Page 6 of 6
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 9:38 pm
by bob the r0bot
hotrodperlmutter wrote:delonge is a semi-hollow, billy. you should know this mang!
i can vouch that a dirty fingers in the bridge sounds class in a semi-hollow, but it really needs some versatility in the form of a p90 in the neck!
That thing is pretty fly
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 9:51 pm
by finboy
did not know they make white les paul juniors now, fuck the billie joe model
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:50 am
by Phil O'Keefe
soundofseventythree wrote:Some might consider the LP a signature model of sorts, I mean it does bear the Les' name (now he was someone worthy of a signature model!!!). But as I understand it he DESIGNED the instrument, or was instrumental in its design at the very least. But true to Gibson form (even way back then) they stuck his name on the SG even though I believe he had nothing to do with that design. From wikipedia (but I read it elsewhere years ago first): The new Les Paul (The SG) was popular, but Les Paul himself did not care for the new design, and requested the removal of his name from the new model (however, he was photographed with the new model several times).
I've also heard that Les was not fond of the 1961 SG "Les Paul", but I've also heard that one of the other reasons for the fact his name came off of Gibsons in 1962 was due to his bitter divorce from Mary Ford that year, and a desire to not have to pay her a share of the royalties from the sales. By the time Les Pauls were re-released in '68, their divorce was settled and he would not be obligated to pay her a percentage of the proceeds from the new licensing agreement.
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 10:29 am
by ekwatts
I just love the fact that Gibson actually discontinued the Les Paul at one point. Basically proves how shortsighted and daft they can be as a guitar company, and it's never changed. They had a bunch of great ideas from a handful of men and executed them in ways that just aren't imaginable nowadays.
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 7:41 pm
by paul_
ekwatts wrote:I just love the fact that Gibson actually discontinued the Les Paul at one point. Basically proves how shortsighted and daft they can be as a guitar company
Kinda like Fender did with every guitar except the tele and strat, but for a far shorter period of time.
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 7:55 pm
by Fran
I sense Paul_ is a Gibson man.
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 7:59 pm
by paul_
I'm a Fender man, I like Gibsons fine too though. Fender had their coolest guitars out of production for similar/longer periods of time than the LP was, and they came back for identical artist-use related reasons to the LP.
Sonic Youth = Cream
Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 8:01 pm
by Gomer
Chad Kroeger sounds more or less constipated. I guess that's versatile.
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2010 2:17 am
by cobascis
Gibson chose him they knew they were making a good investment cuz they like his style an they see sumting dat only professionals can c not dimwits like u ppl.
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2010 2:36 am
by Will
cobascis wrote: Gibson chose him they knew they were making a good investment cuz they like his style an they see sumting dat only professionals can c not dimwits like u ppl.
Luzzle. I'll concede he's a very profitable commodity. This is just another case of Gibson misreading their market. If they had kicked this to Epiphone, they'd do great.
If you think about it historically, this is PROBABLY no more ridiculous than the Trini Lopez model from the 60s (so you could get sweet "Lemon Tree" tones.)
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2010 2:43 am
by Mo Law-ka
Will wrote:cobascis wrote: Gibson chose him they knew they were making a good investment cuz they like his style an they see sumting dat only professionals can c not dimwits like u ppl.
Luzzle. I'll concede he's a very profitable commodity. This is just another case of Gibson misreading their market. If they had kicked this to Epiphone, they'd do great.
If you think about it historically, this is PROBABLY no more ridiculous than the Trini Lopez model from the 60s (so you could get sweet "Lemon Tree" tones.)
but the Trini Lopez was awesome and a somewhat unique model, this, however, is not.
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2010 3:41 am
by Will
They'll do it for Chad Kroaker, but there's still no Woody Guthrie J-45 or Bob Dylan Nick Lucas model.
Although, to be fair, they reissued both the banner-label J-45 and Nick Lucas a couple years ago. Still, it's an endorsement that MAKES SENSE. If there can be both a J-160E and J-160E John Lennon model, they can do this.
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:33 am
by serfx
mostly, i want to know, why the fuck are we still talking about this?
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:44 pm
by 24HRS2MDNT
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:42 am
by Will
HLY SHT. They actually do make a Woody Guthrie sig model:
http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Acousti ... Specs.aspx
And it lists for about 2/3rds the price of that shitty les paul.
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:37 am
by Doug
This musician and his $4000.00 signature Les Paul are taking quite a beating. I just gotta jump in here and point out that there's
no other guitar I know of that is so advanced that it too has star decals on the neck so you can see where your left hand is on the neck in a darkened room.
Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:55 pm
by 24HRS2MDNT
