Tell me about les pauls from the 90's

Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by mark23, Mar 7, 2008.

  1. mark23

    mark23 Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    I've been looking at around at used les pauls. The les pauls standards from the 90's seem to be pretty affordable. So can anyone tell me more about them. What are the neck profiles like, as far as ic they don't' come with options, 60's or 50's. Where they weight relieved, swiss cheesed up? Any info would be great thanks.

    mark
     
  2. Caretaker

    Caretaker Silver Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,878
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    As far as I know, they are not weight relieved. I had and played 2 other 96 Standards. They all had HUGE necks. Almost like a historic.
     
  3. hbentley

    hbentley Member

    Messages:
    1,355
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    i had a paul from '94 i think. the neck felt phenomenal to me. somewhere in between a 50's and 60's. the guitar played and sounded great.
     
  4. mark23

    mark23 Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    unweight relieved sounds great and I definitely prefer there plain tops. Now if i could find one with a neck leaning more towards the 60's profile it would be great.
     
  5. SgtThump

    SgtThump Member

    Messages:
    7,047
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Location:
    St Louis, Missouri
    Didn't they start with the weight relief holes in the early '80s?
     
  6. treeofpain

    treeofpain Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    6,409
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Location:
    Columbia, SC
    I think the Classics tend to have slimmer necks, right? they were supposedly a budget reissue of a 1960 LP.
     
  7. moo cow

    moo cow Supporting Member

    Messages:
    210
    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    yep, the classics have the slim 60's neck. i have one and love it. plays like butter and that neck is suuuuuuuweeeet! mines a 92. it's not light by any means and the stock ceramic pups aren't much to write home about. i had some fralins in it for a while and just today popped some burstbucker pros in it. it really sings!!
     
  8. mark23

    mark23 Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    yeah earlier classic are also another route i could take. I did a little reading on the lp forum and from what i understand the weight relieving wholes did start in the 80's. So I guess if your on a budget and have to have the 60's neck the best option is to go with a model in the early 2000's preferable before 2006 when some suspect chambering began.
     
  9. fuzz_factor

    fuzz_factor Supporting Member

    Messages:
    3,675
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    PDX
    I seriously doubt my '91 Standard is weight relieved! Sometimes I wish it was. It plays great, sounds great and looks great with its plain Cherry Sunburst top. It does get heavy after a while, however...

    As to the neck, I'm not totally up on all the potential Gibson neck shapes, but you wouldn't call the neck on my '91 slim, slim-taper or 60s. It feels pretty thick (but not huge like, say, an old Martin) but is nice and round. It's a really comfortable neck. Remarkable mostly for how much you don't notice it.

    What I mean by that is: My SG Classic has a great, full, round neck until you get up to around the 12th fret. Things start to get really wide, not terrible, just more noticeable. My Strat has a skinny neck that I often wish was just a tad rounder and fuller. My Martin, at 1 3/4", is a little too wide...you get the picture!

    The only problems I've had with the '91 (and I bought it new) were a couple of tuners needed replacing (I probably should replace them all) and a volume pot that wore out too quickly. The other new Gibson I owned from the 90s had a bad switch. I think Quality Control was getting better in the 90s, but not quite perfect. No other complaints thought. Fit, finish and frets are great. Had a setup done recently and the guitar plays like butter. Almost too well, as I'm used to digging in a litter harder on my Strat.

    Hope this has been helpful,

    - jeff -​
     
  10. stuagu

    stuagu Member

    Messages:
    360
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Location:
    uk
    like les pauls from all eras they vary a great deal in weight feel & sound. ive had good & bad from the 70,s 80,s & 90's. i thought that weight relieving swiss cheese effect only started on classics in the late 90,s? others will know better than me. i had one & i thought it lacked depth in the sound but that may have been in my head! its a case of suck it & see from whatever era.
     
  11. Radagacuca

    Radagacuca Member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Location:
    Germany
    the weight relieved stuff started in the early eighties (9 holes). the new standards are chambered to get rid of even more weight. the necks on standards vary but are mostly nice medium sized ones. (classic necks are mostly pencil thin).
    in general imho the 90s les pauls can ge great or bad guitars as any year, any guitar can be. i suppose they are not that high priced because they are not that "vintage correct" specwise like historics, most of em are plaintops and are not considered "vintage" yet. i suggest you play the guitar and if you like what it gives, go for it.
    and don´t believe the hype!

    peace
     
  12. oscar100

    oscar100 Member

    Messages:
    1,290
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Location:
    london UK
    ive had a couple of 90s CS ones which were lovely

    if you find the right one with resonant wood its a good deal an dwill age like a piece of antique furniture

    the korina one in particular was great but i couldnt get used to a 60s neck - nothing to get hold of
     
  13. jeffwith1f

    jeffwith1f Member

    Messages:
    3,814
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I believe any non cutomshop les paul from the 90's will have the 9 holes drilled in it for weight releif. I know. I was surpised as well, as I thought, given the "solidness" and "it's just damn heavy" of it, but I was informed otherwise.

    When looking around at Les Pauls, I checked out a variety of standards of the late 80's - 90's vintage, as they seemed to be the best value. I think I played 6 or 7 before coming across the one I bought. I believe it's a '97, given the lack of any flame on top, I'd say it's a plain top. wine red. very clean. plays a dream, sounds great. definately felt head and shoulders above the others I was playing at the time.

    so, I agree, the 90's used Les Paul is likely going to be your most affordable bet in terms of Les Paul these days. as with all Gibsons, there are definately variations between instruments of the same model and year. It's worth playing the selection of them that are available in your area when you are looking and keep an eye out for the one that speaks to you in particular. You'll know it when you pick it up and play it for a bit.
     
  14. Mattbedrock

    Mattbedrock Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    4,270
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Location:
    Brevard County, FL
    I have a '95 Les Paul Classic (sunburst, plain top) that was very affordable. I prefer the slim taper neck - it is very similar to my ES-335 in shape and size. I don't know about weight relief, but it's heavy. I didn't love the tone all that much through my Fenders - seemed a little thin, a little too bright. Then I got a JCM900. Now I get it. That pair can knock down buildings.
     

Share This Page