Yaron vs Bartlett vs Morgan vs The Stig vs Gibson R9 vs etc...

Emiel

For a bit less money you could also have a look at early '80s Tokai's and Greco's. They have that 'old wood' sound as well. I have heard quite a number of Gibson Historics and with the right pickups and pots, my 1980 Tokai LS80 is about as good as it gets...

TA22GT

I have a replica. It's my second one from the same builder. It is old wood. It is a Braz board. It has Otpg pickups. It is very light.
The best thing about it, which I stipulated, is that it has his name on it. The first one didn't and it never sat right with me.
It isn't a true replica however because it has a different jack plate so it doesn't break every two minutes.
I own a lot of great guitars but this is the One. It had mojo before I even opened the case. The guy that made it is a great luthier and a monster guitar player. You get his soul with his builds. His mentor makes the best replica's on the planet. They go back to childhood.
This topic will be intetesting and lot's of speculation will be posted.

WezV

I build guitars because I love guitars,   I am currently building a few les paul styles for the very same reason... but the idea of making an exact replica doesn't appeal at all, I will leave that to others.   I want guitars that have a passing resemblance to those vintage originals, but offer something different

I do like to understand how and why they did things back in the golden age, I don't feel tied to it for the ones I build myself

I don't get it when people care more about the plastic than playability or tone.  

I don't get it when they focus purely on wood species without considering the variability inherent in that species or giving any thought to the grain structure of an individual piece

I don't get it when they talk about PAF tone  or capacitor types without considering how variable  those things actually are.

HarrySeven

NelsonP said:

Wait. Terry Morgan is real?

Yes. I can vouch for this.

We were even in the same music shop together earlier this week.

Garthy

The wood wasn't 60 years old when the originals were built. I'd rather just have the best available than a replica of something old and I can't imagine many industries where there has been no progress at all since 1959.

Bridgehouse

Garthy said:

The wood wasn't 60 years old when the originals were built. I'd rather just have the best available than a replica of something old and I can't imagine many industries where there has been no progress at all since 1959.

That's not strictly true - some of the Honduran mahogany that Gibson had stockpiled would have been felled in the late 19th century and imported with the rest of their stocks when they were building huge numbers of mandolins in the 1910's and 1920's. The mahogany stocks would have air dried over that time and been very light and very resonant by the late 1950's. I believe they ran out in the mid 60's..

WezV

Garthy said:

The wood wasn't 60 years old when the originals were built.

No, but stocks were better 60 years ago because larger trees were available.   Its not the age of the wood, its  the individual qualities of each piece.... You can find the same on new wood, but it takes some searching as there is more crap out there.

Limehouse_Blues

In terms of care and attention and sheer man hours I wouldn’t be surprised if more goes into a luthier built replica than went into an original burst which, lest we forgot was still a mass produced item. I know 1800 or so guitars in 3 years isn’t loads but it’s still way more than all the Jaegers and Yarons will ever build. Also, in the late 50s I understand that the best hands at Kalamazoo still worked on archtops (not that the craftsmen that gave us the Burst lacked talent - far from it).

In terms of modern replicas I think that the pricing of the best luthier built examples reflects all those man hours and attention to small aesthetic details more than basic build. Those aesthetic things (correct lacquer, correct ‘hue’ and colour of plastics, correct binding) all go to the ‘mojo’ of the guitar above all and cost time and money to get perfect.

My Tokai LS1 R4 doesn’t have the mojo of my Jaeger makeover, let alone an original 54. But it remains the best playing and sounding GT that I’ve ever played, eclipsing even vintage examples that I’ve had the pleasure of playing (two 54s, a 55 and a 56).

The best modern luthiers could get me closer in terms of ‘mojo’ for several extra grand but in terms of basic construction and primary tone aren’t necessarily going to be any ‘better’ than very well made factory built examples (I’m thinking Fujigen / Tokai rather than Nashville Gibson).

To my mind the ‘boutique’ nature of finely built modern replicas is somewhat at odds with the true nature of an original burst. The originals were built by skilled craftsmen and women but not by individuals. They were priced as a premium product - but they were BMWs not Rolls-Royces. By contrast the finest luthier built replicas are much more akin to a Rolls than a BMW.

p90fool

Limehouse_Blues said:

To my mind the ‘boutique’ nature of finely built modern replicas is somewhat at odds with the true nature of an original burst. The originals were built by skilled craftsmen and women but not by individuals. They were priced as a premium product - but they were BMWs not Rolls-Royces. By contrast the finest luthier built replicas are much more akin to a Rolls than a BMW.

I totally agree. paying specialist craftsmen to replicate production line consumer goods is bizarre to me, like having a Lalique greenhouse or a Faberge er... omelette. 

hotpickups

I have one burning thought though about all these les Paul replicas I've seen out there. Don't they risk being sued by Gibson ?

Bridgehouse

hotpickups said:

I have one burning thought though about all these les Paul replicas I've seen out there. Don't they risk being sued by Gibson ?

They'd be worth even more then when they became "lawsuit replicas"

hotpickups

Bridgehouse said:

hotpickups said:

I have one burning thought though about all these les Paul replicas I've seen out there. Don't they risk being sued by Gibson ?

They'd be worth even more then when they became "lawsuit replicas"

Gibson could be rescued with the onslaught of potential revenue suings lol

mikeyrob73

hotpickups said:

I have one burning thought though about all these les Paul replicas I've seen out there. Don't they risk being sued by Gibson ?

Or Terry Morgan? :-p

hotpickups

mikeyrob73 said:

hotpickups said:

I have one burning thought though about all these les Paul replicas I've seen out there. Don't they risk being sued by Gibson ?

Or Terry Morgan? :-p

Who?

Bridgehouse

hotpickups said:

mikeyrob73 said:

hotpickups said:

I have one burning thought though about all these les Paul replicas I've seen out there. Don't they risk being sued by Gibson ?

Or Terry Morgan? :-p

Who?

Don't you start.. that's three mentions now - you'll summon the spirit of @richardhomer ;

WezV

Yes... there is a reason the builders are either secretive (TM,  stig) or now making different shapes (Bartlett, Yaron)

richardhomer

Bridgehouse said:
Don't you start.. that's three mentions now - you'll summon the spirit of @richardhomer

The best Les Paul replica I’ve ever played was based on a ‘53 Gold Top. It was so accurate, it even had a dealer’s sticker obscuring the serial number, which the maker had carefully removed with a very sharp implement, resulting in the number becoming illegible.

Really masterful work....

meltedbuzzbox

WezV said:

I build guitars because I love guitars,   I am currently building a few les paul styles for the very same reason... but the idea of making an exact replica doesn't appeal at all, I will leave that to others.   I want guitars that have a passing resemblance to those vintage originals, but offer something different

I do like to understand how and why they did things back in the golden age, I don't feel tied to it for the ones I build myself

I don't get it when people care more about the plastic than playability or tone.  

I don't get it when they focus purely on wood species without considering the variability inherent in that species or giving any thought to the grain structure of an individual piece

I don't get it when they talk about PAF tone  or capacitor types without considering how variable  those things actually are.

Everything you have stated appeals more to me than all the BS associated with 59 reproductions

sherpa_man

I am not talking about bad cheap fakes here.

I have owned most and played most higher end Gibson replicas.

The reason i went for a 59 replica isn't because it had Gibson or Les Paul on the logo. These high end replicas are so much better than even the Gibson True Historic. People who put 7k plus into these guitar, probably don't buy them because they are replicas, or have the logos. They buy them because they are made and built to the highest quality, they use the best types of woods and components. Some of the high end builders make 18 guitars a year and have a 3 year waiting list. They have a 3 year waiting list for a reason.

To me buying a high end replica is like buying a high end Huber. I paid that much because they are that good. If the Bartletts i have or had didn't have the logo, i would still buy one, no problem.

TA22GT

Some great common sense posts in this thread! Too many to quote!