Jump to content

Lets see your LES PAUL copys....


Kerry67

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
I don't consider Squier's to be copies either for the same reason. I do have Tele copies made by SX and Jay Turser though.

Yeah, I dunno. I don't think less of them for being copies, but I do think of them as copies nevertheless. It isn't a quality thing, it's a "Gibson makes Les Pauls and Fender makes Stratocasters and any other company that makes those guitars are making copies" sort of thing. Again, not that I think less of them for being copies - just wish the owners could fess up to the honest truth of the situation. A licensed copy is still a copy, it just happens to be legal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, I dunno. I don't think less of them for being copies, but I do think of them as copies nevertheless. It isn't a quality thing, it's a "Gibson makes Les Pauls and Fender makes Stratocasters and any other company that makes those guitars are making copies" sort of thing. Again, not that I think less of them for being copies - just wish the owners could fess up to the honest truth of the situation. A licensed copy is still a copy, it just happens to be legal.

 

 

maybe licensed isn't the best word for this situation. Epiphone is owned by Gibson as Squier is owned by Fender. They are simply the import/economy divisions of their respective companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, I dunno. I don't think less of them for being copies, but I do think of them as copies nevertheless. It isn't a quality thing, it's a "Gibson makes Les Pauls and Fender makes Stratocasters and any other company that makes those guitars are making copies" sort of thing. Again, not that I think less of them for being copies - just wish the owners could fess up to the honest truth of the situation. A licensed copy is still a copy, it just happens to be legal.

 

But that's what he's saying. Orvilles were made BY GIBSON. It wasn't another company. Gibson contracted two factories to make Les Pauls for them. So I don't really know how anyone would consider them a copy seeing as gibson wanted them made.

 

I think it's just because of the name.....so consider this...

 

...what if Orvilles actually said Gibson on the headstock? (in big script..the top line says gibson on it in little script) Would you then consider it "a gibson"? Because Gibson wanted to call them gibson's but they didn't have the trade name gibson in Japan. It belonged to some other company. So Gibson decided to use Orville's name instead.

 

I own a Greco Les Paul....here...

 

DSC05537.jpg

 

and an orville by Gibson

 

Image0090.jpg

Image0098.jpg

 

And I have no problem being honest and calling the Greco a copy, clone, whatever....

 

But the Orville says gibson on the headstock...so I consider it a gibson.

 

If people need their gibsons to be made in america to be a gibson then they are just {censored}ing snobs. I mean....does anyone NOT consider a mexican fender a fender?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Like I said, six of one, half a dozen of the other. I don't really care either way to be honest. If it has six strings and resembles a light-burst LP then I'll probably lust after it. I (f***ing) love my Gibson to death - but I had to try close to 60 of them to find it and most of those 60 were completely unappealing to me. In the same thought, I used to own an Epi LP Standard in a really nice trans amber that I still kick myself for selling.

 

That being said, (to me) my Epi was a Les Paul copy; that's how the detractors want to see it so I'm cool with seeing it the same way just to avoid being on the defensive in these discussions - I just wanna play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Good post.

 

But that's what he's saying. Orvilles were made BY GIBSON. It wasn't another company. Gibson contracted two factories to make Les Pauls for them. So I don't really know how anyone would consider them a copy seeing as gibson wanted them made.


I think it's just because of the name.....so consider this...


...what if Orvilles actually said Gibson on the headstock? (in big script..the top line says gibson on it in little script) Would you then consider it "a gibson"? Because Gibson wanted to call them gibson's but they didn't have the trade name gibson in Japan. It belonged to some other company. So Gibson decided to use Orville's name instead.


I own a Greco Les Paul....here...


DSC05537.jpg

and an orville by Gibson


Image0090.jpg
Image0098.jpg

And I have no problem being honest and calling the Greco a copy, clone, whatever....


But the Orville says gibson on the headstock...so I consider it a gibson.


If people need their gibsons to be made in america to be a gibson then they are just {censored}ing snobs. I mean....does anyone NOT consider a mexican fender a fender?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...