Les Pauls - best years?

musteatbrain

guitars4you said:

Les Paul's - Best Year  ??????

Let me know if you ever find out the answer

Good and bad examples in most years - Granted certain era's are not held in the same esteem as others but still good examples within those era's

Absolutely. I recall trying a great 70s pancake body Les Paul at your shop years ago.

Also, a friend of mine owns 2 good 70s customs.
One is less than 8lbs and made of about 6000 pieces of wood but plays and sounds stunning 

ICBM

John_A said:

robgilmo said:

70's Strats? I always thought they were not as good as other years?

Just different, big headstock 3 bolt neck.  Malmsteen and Blackmore seem to mange to get them to work

True of the early-70s ones. It becomes progressively harder to find good ones made after 1975, and by 1978-79 I've never come across one. (That hadn't been drastically modified.)

guitars4you said:

Good and bad examples in most years - Granted certain era's are not held in the same esteem as others but still good examples within those era's

I like a lot of 70s Norlin Gibsons and I often prefer them to many modern ones.

Jock68

I think the responses above highlight the inconsistencies of build quality and value coming out of Gibson.  If you do not require the label there are many good companies out there making replicas that exceed anything Gibson have produced over the last few decades.

Skipped

danny_777 said:

I'm keen on the early reissues made over '87-99, as my general experience with guitars from this era has been positive and the tops/finished are generally very pretty. However there's been a lot of chat about how Gibson's current guitars are some of the best they've ever made.

I'm currently torn between an R8 from the recent lot of sales, and a very nice-looking 1988 '59 reissue I've found overseas.

The best years were '52 to '61.

But If we are talking about the best reissues, I agree that the Pre-Historics are very nice guitars.  I would favour an 1987 Pre-Historic (Tim Shaw Pickups) over a 1988 Pre-Historic. The Bill Lawrence pickups were introduced in 88.

Listen to "Brothers in Arms". Arguably one of the greatest Les Paul sounds ever recorded. That guitar - Mark Knopfler's Pre-Historic -  was made in the mid 80s. Amusingly, Knopfler now uses a 'Burst (live) to recreate the sound of the Pre-Historic/Shaw Pickups.

Just out of interest, how much is the '88? No need to reveal the seller.

designerseye88

Just to throw it out there if you can live without the name on the head stock Id probably be looking at a Greco super real with Dry-Z's. You can find them for less than a modern R8 but are steadily increasing in price. Plus the QC is excellent and the Dry-Z pickups are considered the best modern PAF's available. 

Im not knocking modern Gibson reissues but in the early 80's Japan was knocking out some seriously good guitars which are still sleepers IMO. 

Freebird

designerseye88 said:

Just to throw it out there if you can live without the name on the head stock Id probably be looking at a Greco super real with Dry-Z's. You can find them for less than a modern R8 but are steadily increasing in price. Plus the QC is excellent and the Dry-Z pickups are considered the best modern PAF's available. 

Im not knocking modern Gibson reissues but in the early 80's Japan was knocking out some seriously good guitars which are still sleepers IMO. 

There was a nice Tokai "reborn" up for sale on here recently.

guitars4you

ICBM said:

guitars4you said:

Good and bad examples in most years - Granted certain era's are not held in the same esteem as others but still good examples within those era's

I like a lot of 70s Norlin Gibsons and I often prefer them to many modern ones.

A couple of years ago I had a black early 80's Std - good weight - good re-fret - changed p/ups that played and sounded a treat - Almost everything you'd expect in a good LP - A real cracker - But equally many mediocre examples

Likewise about a year ago I had a 90's black LP Custom in stock - Charlie Chandler refret - new wiring loom - new p/ups(can't recall which) and again the final result was a very nice LP

Both were better after various changes - off the shelf some are very mediocre - Yet both the above 2 examples show what can be achieved

guitars4you

musteatbrain said:

guitars4you said:

Good and bad examples in most years - Granted certain era's are not held in the same esteem as others but still good examples within those era's

Absolutely. I recall trying a great 70s pancake body Les Paul at your shop years ago.

 

can't recall which one it might have been - was it a good example or poor

robgilmo

Just wondering, people are saying the best ones are from the 50's, is that in terms of collectability? I just dont see it other wise, modern machinery and manufacturing , better selection of materials, I just dont see how something made 70 years ago can be of better quality than something built today, 

guitars4you

robgilmo said:

Just wondering, people are saying the best ones are from the 50's, is that in terms of collectability? 

Or is it based on reputation alone ? - I dare say the vast majority of FB followers have not played a genuine 50's LP  - Granted my thoughts about which FB members have/haven't played a genuine 50's LP is a gut feeling - So is this a thought based on  an actual hands on experience or via reading so many other stories

Granted many will have played R8 style replicas - In fact looking at recent blogs on FB, more a case of who hasn't played an R8

We all have different size hands and expectations so different LP's will suit different players - Joe Walsh sold a golden era LP, as it was not as good as his other LP, in his opinion - The man who purchased it loved  it and it has become one of the most famous and  iconic LP's for Mr Page

Adamski

I’ve heard that the best years for a Les Paul are ‘56,’57,’58,’59 and 60.......

guitars4you

Freebird said:

sawyer said:

View each guitar on its own merit. Year doesn't matter. I played loads of Les Paul's till I found mine.2003 as it happens.But just a good guitar. Not necessarily anything to do with the year:)

2002/2003 are renowned for being "good" years. They retooled their production lines and there was tremendous enthusiasm among the workers regarding a perceived return to greatness, or was that in the late 80's?  They've had a few eras like that which got people excited. There is a discussion on one of the big Les Paul forums, where ex-employees shared their memories. The early years post-Norlin were also a time of change.

agree about the 2002 period on-wards - would expand it a bit beyond 2003 - Granted weight relief kicked in around 2004, but up to 2008 and the PCB pot models with locking jack socket, then that 2002 to 2008 era are okay - Probably amongst the best non-vintage golden era models and non Custom Shop/Replica models

Freebird

Adamski said:

I’ve heard that the best years for a Les Paul are ‘56,’57,’58,’59 and 60.......

I've heard you get to pay a hefty price premium for the pleasure of owning one of these particular models.......

Whitecat

robgilmo said:

Just wondering, people are saying the best ones are from the 50's, is that in terms of collectability? I just dont see it other wise, modern machinery and manufacturing , better selection of materials, I just dont see how something made 70 years ago can be of better quality than something built today, 

The one argument people have about those guitars being “better” that has a vague amount of plausibility to it IMO is the fact that there was a lot more proper old-growth wood back then and the wood alone is arguably “better.” But, in the grand scheme of things I agree with you otherwise. 

Skipped

robgilmo said:

 I just dont see how something made 70 years ago can be of better quality than something built today, 

I am not sure why you doubt that.

Gibson would find it very hard (today) to find a team of people, to build Les Pauls, who had honed their skills building high end Jazz guitars. In fact it would be impossible.

Then we have the materials.

I would say it is now accepted that the materials used were not just high quality, The wood had been stored for decades.......in preparation for its intended use.........which was to build high end Jazz guitars.

markj

Freebird said:

sawyer said:

View each guitar on its own merit. Year doesn't matter. I played loads of Les Paul's till I found mine.2003 as it happens.But just a good guitar. Not necessarily anything to do with the year:)

2002/2003 are renowned for being "good" years. They retooled their production lines and there was tremendous enthusiasm among the workers regarding a perceived return to greatness, or was that in the late 80's?  They've had a few eras like that which got people excited. There is a discussion on one of the big Les Paul forums, where ex-employees shared their memories. The early years post-Norlin were also a time of change.

The 2003 standard I had wasn’t that good at all. My 2010 traditional is way way better.

poopot

Have a word with @customkits and get him to build you a burst!... nowt from Gibson after the mid 60’s will stand up to that!...

crunchman

The perceived wisdom seems to be that the newer Custom Shop guitars (2013 onwards I think) tend to sound better as they no longer have the sheath around the truss rod.  The stock Custom Buckers seem to be better than the Burst Buckers that were on them before.

In terms of the regular factory production 2002 to 2006/7 has a good reputation.

Having said that, you can find very good guitars from most years, and others that are less good.

chrishill901

I think theres a bit of a common misconception that there are 'good' years and 'bad' years based on the quality of the production line when in fact every year has good and bad examples. I think this myth is perpetuated by used ads that will say things like '2005 LP Standard Faded, considered the best year' which makes people think there are certain years to look out for in terms of quality. What is the case however is that there are certain years that are more desirable because of design choices, not because of the quality of the build. The 2005 LP Standards Faded for example is desirable because it wasn't chambered but the 2006 and 2007 ones were. The same goes for the 2013 traditional that wasn't weight relieved at all as opposed to pre-2013 ones. I see a lot of love for pre-2008 Standards because it was before they started introducing 'innovations'. The issue however is that people see this in ads or chats on forums that say things like '2013, great year' and they make the assumption that 2013 was this magically great year for Gibson QC. Gibson have always been able to make a great guitar, and dodgy ones have always managed to make it off the production line. Find the model you want based off the spec and then find the best example of it you can find. Just because the 2005 LP Standard Faded is heralded as a great guitar doesn't mean the one you pick up on eBay will be. Find one, try one and decide to buy one.

guitars4you

chrishill901 said:

 Find the model you want based off the spec and then find the best example of it you can find. 

very valid