Les Pauls - I know you guys know

Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by Help!I'maRock!, Oct 15, 2008.

  1. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    9,061
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    on the phone
    I've read a lot on different forums about how the Les Paul shape changed over the years. Supposedly the Historics and VOS aren't even the original shape of the originals. so please detail the differences.
     
  2. stuagu

    stuagu Member

    Messages:
    360
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Location:
    uk
    theyre getting closer but (apparently as ive never had any & 58/59's next to any of the historics ive had to check) they are still slightly smaller body wise & the dishing of the body is still different. i cant back this up with anything except that its the opinions of people ive spoken to over the years who know more about it than me & opionions given on this (the best!) & other forums. in my experience they vary in quality from good to great.
     
  3. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    9,061
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    on the phone
    what do you mean by "the dishing of the body"?
     
  4. jiml

    jiml Supporting Member

    Messages:
    8,353
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2002
    Location:
    amorica

    Carve of the maple top (looks like an upside down bowl or dish).
     
  5. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    9,061
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    on the phone
    i guess the obvious question is when and why did they change it?
     
  6. LPguitarman

    LPguitarman Member

    Messages:
    353
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri
    So are you saying a new Les Paul that I would get at any GC or on-line dealer has a slightly smaller body and different top carve than original Les Pauls?
     
  7. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    9,061
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    on the phone
    allegedly
     
  8. phantasm

    phantasm Member

    Messages:
    1,215
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    The originals seem to have a more extreme crave to the top. Some of the newer ones just look a little sloped, not a bubble.
     
  9. Soul Driver

    Soul Driver Member

    Messages:
    451
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Location:
    Wellington, New Zealand
    I'd recommend using the search feature over at the Les Paul Forum......... Are Historics different to the '50s Les Paul, Yes! However, my experience and opinion is that they are great instruments and I didn't have to remortgage the house to buy one.
     
  10. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    9,061
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    on the phone
    i'm not really interested in buying one. i'm more interested in what the changes were, when and why they were made, and why the reissues haven't gone back to the original design.
     
  11. JimmyR

    JimmyR Member

    Messages:
    3,793
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Location:
    sub lacum
    I played a real deal '59 last year. It looked a helluva lot like a historic but maybe not as nice! I'm not interested in buying either, although I have owned a couple of R6s. I found the real '59 to feel and look a lot like the historic but there is something in the patina of the finish that the newer guitars just can't replicate. It wasn't any better, just different. Even if I had the money for an original I would still buy the historic. I once played a Murphy aged R9 and it looked more authentic than the original! It certainly played better! :)

    As far as the top carve, I can't say that I noticed much difference. The late 70s LPs had a much flatter carve, and are often referred to as "pancake" LPs. But current LPs have a much more arched top much like the originals. They all vary a little owing to the hand-controlled sanding after the CNC carving. BTW the original LP's carve was done by machine too. Just not CNC.
     
  12. frisco kid

    frisco kid Member

    Messages:
    1,785
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Location:
    Dallas
    I thought the pancake reference was due to the multi-layers of wood that comprised the body, not the carve (or lack of carve) shape?

     
  13. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    9,061
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    on the phone
    that's what i've always thought. i've never heard it in reference to the top.
     
  14. hogy

    hogy Member

    Messages:
    11,466
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    It is.
     
  15. Soul Driver

    Soul Driver Member

    Messages:
    451
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Location:
    Wellington, New Zealand
    I didn't suggest that you were. However, this subject has been done to death over at the Les Paul Forum....... I was suggesting that you would find the information that you are asking for there.
     
  16. darth_vader

    darth_vader Member

    Messages:
    315
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Do you realise how absurd that statement is?
     
  17. soldano16

    soldano16 Member

    Messages:
    2,348
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    British Columbia
    The term pancake doesn't come from a reduced carve. It comes from the thin line that showed between the two large pieces of the body. It looked really thin and flat - like a pancake.
     
  18. michael.e

    michael.e Supporting Member

    Messages:
    19,489
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2003
    Location:
    Half Moon Bay, CA
    How about you adress this in a bit less argumentative manner? What is the point in being so sharp with the commentary.

    If you have differing knowledge, please share it instead of beating others over the head.

    Emee
     
  19. Radagacuca

    Radagacuca Member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Location:
    Germany
    imho there is no such thing as the "original" lp because non of em is 100% identical to the next. they all vary in neck shapes, top carves and such. there were slight differences in all of em.
    i think people are way too picky when it comes to specs and such of the pre-60´s les pauls compared to the historics today. i am pretty sure there´s amazing les pauls built today that can give you serious tone, playabilty and looks. and this is what it´s all about. i don´t care about the minor differences in the reissues as long as they sound good, play easy and look nice. if one of the 3 criteria is not there i sell or don´t even buy. no matter if the guitar is a 100% copy of one pre 60´s les paul or just a 80% copy. easy as that. there´s good and bad guitars while the "good" and "bad" is pretty much subjective. this is how it is and ever was, even pre 1960.
    i sometimes get the impression that people care more about spec sheets than what a guitar actually is all about.

    ok, i see this doesn´t answer your question :eek::)
    peace.
     
  20. GuitarsFromMars

    GuitarsFromMars Member

    Messages:
    11,516
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Location:
    playing in traffic...
    you got the originals,and the original manufacturer,building a reissue,with the original manufacturing techniques,not being available,where is the surprise?
     

Share This Page