Members Joeballz Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 How much are original 1959 Gibson Les Pauls worth? Just wondering how much they go for in horrible condition to museum condition. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wyatt Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 I don't think there is a hard range. They come up so infrequently that each one is an isolated auction. They are easy pulling $250,000+ in great condition these days. Poor condition models never seem to come up for sale, so I don't know if anyone could nail down a price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bryvincent Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 which 1959 LP?Standard?Custom?Junior?Special? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fuzztone Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 which 1959 LP?Standard?Custom?Junior?Special? [YOUTUBE]D-uGolHnbTA[/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wyatt Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 which 1959 LP?Standard?Custom?Junior?Special? Well, the word "Standard" wasn't officially used until the '70's. So it was ...... the Les Paul model... the Les Paul Custom model... the Les Paul Jr. model... the Les Paul Special model But that is a fair question since he didn't use the magical "burst" word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kap'n Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 Well, the word "Standard" wasn't officially used until the '70's. So it was ...... the Les Paul model... the Les Paul Custom model... the Les Paul Jr. model... the Les Paul Special modelBut that is a fair question since he didn't use the magical "burst" word. I think "Standard" replaced "Model" in '58, but I could easily be wrong. Clean '59 Standards are easily six figures these days, but a lot depends on amount of curl, phase of moon, how the fade is, etc. Of course, this is a screwy economy to figure out any price on true vintage guitars, much less something like this. In any event, it's the price of a house, or several houses in Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willyguitar Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 All I know is that they are HUGELY overpriced for what you are actually getting. Or, to put it another way, the price reflects more how rare they are, and the stupid kudos that goes with them, than the actual quality. Now, rather than spend 200K on a 1959 Les Paul, I would much rather spend 6k on a 1955 or 1956 Les Paul Junior. You'd probably get a much better guitar too. But then I am very biased. And of course, people don't buy 1959 Les Pauls to play them, I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wyatt Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 I think "Standard" replaced "Model" in '58, but I could easily be wrong. Clean '59 Standards are easily six figures these days, but a lot depends on amount of curl, phase of moon, how the fade is, etc. Of course, this is a screwy economy to figure out any price on true vintage guitars, much less something like this. In any event, it's the price of a house, or several houses in Detroit. "Standard" was first used officially by Gibson when they reintroduced the model in 1976 (which is also when it first went on the truss rod cover). Before that it was just a nickname. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarcapo Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 I'm thinking about tulip bulbs in Holland right about now.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members almightycrunch Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 All I know is that they are HUGELY overpriced for what you are actually getting. Or, to put it another way, the price reflects more how rare they are, and the stupid kudos that goes with them, than the actual quality. Now, rather than spend 200K on a 1959 Les Paul, I would much rather spend 6k on a 1955 or 1956 Les Paul Junior. You'd probably get a much better guitar too. But then I am very biased. And of course, people don't buy 1959 Les Pauls to play them, I would imagine. failzorz on the highest of levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scott944 Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 As I've mentioned before in similar threads, Tony Bacon's recent book "The Million Dollar Les Paul" is a great read on this subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willyguitar Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 failzorz on the highest of levels. why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members almightycrunch Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 Because it is not just a myth, it is truly a "special" instrument. It is kinda like comparing a Lamborghini Murcielago with an Impala SS I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willyguitar Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 Because it is not just a myth, it is truly a "special" instrument. But so are 1955 Les Paul Juniors. And so are 1950s strats, and 1952 teles. My point is that 1959 Les Pauls seem to be disproportionately sought after, compared to other vintage instruments, which may be as special, or even more special (in terms of how good they are as instruments), especially since there are probably a few more of them (say Juniors) about and the chance of getting a good one is that much higher. But as I (perhaps flippantly) suggested, I doubt the people with the dough to buy 1959 Les Pauls are actually interested in playing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bryvincent Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 "Standard" was first used officially by Gibson when they reintroduced the model in 1976 (which is also when it first went on the truss rod cover). Before that it was just a nickname. Kap'n is right, "Standard" was first used in '58. that's according to all Gibson books i have and all Gibson history i'ved read. but it was in '76 that Gibson started putting "Standard" on the truss rod cover. http://www.provide.net/~cfh/gibson5.html . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members almightycrunch Posted November 14, 2009 Members Share Posted November 14, 2009 But so are 1955 Les Paul Juniors. And so are 1950s strats, and 1952 teles. My point is that 1959 Les Pauls seem to be disproportionately sought after, compared to other vintage instruments, which may be as special, or even more special (in terms of how good they are as instruments), especially since there are probably a few more of them (say Juniors) about and the chance of getting a good one is that much higher.But as I (perhaps flippantly) suggested, I doubt the people with the dough to buy 1959 Les Pauls are actually interested in playing them. At this point, save for a special few players, yeah it is collectors who are ending up with them. I understand what you are saying though, and agree with you in many ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mister Zero Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 As I've mentioned before in similar threads, Tony Bacon's recent book "The Million Dollar Les Paul" is a great read on this subject. Just read this last month, great book. It shows that a lot of these are being played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Elias Graves Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 why? You obviously weren't witty enough in your post, Willy! EG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ΨWindingΨ Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 If you think a $6K historic is overprice you may as well not even start asking about an original 59. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarmandp Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 But so are 1955 Les Paul Juniors. And so are 1950s strats, and 1952 teles. My point is that 1959 Les Pauls seem to be disproportionately sought after, compared to other vintage instruments, which may be as special, or even more special (in terms of how good they are as instruments), especially since there are probably a few more of them (say Juniors) about and the chance of getting a good one is that much higher.But as I (perhaps flippantly) suggested, I doubt the people with the dough to buy 1959 Les Pauls are actually interested in playing them. 1955 les paul juniors are a dime a dozen. 1959 Les Pauls are 50% musical instrument and 50% art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members p4vl Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 If you have to ask, you cannot afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willyguitar Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 1955 les paul juniors are a dime a dozen.1959 Les Pauls are 50% musical instrument and 50% art. I'd rather have 100% instrument, after all, it's a guitar, not a {censored}ing Rembrandt. (although I would also never buy a Rembrandt - maybe a Caravaggio though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members almightycrunch Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 No, its THE prime example of something coming together as insanely perfect as it could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members volvo1800 Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 Not what it was 2 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members volvo1800 Posted November 15, 2009 Members Share Posted November 15, 2009 If you have to ask, you cannot afford it. My experience with the wealthy is that they are usually inquisitive . . . that's why there wealthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.