's, 335s and les pauls but he is more associated with the Strat.

There are a lot of sg users, but none are as faithful as Angus Young. Thats my argument.

Sure there are cooler players, but Angus just does it for me.
I'm sure a lot of people will agree with me, but there will also be others that disagree. Point taken.

ohigg84 · 01-02-2012 06:38PM

BostonB wrote: »

I think of the Yamaha as a Les Paul variant. An SG is very different sound. I associate it with Angus, Hendrix, Doors, Cream, and most of all Tony Iommi.

Yeah there is a different sound between the les paul and sg.

The '57 humbuckers on the les paul, the crunching P90's on the SG Standard/Special models.

Don't get me wrong. I love les pauls too, but I prefer the SG..

Another thing is for the les paul, the neck joins the body at the 16th fret (so its hard to play some solos) whereas for the SG, the neck is joined at the 19th fret, so instantly you have more upper access..
Thats why SG's have the fastest necks in the world.

Only disadvantage of the SG is how they were prone to neck breaks, especially the early 60's models..

Beautiful guitar, I have 6 of them.. Beauties..

il gatto · 01-02-2012 10:18PM

MilanPan!c wrote: »

il gatto wrote: »

Fortunately even though guitars are much the same, it's nothing a good setup usually can't fix. You don't need to play dozens of Les Pauls to find a good one, just to find one set up to your taste.

Sadly this is NOT true.

Not only are there a huge number of sub-standard ones made throughout the 80s and 90s, but there's entire YEARS of production that people consider substandard.

Check this out:

http://www.google.ie/search?q=%22good+years%22+%22les+paul%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a

That will lead you to dozens of discussion wherein LP enthusiasts trash entire years of production. And as someone else on the thread noted, some LPs have things like sawdust under the finish, which can def not be sorted via a setup. I can't really imagine anyone choosing a Les Paul with a ****e finish to be "for them". And that's just one issue.

Here's a quote from a Gibson dealer about how they got a lot better in 06

"I'm a Gibson dealer, and used to call my local rep all the time to complain, or have him try to fix things...

No more mother of toilet seat inlays with poorly cut edges and lots of filler.
Same thing with the binding.."

Good years for LPs?

Again, a setup wouldn't fix those sorts of issues.

Here's another quote from a LP fanatic who seems to know his LPs:

There was still good wood out there during the Norlin years. A lot of the guitars were heavy but it was still good resonant wood. Even pancakes have their place.

For me, the 'golden era' of affordable (not $10,000+) Gibson is the late 70's Kalamazoo stuff. I haven't liked anything that came out of Nashville. The only reason why Nashville opened was to give Gibson a place to have cheap labour, *Michigan being a unionized workforce of skilled luthiers* and I think it really shows in the quality of the instruments during that time period.

Kalamazoo was in danger of having its doors locked forever, and they knew it, so they made the best the could possibly make to prove a point... The only problem is that in the 80's, the world became all about big business, meaning cheaper and faster was preferred to quality... So Kalamazoo had their doors closed anyway in 84.

The entire decade of the 80's is full of dog Les Pauls. There are some good ones, but they are harder to find. 90's got a little better, and the 00's is the best I've seen from Gibson in my life span *so far* and there are still plenty of dogs.

10 years full of dog LPs

il gatto wrote: »

And the Yamaha SG is a cool guitar (even if it is based on a Gibson SG;)).

The Yammy SG has the same body shape as the Gibson SG, but other than that it's much more like an LP. Best of both worlds! Plus the sustain, the wood choice the finish and the electronics are typically better than most LPs I've come across.

It IS true unless your definition of a good guitar is how it looks rather than how it plays and sounds. I'm well aware of Gibsons history and the variance in QC but the facts are is that spending €2,000 on a guitar people want perfection in the finishing. The finish has no affect the sound. I've played Gibsons from 70s,80s,90s and 00s. Some were set up more to my taste than others but none were bad and the 80s one no worse than the others. Sure there may be an occassional hound as there is with any mass produced item, but poor binding and blemished laquer do not mean there is definitely an underlying problem with the insruments construction.
A company like Gibson attracts attention to how it operates in a way PRS, Yamaha or Ibanez do not. There are people who still won't buy a post Kalamazoo instrument. Not based on fact, but protest to the fact that they moved.
"]There was still good wood out there during the Norlin years. A lot of the guitars were heavy but it was still good resonant wood. Even pancakes have their place." This would indicate what I'm saying IMO. The fundamentals were still good.
You don't think they're worth it? Fine. Alot of people love them. Talking down to people won't convince anyone otherwise. And picking one guys opinion from a forum to back up your opinion is weak. The rest of that thread seems to come to the consensus that there were lots of excellent guitars made at the time. I didn't see any thrashing.

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

Comments