Non Single Cut alternatives to Les Pauls

Mr Fingers

Member
Messages
2,492
I like the Yamaha suggestion. I don't think that most of the rest mentioned here can hang with a LP. I also agree with those who say that PRS is the ideal, because it is. It was designed to meet this need, and it's brilliant. I dislike the S2s; used originals are a great way to go. Can't you get a receipt buying used?
 

hotrats73

Supporting Member
Messages
2,598
I like the Yamaha suggestion. I don't think that most of the rest mentioned here can hang with a LP. I also agree with those who say that PRS is the ideal, because it is. It was designed to meet this need, and it's brilliant. I dislike the S2s; used originals are a great way to go. Can't you get a receipt buying used?
yes if I'm patient enough to wait for one to pop up in a shop not too far.
there's one right now but is 700km away from me and don't have the founds yet.

I agree that the 594 is brilliant and apparently there's nothing around like that, unless you go for a custom built.
 

wetordry

Member
Messages
4,553
Going thru the same thoughts, but without the distance issues, i bought a prs 594 mccarty used.
Great guitar, and the control layout really made swapping back and forth a non issue...first time i played it.
Good luck in the search!
 

ozraves

Member
Messages
355
The PRS USA S2 594 and S2 594 Thinline are nice guitars and fun to play once fully set up. They may not be everyone's cup of tea but the cut on those is pretty damn good.
 

hotrats73

Supporting Member
Messages
2,598
PRS prices are often negotiable. I got my 594 for 20% off this spring.
I think here in Italy (and Europe) things are different but I will investigate.

Going thru the same thoughts, but without the distance issues, i bought a prs 594 mccarty used.
Great guitar, and the control layout really made swapping back and forth a non issue...first time i played it.
Good luck in the search!
thank you
 

scelerat

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
2,978
Love my Yamaha SG-1500. Does the Les Paul thing and then some. Try an SG-2000 or SG-1000, the models with the maple cap. I feel like for most folks for whom the Gibson logo is not a make-or-break issue, the Yamaha SGs nail the "fat slab of mahogany with humbuckers" thing. Fat neck, high output humbuckers with very usable coil split sounds.
 

MikeMcK

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
4,721
Although that's good looking guitar, I never quiet understood how those kinds of double cuts satisfy the desire to have a double cut LP. Those cutout and/or horns are not anything like the shape of an LP cut/horn. The cut buts against the neck around a 90 degree angle, which is not at all like the cut on a Les Paul.

I simply never uderstood why Gibson can't just make a true double cut LP... which is why I made my own. Obviously Yamaha and Ibanez have done that, but for some reason Gibson doesn't go there. Instead they make a double cut LP Junior that looks nothing like a Les Paul outline.

I just don't get it.
If your concern with the cutaway is access to the 21st and 22nd frets, I can tell you firsthand that the Hamer gives you better access up there... in fact, going back to a LP after years' worth of Hamers, I still have trouble getting around up there on a Les Paul.
 
Messages
56
If your concern with the cutaway is access to the 21st and 22nd frets, I can tell you firsthand that the Hamer gives you better access up there... in fact, going back to a LP after years' worth of Hamers, I still have trouble getting around up there on a Les Paul.
It's not about the access to those frets. I am just puzzled why Gibson never thought of making a true double cut LP. As I tried to explain in an earlier post, I think there was a small misunderstanding when I red the opening post. And I think it's because I already had an idea in my mind, that I've carried for years, so I misinterpreted the OP.

I guess those are two different issues. The issue that the OP is discussing, and my related issue of a true double cut LP.

As you can see in my initial reply, I did end up making one for myself and I don't think it looks hideous. But that might be just what my eyes want to see. I can't be objective since it's the product of my own work.

And still, I don't understand why Gibson never thought of making such model, when clearly other companies (Yamaha, Ibanez) did venture in that direction.

Interestingly enough, Gibson did make a double cut hollow body, with pointy horns, which is really not to my taste. But it did sell, I guess, and I don't think there would ever be a demand for such guitar among players that play thick hollow body guitars, like an L-5, L-7, or whatever. But Les Paul players are in fact more likely to look for some kind of double cut guitar that is not a Strat, SG, PRS, and so on.
 

Whiskeyrebel

Supporting Member
Messages
30,057
This thread caught my attention because I was always wishing that Gibson came up with a double cut Les Paul. I am not talking about those double cut ones that they did come up with and I am also not talking about the SG which was first called a Les Paul. I am talking about a actual double cut symmetrical Les Paul with the Les Paul cut and Les Paul carve.

Another thing that I always wanted to find was a Les Paul with a neck through body. The Closest thing that Gibson ever produced to resembling a neck through Les Paul was the Spotlight Special.

Anyway, Gibson never made what I wanted. Other companies did make double cut LP, kind of what I wanted, but not quite. So, one day around 1995 I said, "Smurf that, I'm just going to make my own." I feel, if you want something done right you gotta do it yourself. And I still have and play that guitar. It's been through a few mods, but I like it.

It is mahogany neck and body. Ebony board and ebony planks connecting the neck through with the side bouts. Maple top. No markers on the fret board, but does have side dots.

Here are some photos.

View attachment 275999

View attachment 276000

View attachment 276001

View attachment 276002
Gibson made some in that shape in the early 80s but they had the Explorer banana headstock.
 

MikeMcK

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
4,721
It's not about the access to those frets. I am just puzzled why Gibson never thought of making a true double cut LP. As I tried to explain in an earlier post, I think there was a small misunderstanding when I red the opening post. And I think it's because I already had an idea in my mind, that I've carried for years, so I misinterpreted the OP.

I guess those are two different issues. The issue that the OP is discussing, and my related issue of a true double cut LP.

As you can see in my initial reply, I did end up making one for myself and I don't think it looks hideous. But that might be just what my eyes want to see. I can't be objective since it's the product of my own work.

And still, I don't understand why Gibson never thought of making such model, when clearly other companies (Yamaha, Ibanez) did venture in that direction.

Interestingly enough, Gibson did make a double cut hollow body, with pointy horns, which is really not to my taste. But it did sell, I guess, and I don't think there would ever be a demand for such guitar among players that play thick hollow body guitars, like an L-5, L-7, or whatever. But Les Paul players are in fact more likely to look for some kind of double cut guitar that is not a Strat, SG, PRS, and so on.
I saw your guitar... very cool and I can't imagine how much work went into it. Actually, Gibson did something similar whenever the "Johnny A" sig model went from semi-hollow to solid-body (see pic). Originally the Johnny A was a semi-hollow but the with the back & sides routed from mahogany instead of being formed from steamed multi-ply wood. At some point they made it a solid-body.

It's not 100% a symmetrical LP shape... the cutaways are Florentine instead of the "somewhere between Florentine and Venetian" LP cutaway. But my guess is that by the time Gibson paid attention to the traction Yamaha got (via Carlos Santana) that was recognizably a "Yamaha" body shape and the last thing G wanted was to be seen as imitating the imitators. Remember, that was only about a decade after they brought back the Les Paul, and people already wanted it to be more traditional (i.e. "'59-ish") than it was.

 

Slevin

Supporting Member
Messages
1,688
Since you’re a custom shop guy yeah I’d go vintage hamer. 1979-early 80s sunbursts were one piece tops, one piece Honduras Mahogany backs, East Indian Rosewood boards. They were basically trying to duplicate the craftsmanship of the 1950s Les Pauls. My 96 special has all of that too but it’s a two piece flamed maple top in the best LP style guitar I’ve ever owned

this isn’t my guitar but this is an early Sunburst
 

Attachments

Salfordlad

Member
Messages
938
What do the extra switches between the volume and tone controls do? Phase switch?
When I bought it used in 1999 @ Gelb in Redwood City CA. It already had been modded with one switch to split the bridge pickup. I had a tech in the south bay add another 3 way switch so now it has series/parallel/out of phase and the second 2 way switch splits the bridge. I really had know idea what I was buying when I got it, all I knew was that it played and sounded immense.
 

hotrats73

Supporting Member
Messages
2,598
I saw your guitar... very cool and I can't imagine how much work went into it. Actually, Gibson did something similar whenever the "Johnny A" sig model went from semi-hollow to solid-body (see pic). Originally the Johnny A was a semi-hollow but the with the back & sides routed from mahogany instead of being formed from steamed multi-ply wood. At some point they made it a solid-body.

It's not 100% a symmetrical LP shape... the cutaways are Florentine instead of the "somewhere between Florentine and Venetian" LP cutaway. But my guess is that by the time Gibson paid attention to the traction Yamaha got (via Carlos Santana) that was recognizably a "Yamaha" body shape and the last thing G wanted was to be seen as imitating the imitators. Remember, that was only about a decade after they brought back the Les Paul, and people already wanted it to be more traditional (i.e. "'59-ish") than it was.

Wow, this is gorgeous
 




Trending Topics

Top