Advice - Need a Non Terrible Les Paul

tabano

nobody  should be keep  trying Gibson Les pauls until they find one that is ok,
they ALL should be ok, or at least the same % as  “most” other brands in that price range but,
they are not..

Gerz6558

I think the new gibson managements whole message was built around the fact that they know the consistency hasn't been there, and they are trying to turn it around. How long have they been in, a year? I guess it takes a while to turn it around.

I don't think the copies thing is relevant, that's like saying don't bother with any strat or tele type guitar if it's not Fender. The way I see it is the other companies are keeping the likes of fender and gibson on their toes, if they didn't exist I'm sure the big two would be cutting corners for fun.

johnl

I must be very, very lucky or far more forgiving but I've not played any truly terrible Gibsons. The truth is as with anything that is (even in part) handmade there's going to be a bit of variety in terms of finishing etc but I've not seen a load more variation in Gibsons than I have in other brands.

That said, if you can get over the slightly odd shape, a lot of people say that Eastman make a fantastic singlecut. 

crunchman

I've owned 7 Gibsons - I still own 3 of them.

3 of them have had significant issues.  They were issues that could be fixed or worked around but they should never have been let out of the factory like that. 

The guitars with issues were 2007 (or thereabouts), 2010, and 2015 so there does seem to have been a long term QC problem. 

I don't know if the new management have managed to turn this around or not.

SteveRobinson

johnl said:

That said, if you can get over the slightly odd shape, a lot of people say that Eastman make a fantastic singlecut. 

Anyone who complains about finish flaws really isn't going to like an Eastman

johnl

crunchman said:

I've owned 7 Gibsons - I still own 3 of them.

3 of them have had significant issues.  They were issues that could be fixed or worked around but they should never have been let out of the factory like that. 

The guitars with issues were 2007 (or thereabouts), 2010, and 2015 so there does seem to have been a long term QC problem. 

I don't know if the new management have managed to turn this around or not.

What were the issues and which guitars were they if you don't mind me asking?

Philly_Q

SteveRobinson said:

johnl said:

That said, if you can get over the slightly odd shape, a lot of people say that Eastman make a fantastic singlecut. 

Anyone who complains about finish flaws really isn't going to like an Eastman

I don't mind the finishes but the shape is a bit offputting.  Same with most non-copy LP-alikes, to be honest.  Even the Nik Huber and P J Eggle singlecut shapes grate a little bit, although they're beautiful guitars.

johnl

Philly_Q said:

SteveRobinson said:

johnl said:

That said, if you can get over the slightly odd shape, a lot of people say that Eastman make a fantastic singlecut. 

Anyone who complains about finish flaws really isn't going to like an Eastman

I don't mind the finishes but the shape is a bit offputting.  Same with most non-copy LP-alikes, to be honest.  Even the Nik Huber and P J Eggle singlecut shapes grate a little bit, although they're beautiful guitars.

Yeah I'm not a massive fan of the shape either - although I find it bothers me a lot less on their newly-announced junior: 

Philly_Q

Actually the LP-alikes which appeal to me most are quite a radical departure in terms of body shape - Springer guitars.

crunchman

johnl said:

crunchman said:

I've owned 7 Gibsons - I still own 3 of them.

3 of them have had significant issues.  They were issues that could be fixed or worked around but they should never have been let out of the factory like that. 

The guitars with issues were 2007 (or thereabouts), 2010, and 2015 so there does seem to have been a long term QC problem. 

I don't know if the new management have managed to turn this around or not.

What were the issues and which guitars were they if you don't mind me asking?

2007 (or thereabouts) ES339 - biggest issue was that the wires to the volume pot weren't soldered properly. They were just wrapped on the tags.  It started cutting out after a few months.   There were also tool marks on the fingerboard.  They weren't obvious in normal light, but when I put lemon oil on, I could really see them.  There were also a couple of cosmetic flaws in the finish.

2010 R8 - neck angle was too steep. It meant the bridge sat too high on the posts and tilted forwards.  It was ok with the action really low, but it was a lower action than I would normally have.  The bridge also wasn't quite in the right place.  I did put a Nashville bridge on it for a while to get more travel on the saddles.  When I lowered the action so the bridge wasn't tilting on the post I think you could just get the intonation correct with the stock bridge.  One of the ex-Chandlers repair guys told me that if it was his guitar, he would have filled the bridge post holes and drilled new ones 3mm away.  I've sold that one long since.  Sounded great though!

2015 ES Les Paul - the way the nut was cut from the factory was a joke.  I couldn't get it to stay in tune so I took it to Charlie Chandlers.  The young guy who works with him just laughed at how badly cut the nut was.  There are one or two minor cosmetic issues on it as well.  No structural issues, and it sounds really good.

The R8 was the only one that wasn't fixable or livable with.

I've had two other Custom shop Les Pauls, including the one in my avatar, which I still have.  I've got an ES335, and I did have a 2000 SG.  The two I bought new, the nut slots ideally needed to be half a mm deeper, but that goes for most new guitars.  There were no real issues with any of those four.   I don't know what the ones I bought second hand were like when the left the factory though.

rico

I’d avoid Japanese copies. Just not as good as a proper Les Paul. Your budget will stretch easily cover a Studio, possibly a Standard. I’d be looking at guitars from the mid/late 80s to mid 2000s. 

John_A

rico said:

I’d avoid Japanese copies. Just not as good as a proper Les Paul. Your budget will stretch easily cover a Studio, possibly a Standard. I’d be looking at guitars from the mid/late 80s to mid 2000s. 

I wouldn’t.  My main Les Pail is a 1981 Tokai that I’ve owned for 15 years. In that time plenty of ‘proper’ Les Paul’s have come and gone but the Tokai is going nowhere 

Kittyfrisk

rico said:

I’d avoid Japanese copies. Just not as good as a proper Les Paul. Your budget will stretch easily cover a Studio, possibly a Standard. I’d be looking at guitars from the mid/late 80s to mid 2000s. 

'Just not as good as a proper Les Paul', is too generic & unprovable a statement to stand.
I have owned & played many USA Les Paul's, as well as as Tokai, Burny & other copies.
I still own Maya & Tokai Les Paul's as well as 'proper' USA builds.
I wouldn't & don't judge any of them as being 'better' than any others, but the Japanese made guitars really, really aren't any worse.

thegummy

Fiftyshadesofjay said:

And I know a good setup can help Gibson’s but I’ve found them still pretty shonky tuning wise after getting the works done. Not to mention ones I’ve returned due to truss rod issues, inlays falling out etc.

I suspect the people who say they don't have tuning problems with Les Pauls must play differently to me and many others, maybe pick softer or something. It just doesn't make sense that it's down to a poorly cut nut because then why would it always be Les Pauls that suffered from that?

I think one of the main reasons that tuning problems on Les Pauls is so common place is the tight angles of the D and G strings going from the nut to the tuner. If you look at the PRS tuners, those two are closer together in the middle for exactly that reason (and on many other guitars the tuners are all in a line providing a near straight string path.

With that being the problem, it means that any LP copy made by another company will be just as susceptible to the tuning issues as Gibsons if they have the same placed tuners.

It's a shame you need a skinny neck because the PRS Les Paul copies are such good quality and fix that issue. The PRS Custom models do have a very skinny neck and are HH but they do stray quite far from the Les Paul design in other ways.

Have you heard of the String Butler? It's basically a little gizmo you attach to the headstock of a Les Paul type guitar so the strings come through the nut straight then go round rollers on the device to the tuner so instead of the string taking a tight angle at the nut itself, it changes direction on the roller which prevents it getting stuck and causing the tuning issue.

p90fool

thegummy said:

I suspect the people who say they don't have tuning problems with Les Pauls must play differently to me and many others, maybe pick softer or something. 

While the design is less than perfect for modern light strings the Gibson headstock is used by half the pro guitarists who've lived and worked over the last hundred years or so, I'm sure most would've given up on them if they were so terrible. 

I bought a new LP Traditional in 2012 and literally gigged the paint off it in four years, it also needed a refret at the same time so I attack it pretty hard on 9-46 strings and it's rock solid, no different to my Telecaster. 

I also play in a twin guitar band using lots of full chords, so accurate tuning is far more critical to me than when I play in an r&b three piece. 

I lube the nut at every string change, but that's all, and I do pay careful attention to how I fit and stretch the strings. 

I'm not going to shout "user error" but it's worth having a rethink sometimes about restringing techniques, I actually changed my own technique about ten years ago after decades of doing it another way. 

thegummy

p90fool said:

thegummy said:

I suspect the people who say they don't have tuning problems with Les Pauls must play differently to me and many others, maybe pick softer or something. 

While the design is less than perfect for modern light strings the Gibson headstock is used by half the pro guitarists who've lived and worked over the last hundred years or so, I'm sure most would've given up on them if they were so terrible. 

I bought a new LP Traditional in 2012 and literally gigged the paint off it in four years, it also needed a refret at the same time so I attack it pretty hard on 9-46 strings and it's rock solid, no different to my Telecaster. 

I also play in a twin guitar band using lots of full chords, so accurate tuning is far more critical to me than when I play in an r&b three piece. 

I lube the nut at every string change, but that's all, and I do pay careful attention to how I fit and stretch the strings. 

I'm not going to shout "user error" but it's worth having a rethink sometimes about restringing techniques, I actually changed my own technique about ten years ago after decades of doing it another way. 

I've heard a few top players who play Les Pauls long term mention the tuning problems.

I specifically remember Tim Pierce - top session guy with loads and loads of huge name credits and who has owned hundreds of guitars - talk about the tuning problems of LP but at the same time saying it's worth putting up with it for the sound.

He has also mentioned a few times that he has a hard strum which makes me think that maybe those who never have these problems have a generally softer strum.

Weirdly I've also known someone who didn't agree when I mentioned that LPs are known to have tuning problems but his LP did constantly go out of tune lol.

I'm sure three probably are people out there with stable tuning on their LP but if you took a note of all the guitars in the world (over a reasonable price) that have tuning problems, I'm quite sure most of them would be LPs. So they are more prone to problems than other guitars even if some people get by with them.

If I ever come across a stable Les Paul I'll make a point mentioning it on this forum.

Kittyfrisk

^  "...if you took a note of all the guitars in the world (over a reasonable price) that have tuning problems, I'm quite sure most of them would be LPs. So they are more prone to problems than other guitars even if some people get by with them."

I'm a little bit surprised that so many professional guitarists have been fooled to date... 

gibby

Hi there...thought I'd chuck my "2 peneth worth" in. How are you tuning the guitar? I've read thro all the posts,with comments about the nut slot issues and wrapping strings around the posts correctly etc; they're all valid, but do you tune "up to pitch" only (under tension) or do you tune back "down to pitch" if you've gone slightly sharp?  I've owned many GIbson LP's, (and still do), and as long as I've tuned up to pitch they've been fine.Never had any issues, but I do generally have the bigger necks and most of my current LP's are older, from 1975 - 1998.I've had a 2008 and a 2011 Standard, but both sold on due to chambering/weight relief; otherwise they were lovely guitars. I have 2 LP's you would call probably call "slim 60's" necks, but they aren't that thin TBH. Wouldnt say tuning stability on Gibson is any better or worse than my PRS's or Fenders..in my experience, so far

WiresDreamDisasters

My Orville has been damn brilliant since I bought it. It's my main guitar.

I have an ESP EC1000 with an Evertune bridge and I do love it, but it doesn't play as nicely as my Orville and doesn't sound the same as it either, even with similar pickups. It also has 24 frets, which might be a deal breaker for you if you're after a traditional Les Paul feel.

Fiftyshadesofjay

gibby said:

Hi there...thought I'd chuck my "2 peneth worth" in. How are you tuning the guitar? I've read thro all the posts,with comments about the nut slot issues and wrapping strings around the posts correctly etc; they're all valid, but do you tune "up to pitch" only (under tension) or do you tune back "down to pitch" if you've gone slightly sharp?  I've owned many GIbson LP's, (and still do), and as long as I've tuned up to pitch they've been fine.Never had any issues, but I do generally have the bigger necks and most of my current LP's are older, from 1975 - 1998.I've had a 2008 and a 2011 Standard, but both sold on due to chambering/weight relief; otherwise they were lovely guitars. I have 2 LP's you would call probably call "slim 60's" necks, but they aren't that thin TBH. Wouldnt say tuning stability on Gibson is any better or worse than my PRS's or Fenders..in my experience, so far

I’ve tried all the tricks to be honest. Having the nut re-cut, using nut sauce, tuning up to pitch. Standards tend to come with Locking tuners.