Les Paul Questions

[Twitch]

Shockingly, I think I may becoming interested in having a Les Paul. Unlike Jacksons, I have NO idea what Im looking for. I know virtually nothing about them. I know enough that I want to stay away from the Studio models if I want the full body and better inlays, or is this even correct?

Ive noticed the Studios are more in line with what I have to pay or trade, but I really want the nice inlays, heavier body and binding.

Are the Studio models USA models?

Are there any key words in adds specific to Les Pauls that should raise red flags for me?

Ive noticed that while the Standards seem to have reasonable prices, the Customs are pretty far out there price wise, why is this? What are the key differences between a Standard and Custom?

Are there any key words that would denote a thinner neck? Id really like a model with a thinner neck.

This should get me started. If theres any other info you think I should know, feel free to let me know.

Thanks.

[DonP]

Twich, this will take some time to type up. Give me an hour

[Twitch]

Twich, this will take some time to type up. Give me an hour

Thanks, I look forward to it. I figured youd be the first to respond.

[DonP]

Shockingly, I think I may becoming interested in having a Les Paul. Unlike Jacksons, I have NO idea what Im looking for. I know virtually nothing about them. I know enough that I want to stay away from the Studio models if I want the full body and better inlays, or is this even correct?

Ive noticed the Studios are more in line with what I have to pay or trade, but I really want the nice inlays, heavier body and binding.

Are the Studio models USA models?

Yes

Are there any key words in adds specific to Les Pauls that should raise red flags for me?

It depends on what your looking for.

Ive noticed that while the Standards seem to have reasonable prices, the Customs are pretty far out there price wise, why is this?

Because people are willing to pay more for a custom, Gibson complies by charging more. Custom's have always been more than standards going back to the first introduction in the 50s

What are the key differences between a Standard and Custom?

It depends on which year of each. In general, the custom as ebony with MOP block inlays, certain ones are solid mahogany, certain ones have 3 pickups...

Are there any key words that would denote a thinner neck?

I stayed away from Les Pauls a long time because I hate fat necks. In 2002 I discovered the Classic. In general, a '60s' neck is thin, a '50s' neck is fat.

Id really like a model with a thinner neck.

You want a 60s neck like most of mine

This should get me started. If theres any other info you think I should know, feel free to let me know.

Thanks.

I have 6 Les Pauls. Each one sounds different. Some are great metal guitars, some are great classic rock (AC/DC, Thin Lizzy, Tesla, old Def Leppard).

(the stuff below goes in increasing price order)

For you, I'd say try to track down a used Classic. It has the very high output 496R/500T pickups and is just like a thin necked Standard. 1990-1992 are the best years, because these are almost like a historic (on the outside). They get progressively crappier options throughout the years. The inlays get greener, 'Classic' instead of 'Model' on the headstock, thick binding in the cutaway, they loose the ABR-1 in 2002, then 2 piece backs. I have a 1996 Premium Plus - the first LP I purchased in Dec 2002. It's a fantastic guitar, I found 4 conductor zebra 496R/500T and push/pull pots to split the pickups.

Next, I'd try to score a 2002 - 2006 Standard with a 60s neck. In 2002 Gibson total revamped the standard, making it very historically correct (small cutaway binding, nickel hardware, Klusson repros made by Gotoh, BB Pros...). When this model came out I hit a BIN on ebay and got a brand new one in Feb 2003. The BB Pros can do metal with a high gain amp, or great Def Leppard (old school), AC/DC. The 500T can do hard rock as well, but only if you don't boost the amp gain too much. Say the Green channel dimed but un-boosted (button out) on a DSL100.

After that, a used G0. This is a Historic Les Paul (better wood, long tenon, no weight relief holes). These guitars sound fantastic to me. I got mine in Dec 2004. It's got the "wall of sound" tone. I can do Megadeth, Dio, Savatage etc with this axe.

Let me know what other info you need and what your budget is so that I can guide you to the right choice.

[Trussrod]

I've had a Les Paul Custom for years. All I can say is be sure to play the guitar before you buy it. Some work well for rock/metal, some don't. Also, make sure the bridge tail piece is not made of aluminum.

[DonP]

Also, make sure the bridge tail piece is not made of aluminum.

? Aluminum is historically correct. I upgrade all my tails to Aluminum, usually using the Stew-Mac Gotoh for $36.

Twich,

To explain this discussion, there are many different hardware upgrades that you can do to fine tune the tone of your Les Paul. Bridge type (Nashville vs. ABR-1), tailpice (heavy Zinc or light Aluminum), light Kluson tuners or heavy Grovers, tailpiece stud and bushing material (steel vs. brass), bridge material (zinc / aluminum / steel), the bridge post material (brass or steel).

Each Les Paul is different, and each player is different. I'd say 90% of the people on the LPF or MyLPF would suggest an Aluminum tailpiece over zinc, but remember those most of those people play blues / zep / allman bros, clapton, etc. One of the main reasons I don't hang out there as much as here. I love my Les Pauls, but I'm 100% a metalhead.

[Grandturk]

My 78 Les Paul was a stone cold Les Paul killer - played better than any other Les Paul I've ever played. Still got rid of it though - traded it for a Strat.

[Twitch]

Thanks DonP and TR. Don heres one Im looking at locally here in town. I like the color and the price, but its a Studio and the inlays appear to be smaller than they would be on a Standard. Whats your opinion on it?

http://bloomington.craigslist.org/msg/2158142011.html

[Brozz]

Some (maybe all) the newer LPs have "chambered" bodies. Meaning they have large areas routed out of them. Similar to a Strat, and yea, it really effects the guitar .. in a negative way.

The Studio Series isnt bad for the money. They have the LP sound, and are made pretty well, and are an affordable no frills option to the real deal.
Just something to keep in mind.

I have a 1975 LP Standard, and yea really nice piece. Im a metal player at heart, and honestly, the LP falls a bit short in that category. Its a very "midsy" tone that muddies up pretty easily. It improved alot (IMO) when I installed an EMG 81/85 combo, but it still has that LP tone ... not a bad thing at all, just not for everyone.

[Twitch]

Its a very "midsy" tone that muddies up pretty easily. It improved alot (IMO) when I installed an EMG 81/85 combo, but it still has that LP tone ... not a bad thing at all, just not for everyone.

What got me on this kick was an 80 something Standard w/ EMGs in it that I used at a studio. It sounded killer. Id like to reproduce the tone as close as possible.

[Trussrod]

? Aluminum is historically correct. I upgrade all my tails to Aluminum, usually using the Stew-Mac Gotoh for $36.

I think you're right. A tech upgraded the bridge and told me about this--I never looked it up personally.

Twitch, for current pricing I would check the completed listings on eBay for the make and model. There's a nice saddle upgrade for LP's by TonePros that supposedly increases sustain. The TP saddle holder is cross drilled for a set screw. You can add GraphTec String Saver saddles to this bridge, too. IIRC there was a discussion about the inlay material Gibson uses--it's MOTO not MOP for most models. Electra made quality LP copies in the 70's--solid tone woods, etc. If you can get one cheap it might be worth it.

http://www.guitarcenter.com/TonePros-Metric-Locking-Tune-O-Matic-Bridge--large-posts--306149-i1128083.gc

http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Nuts,_saddles/Electric_guitar_saddles/String_Saver_Tune-o-matic_Saddles.html?actn=100101&xst=3&xsr=8222

[mjtripper]

I'll go against the grain here a little and say if you want a les paul and don't mind the headstock not saying gibson check out a heritage 150. They are made by the old gibson employees and are better then any gibson I've played in a really really long time. You can get them cheaper then gibson as well and I've seen them used around here in the 1200 area. It's good enough for Skolnick

[DonP]

I'll go against the grain here a little and say if you want a les paul and don't mind the headstock not saying gibson check out a heritage 150. They are made by the old gibson employees and are better then any gibson I've played in a really really long time. You can get them cheaper then gibson as well and I've seen them used around here in the 1200 area. It's good enough for Skolnick

I've only checked out one Heritage in person. I like to support Heritage because it's in the original factory and workers. This is only one example, but it didn't light my fire. If you want to go the non-LP route, there are a pair of Orville by Gibsons on the MyLPF classified that look sweet. I personally never owned anything but a Gibson.

[DonP]

Thanks DonP and TR. Don heres one Im looking at locally here in town. I like the color and the price, but its a Studio and the inlays appear to be smaller than they would be on a Standard. Whats your opinion on it?
http://bloomington.craigslist.org/msg/2158142011.html

Doesn't do anything for me. I'm very picky about binding and looks, and if it doesn't look like it came out of BOTB, I usually stick my nose up in the air

Now for you, is it in your budget? You can't trust sellers, but it says it has a fat neck that you didn't want. Go try it out, you might like it.

[DonP]

Some (maybe all) the newer LPs have "chambered" bodies. Meaning they have large areas routed out of them. Similar to a Strat, and yea, it really effects the guitar .. in a negative way.

The Studio Series isnt bad for the money. They have the LP sound, and are made pretty well, and are an affordable no frills option to the real deal.
Just something to keep in mind.

I have a 1975 LP Standard, and yea really nice piece. Im a metal player at heart, and honestly, the LP falls a bit short in that category. Its a very "midsy" tone that muddies up pretty easily. It improved alot (IMO) when I installed an EMG 81/85 combo, but it still has that LP tone ... not a bad thing at all, just not for everyone.

Ah, the old chambering card. I pointed Twich in the direction of non-chambered LP's in my first recomendations. Chambering started around 1997 with the Elegant. Then they chambered an R9 around 2004 (called it the Cloud 9) and then other historics. Standards started getting chambered in mid 2006. Then in 2008, the Standard kept being chambered, and the Traditional was unchambered. The Traditional Pro is the Classic reborn.

Is chambering good or bad? Well, I tried a 2006 Std. and it was a muddy mess. So I stayed away until May 2010 when I spotted a CR8 at Sam Ash for $3K. Sounded bright clear, fantastic. I knew right then and there it was mine. Flamed historic usually go for $6K, so this is a flamed historic for 1/2 the price that sounds great and looks great. So I say don't listen to the nay-sayers and keep an open mind. If it sounds good it is good no matter how it's constructed.



Finally, I was in GC a few months back and they had a 1956 that was refin'd for $5K. I made GC throw in a Fender historic case because they wouldn't budge on the price. I told them they should give me the guitar too!

So now I'm broke. No new guitars this year.