Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Gibson is now offering the Les Paul Studio and SG with Maple Body, Maple Neck, Maple Fretboard, '57 Classic Humbuckers, and a Nitro finish. The maple neck looks strange on a Gibson.

http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/F ... itars-401/

I'd like to try one. Maple Gibsons brighten the sound of a humbucker.

The necks remind me of Tuxedo Ricks. I thought the title may have been a tribute to Iggy and the Stooges album "Raw Power" which featured some of the most insane guitar shrapnel ever committed to tape. A Les Paul, several Marshall stacks, and way too much intravenous inspiration created a sonic attack in the war zones of sanity. Outstanding album, IMHO.

Maple Gibsons are cool, but can lead themselves to be quite "ice picky" in certain situations. The L-5 was all maple and sounded great in some places, and overly bright in others. The same can really be said for about any solid maple guitar, and Ibanez walked that line for years with its "Artist" and "Roadstar" series guitars, as well as others.

I too would be very interested in hearing these.

"Maple Gibsons are cool, but can lead themselves to be quite "ice picky" in certain situations. The L-5 was all maple and sounded great in some places, and overly bright in others. The same can really be said for about any solid maple guitar..."

My findings as well. I couldn't imagine an maple bodied/maple necked Les Paul or SG equipped with '57 Classics - it'd make you ears bleed and a Tele sound like an L-5 by comparison. I've a 2007 Historic '59 ES-335 which is maple laminate and sports a pair of '57 Classics. It's the brightest guitar I own and the treble pup is almost unusable by itself. The combo of both pups sounds fantastic, though.

I recall the maple necked Les Paul Customs that came out in the '70s - sounded nothing like a Custom, which are darker sounding than a Standard by nature due to the mahogany body/neck and ebony fretboard. I say if it ain't broke, don't fix it.... then again, it's just Henry and his asinine marketing philosophy. Don't even get me started on that or him.

hmm....just not doing it for me. Neither on an aesthetic level, or thinking about how it would sound.

I'd say Les Pauls have a very distinct, defined sound--why rock the boat?

I don't care for the Les Pauls, but I do like the SG. Especially in yellow and aquamarine. A 12" board radius is pretty flat for what I'm used to, though.

collin wrote:hmm....just not doing it for me. Neither on an aesthetic level, or thinking about how it would sound.

I'd say Les Pauls have a very distinct, defined sound--why rock the boat?

+1...but try telling Gibson that.

I think Gibson did this in the '70s (Maple neck / board / body) with the L6-S. Didn't prove to be real popular.

Gibson's design dept has been putting out some seriously questionable guitars as of late. You'd think they'd be the more conservative of the big two, maybe they're just trying way too hard to shake that image.

Agreed. I just don't see any merit in these except to add to an already confusing product range.

By the way, I can't help but think these gratuitous "stripped-down" Gibsons (Faded series, BFG and now the Raw Power) are feeble attempts to move as much product as possible for the cheapest cost on their end. So all the kids who buy their stuff at Guitar Center can say, "I've got a REAL Les Paul," and all the guys at Gibson can fill their wallets.

1965 wrote:By the way, I can't help but think these gratuitous "stripped-down" Gibsons (Faded series, BFG and now the Raw Power) are feeble attempts to move as much product as possible for the cheapest cost on their end. So all the kids who buy their stuff at Guitar Center can say, "I've got a REAL Les Paul," and all the guys at Gibson can fill their wallets.

This is true. Plus, you can now buy Gibson instruments at box retailers like Best Buy as well as Baldwin branded instruments at Toys R Us, Target and other retailers. I've played Gibson guitars for nearly my entire life - the guitar I learned on was a 1966 J-50ADJ flattop - and the only other time that I felt embarrassed for the company was during the Norlin era of the '70s. It seems that ever since Henry Juszkiewicz took the reins at Gibson, there have been some dubious policies and marketing strategies such as a "no photos" policy for online dealers and the huge amount of capital up front to become a dealer. New policy dictates that in order to carry Gibson instruments, a deposit equal to 1 year's stock is due at the time of signing - up front - which is now $350,000. And that's just for the electric line; if you would like to carry OMI or Gibson Montana acoustic instruments, there's a set fee for those as well. As a result, many long time dealers have opted out, some after a 40 - 50 year association with the company. I also feel that QC has suffered - I had to return a Custom Shop guitar to Memphis in 2007 because it was literally unplayable. When you pay $4300 for a new instrument, you'd expect it to be first class and issue free, am I right? I've pics that document just how pathetic this guitar was - probably helped in getting them to replace it in less than 4 weeks.

Then there's the fiasco over the Gibson branded guitars used for the Guitar Hero video game. The company made an agreement with the game to officially license guitars made in the shape of iconic Gibson instruments like the Les Paul & SG; they even had the Gibson logo on the headstock. Then in a surprise move, Gibson turns around and sues stating that they disagreed with the original agreement and wanted to revise the agreement. It was tossed out of court. http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/gibs ... off-stage/

This is the same guy that supposedly saved Gibson in the '80s and also wanted to get back to building guitars like they were made during the company's "Golden Era" of the '50s and '60s. If anything, his Harvard business degree has gotten in the way of that and all he sees now are little dollar signs dancing in his head.

1965 wrote:By the way, I can't help but think these gratuitous "stripped-down" Gibsons (Faded series, BFG and now the Raw Power) are feeble attempts to move as much product as possible for the cheapest cost on their end. So all the kids who buy their stuff at Guitar Center can say, "I've got a REAL Les Paul," and all the guys at Gibson can fill their wallets.

No one goes into business to lose money.



My faded kicks ***.



Besides, Gibson has been offering a low-cost alternative for YEARS now! Ever hear of the "junior" or even the Melody Makers?

True, Nick, but you can't even compare the quality of the original Melody Makers and LP Juniors to some of the low budget **** they're rolling out of that plant today; it's not even close. There's a good reason why folks will hand over $7000 for a '59 double cut Junior or a '54 single cut Junior - build quality. At one point those exact guitars were getting $14,000 during the height of "Junior Mania" a couple of years ago but over saturation in the market brought them down. Still overpriced IMHO, but something's only worth what a person is willing to pay for it. Granted there were some dogs made during those years as well, but the numbers are nowhere near as great as they are today mainly due to an expanded product line and modern build methods.

One of the most killer guitars I ever owned was a 1959 ES-330TD; another entry level guitar and the exact guitar that Grant Green used to play. That thing was a tone monster and could cover everything from Jazz tunes to straight ahead Chicago Blues. I've yet to have a newer ES-335 that could come close to that guitar in terms of build quality, playability and tone. You don't see many of those pop up on the market for good reason. Even the J-50 that I still have was an entry level version of the J-45 and that guitar is still heads and shoulders above many new Gibsons I've had in my hands. Back when those guitars were built - as well as the Melody Makers and Juniors - they were crafted by hand and only the best materials were used. I don't believe that GMIC can make that claim today, especially where the budget lines of Epiphone - especially the Korean made instruments - or Baldwin are concerned and those are the modern equal to the MMs and Jrs. Just an opinion from a guy that's owned and played Gibsons for over 30 years.

[quote="peewee"] There's a good reason why folks will hand over $7000 for a '59 double cut Junior or a '54 single cut Junior - build quality. /quote]

Nope. Build quality is solid, but so is the build quality on other Gibson electrics of the same vintage.

It's hype; supply and demand, sporadic celebrity sightings.