buying a gibson les paul need advice

[Bigfknbang]

tomorrow im heading up to the shop to put a gibson les paul on layaway. probably going to get a studio or a faded?? the studios are 1,050.00 with case and the faded are around 850.00 with case. is there much of a difference between the studio and the faded series besides the finish? anyone own both? which do you like better and why? i'm going to try out a bunch of different ones and i get 6 months to pay it off anyway so i might go for a standard or sumthin. im going to watch some reviews n shiz on em on youtube also.

[rdamaral]

I just sold a Standard. They are far better than a Studio.

You can grab a nice used Studio for under $800. Paying $1,050 is way too much IMO.

People think I'm crazy when I tell them that my Zakk Epiphone is better than a Gibson studio, but it is

[Larz]

I know Wildwood Guitars has several Studios priced around $850 (except for some limited edition ones) but those are priced with a gig bag rather than a case.

I kind of like the blacked out gothic one.

[toejam]

probably going to get a studio or a faded?? the studios are 1,050.00 with case and the faded are around 850.00 with case. is there much of a difference between the studio and the faded series besides the finish?

I don't have a regular Studio model, but I do own a faded Studio. It's a very nice guitar.

[chrisolson]

The 90's Studios were no different than a Standard beyond the finish and lack of binding. Hardware and pickups were the same, and mahogany is, well, mahogany. My Studios (an of them) absolutely KILLED my LP Classic. All things being equal, unless you are stuck on "looks", Studios really deliver. Or at least they did in the mid-90's.

That said, the best LP I ever had was a 95 Epi Goldtop upgraded with Dimarzios and Sperzels. It's not ALL in the name...

[straycat]

The higher end studios can be had for around 1,000 dicker a bit on the price.
The faded are good guitars but the finish is pretty lame IMO.You can buff them out so not a total loss.
I have an 83 studio I would stack up tone wise to a STD but it has Shaw pick ups so not a fair comparison.
I would find a nice used STD for around 1,000 -1,200 they are out there in this tight economy.

[MarkTheMuscleShark]

"buying a gibson les paul need advice"
Don't. That's all the advice you need.

[straycat]

"buying a gibson les paul need advice"
Don't. That's all the advice you need.

Why may I ask Mark?

[Animus]

Why may I ask Mark?

You really need to play any Gibson you plan to buy. They are hit or miss, they don't have the same quality control as something you expect from Jackson or PRS. The surer bet are the customs but even then.... I'd probably rather own a nice LTD Singlecut over a Les Paul Studio.

[clifffclaven]

Why may I ask Mark?

Because he has no fukkin clue what hes talking about.

chrisolson is correct, mid 90s thru about 2003 studios were and are the best ones. I prob wouldnt pay 1050 for a new one, unless it was a killer player. Personally i would save a little more money and get a used standard, something before 2008.

[Bigfknbang]

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/.

[Bigfknbang]

oh i forgot to mention. i played them all through a marshall JVM halfstack. that amp is killer
\m/\m/

[Robert Hendrix]

I tried out one of the new Les Paul Standard Trad Pros a couple of weeks ago. I guess it's a GC exclusive because it's the only place I've seen them. I was pretty impressed. I just didn't like the finish choices. I really don't care much for the "classic" Burst finishes. Now if they had it in a quilt top, I'd be hooked. I'm a sucker for quilts.

[MarkTheMuscleShark]

Sigh, where to begin...
If you're going to be profane, do it right. Fukkin? You mean Fucking? Sorry, had to get that off my chest. Anywho, here's the problems with Les Pauls. First of all, as far as the Les Pauls I've played, I have played a Studio Faded, a Traditional Pro, a Traditional Plus, 1958 Standard VOS, 1959 Standard VOS, 1960 VOS, 1954 custom VOS, a double cutaway with Seymour Duncan pickups, SG '61 Reissue (technically a Les Paul), plus other Gibsons, namely the ES-335 Satin, ES-339, SG Standard, SG Standard with Coil tap, Flying V faded, Les Paul Junior, Explorer, and the EDS-1275, so I've played quite a few. Here's the problems. Weight. They're pretty damn heavy, the higher quality ones, usually weigh in at about 9 pounds, other than that I've heard of Les Pauls weighing in at up to 15 pounds. That may not seem like a big increase, but your shoulders and your back will feel the difference. Then, there's the ergonomics. Most Les Pauls dig into your side, plus it sorta digs into your forearm, like an archtop guitar. Then there's the infamous neck breakage. To be fair, I've never dropped a guitar. However, if your les paul falls off of your stand, gets knocked into something, etc., that headstock is coming off. Mahogany isn't very strong to begin with, and on top of that there is no volute to reinforce the neck. That unnecessary headstock angle doesn't help matters, either. Then there's that cheesy phenolic overlay on the headstock. That "holly headstock veneer"? Plastic. Speaking of Plastic, on the average Les Paul Standard, yes even up to the 1959 VOS, there are "figured acrylic" inlays. A fancy term for plastic. Maybe on a les paul custom, you could get some MOP. Then there's the Corian nut. Those things ALWAYS bind. Not the best for tuning stability or string breakage at the nut. Then there's all these angles. Angled headstock, angled neck, plus I've never liked tune-o-matics, but that's more of an opinion. What's not opinion is the fact that all Les Pauls are the same. Mahogany neck, mahogany body, maple top, rosewood fretboard. What if I want a Walnut top? What if I want a maple neck? Too bad. Lastly, there's the outrageous prices. What's the difference between a Les Paul Standard Plus and a 1959 VOS? Neck profile, frets, pickups, top, shade of sunburst. Why should I have to pay twice as much? For 6000 dollars, I could get a lot. I could get a custom shop Charvel exactly the way I want it for about 4 grand. With the money left over I could get a high end Marshall tube head. The part I really don't like is the neck joint. First of all, it's so abrupt. it's like, body...body...body..body..bodNECK! No contours whatsoever. Then, there's the fact that it is a set neck joint. Set necks are the cheapest and easiest way to mount a neck. stick the neck in, throw some glue on there, you're done. it takes more skill and money to properly mount a bolt-on neck. Then there's all that glue. The neck joint is what I like to call a tone junction. Body meets neck, wood meets wood, tone meets tone. That glue is a weak link. What if your pickups were coated with glue? Everyone knows that unpotted pickups sound much more open and dynamic, am I right? Another thing, upper fret access. You really have to reach up to get to the high frets on a Les Paul. It's like playing a jazz box, you're hosed if you want to play up high. There are other problems, like scale length, intonation, tuning stability, finish quality/durability, but those things are subjective, so I'll leave those matters to others. That's my two cents.

[DonP]

That's my two cents.

That's nice.

There's a few flaws in your story.

If these are such crappy guitars, why do most people want them?
If they are such crappy guitars, why do people keep buying them?
How can Gibson charge so much for a crappy product?
Surely all of these famous guitarist who play Les Pauls could find some other axe to get the job done? I see a few who switched to Stratocasters (Clapton), yet most who played Les Pauls had there hayday with the Les Paul, and got...boring...after the switch.

Surely if these guitars are this bad, no one should want them and they should be going for chump change. So I'd say your two cents don't hold a lot of water.