Members chikinpox Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Nothing backwards about the Custom, and I doubt Les picked the color. I was just making a joke about how little input Gibson took from Les. The issue with the Custom and the Standard is why they would have a fancy gold top on their standard model, and a plain black finish on the "Custom". I'm not saying I believe it, I'm just stating the fact. Many people do believe the colors we mixed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members angus_old Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by chikinpox I was just making a joke about how little input Gibson took from Les. The issue with the Custom and the Standard is why they would have a fancy gold top on their standard model, and a plain black finish on the "Custom". I'm not saying I believe it, I'm just stating the fact. Many people do believe the colors we mixed up. more than that, why would they have a maple top on the low end model, and a solid 1 piece mahogany body on the more expensive one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members angus_old Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by hare.29 Yeah, what's up with that bridge cover? It looks like an air intake. it IS an air intake. it sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members k4df4l Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by chikinpox I was just making a joke about how little input Gibson took from Les. The issue with the Custom and the Standard is why they would have a fancy gold top on their standard model, and a plain black finish on the "Custom". I'm not saying I believe it, I'm just stating the fact. Many people do believe the colors we mixed up. The Gibson Les Paul was created in direct response to the success of Fender Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members hare.29 Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by onbongos it IS an air intake. it sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jec Posted March 30, 2006 Author Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by batotman Les Paul designed nothing on the Les Paul guitar. Yeah, the guitar that I'm referring to as the one that he "put together" was the Epi "log." And I was kinda being sarcastic, or ironic. I know how highly we value the Les Paul legacy around here. You know, not enough that we're willing to pay more than $500 bucks for it.. But still.. (Again, irony...sarcasm...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fuzzy4dice Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by onbongos Les Paul was the shredder of the 50s. His music was as insipid and contentless as shred is today. This is a joke, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim gueguen Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 Originally posted by LowMach the lp guitar is just a variation of Paul Bigsby's single cut design? And fender went ahead and borrowed the headstock design from the same guitar. Kind of funny how now both makers will sue over things they borrowed in the first place. Cutaways on guitars predate Bigsby. Leo Fender claimed he got the six on a side idea from Eastern European instruments he saw, but its just as likely he got the idea from old Martin and other acoustics that had such a setup 100 years before the first Bigsby, which you can see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Josh S Posted March 30, 2006 Members Share Posted March 30, 2006 I'd play that birthday-cake pink LP. I'm not sure why, but it appeals to me. Oh god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John S. Shinal Posted March 31, 2006 Members Share Posted March 31, 2006 Originally posted by Josh S I'd play that birthday-cake pink LP. I'm not sure why, but it appeals to me. Is that any better, or do you still want the pink one ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jerry_picker Posted March 31, 2006 Members Share Posted March 31, 2006 Originally posted by markas214 Not even the signature on the headstock? Most people could care less about Les Paul the musician and associate the name with the guitar rather than the individual. I admit never listening to one single Les paul recording. For me Les Paul means a Gibson solid body electric guitar. Les Paul's endorsment is irrelevent. Not trying to start a debate but that's how I see it. Does Lester get a royalty on each guitar sold that bears his name? Or, did he sell the "Les Paul" name for a lump sum? Or, is he SOL, and riding it just for the extra bit of fame and immortality that LP guitars seem to have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.