Gibson has been giving RUclips people sponsored guitars to change their tune abs help build up the buzz for new Gibson guitars. One problem though, Gibson still has super dry fret board and fret sprout and terrible binding nibs scrape jobs, finish drips on binding rosewood fret boards not fully seated on the neck with gaps between the maple neck and rosewood fretboard, among many other problems that make these guitars far too expensive for what you get. Heritage Is still making superior instruments and so is PRS but if Gibson can get a bunch of buzzword RUclips people to use the guitars in the videos they will get the attention in hopes the attention turns into sales! So in the end your exclamation of Gibson's poor craftsmanship paid off because they just gave you $3,000 les Paul to join the dark side and tow the corporate line, which you did perfectly and will be rewarded for by Gibson with guitar's and maybe cash for a couple videos.
@@AuntAlnico4 I've owned two Gibsons in my life. A '72 Black Beauty Custom LP and '80 Explorer E2 ....sold the 72 for a ridiculous low price back then and still regret it today. Toured with the Explorer and it was a workhorse that I beat the shit out of. I wouldn't buy a Gibson today for the money they ask without trying at least 10 of them out before hand and it is still too much money! for that kind of money, a PRS is a much better model , even the cheap PRS's have basically zero issues. Gibson had it's day...now they are overpriced and underwhelming.
@@stevewilson9778 I've been looking at the new fenders and you're 100% right. They saw what people really liked and wanted, and re-branded it as something completely different. That's why I'm building a Warmoth and putting a pre-wired pick guard on it. You get sooo much more guitar for the money when its done. And have exactly what you want.
+Marty Shwaartz: all in all, this is the thing people should do. I understand why people want a "Standard" name on a Les Paul: it's iconic. Probably what their guitar idols used. No beloved player used a "Traditional" Les Paul. So, change the truss rod cover, and be happy.
But the Les paul Standart often has nicer and higher graded tops than the traditional so its still unfair to us conservative players that just want a standart "standart" and don't want to spend 5k on the cc
@@aaron99man It is a typo, or more accurately a typographical error. It's when you try to spell a word and make an error. If you remove the T at the end of Standart and replace it with a D you end up with the word Standard, as in the Gibson Les Paul Standard.
I'm guessing he is german or eastern european and english is not his first laungage, it's pretty common for germanic languages to use a T instead of a D due to the pronunciation in german being closer to a T instead of a D.
RUclipsrs: “Gibson is so behind the times. They don’t add modern features or innovate in any way!” Gibson: * adds modern features and innovates. * RUclipsr: “why are there all these switches? I don’t want to make my Les Paul sound like other guitars at the flick of a switch!”
@@Nightdare have you play a strat...? you can bend twice the width with the same effort, but then again my dream would be a strat setup with a gibs fretboard and an ibanez neck.... where in japan can i get this?
@@Quietly_Loud Try an older ESP vintage plus preferably the reliced one. 12 inch radius, very nice modern neck profile Seymour duncan ssl1 set. I went to the shop to buy an american standard that day but it felt like a toy compared to the ESP.
I like the push-pulls, the locking tuners and the 57's in my 2010 professional. I can get beautiful clean tones from that thing and it never goes out tuning. But I totally agree that Gibson should reserve the Standard name for a 58 based model. Simple, beautiful and efficient.
Smoked, Harley puts out solid bikes year after year, just because they dabble with different tech doesn't mean there garbage. A lot of their new stuff is actually pretty cool and super fun to ride.
Here's my take. Look at the namesake: Les Paul himself. He was an innovator and an envelope pusher. Without him, we might all still recording full band in one room with one mic and hoping for the best. Who knows where we'd be without Les trying new things and defying the "traditional" die hards. I'm all for Gibson trying something new and attempting to set a new "standard," simply because I think that's a fantastic way to honor the man that originally inspired the whole line. Les didn't sit back satisfied with the status quo, why should his guitar?
Innovation would be sweet. But the question is what are the changes that could be usefull. Imo.: 1: Changing the headstock angle & the tuner location(so that the strings are not bend as much after the nut) 2: adding a bit to the scale lengh (for stable down tunings) I mean even the epiphone adresses at least the headstock angle ... The problem with gibsons les pauls isn't their "bad sound" but tuning stability (especially with down/drop tunings that are veeeerrryyy popular with punk/rock/metal/... today)
I've got a lot of respect for Les Paul the guy, not the guitar (the guitar is fine for a 1950s era design, I don't think it stands up as well against some more modern designs). He was a genius who came up with some genuinely clever solutions to real musical problems of his day and age. There's nobody else who's been inducted both into the American Inventor's Hall of Fame and the Rock & Roll hall of fame.
@M.r. Moon The SG wasn't the end-all, be-all of Guitars. The SG was an attempt by Gibson to produce a double-cut guitar to compete with Fender's Stratocaster. But the guys at Gibson never understood the point of the Stratocasters double-cut shape (down-scaled from the P-bass where it premiered) was to make the guitar balance properly, despite having a lighter body (because of the tremolo cavity). As a result, the SG ended up balancing even worse than the Les Paul, thanks to the thinner body. A bunch of guys like Angus Young played them to great results despite the shortcomings of the design, but you shouldn't let Gibson off the hook just because some players worked around them. It was a bad design that could've easily been corrected by just slightly changing the body shape and moving the strap pins.
@M.r. Moon I just as soon string my coffee table as play an SG, but that's my preference. I don't see how that had anything to do with the video or my comment, though.
The thing is, nobody really knows that yet. It might turn the LP into a grand piano, an aeroplane or gravel. Everything is possible in the 2019 HP Les Paul Standard
The contradiction is painful. It's also funny that they don't want to be copied. The chinese have already their hands on it so, no ones gonna stop making copies anytime soon. Even I have a LP copy.
This video reminds me of the classic joke: How many guitarists does it take to change a lightbulb? Two. One to change the lightbulb, and one to stand there and complain about how much better the old ones were.
I invite anyone to use an inflation calculator on guitar prices, like Kieth Williams (5 Watt World) does in his short history videos. You will find that prices have barely gone up. Example I just did today, $159 for a LP Special in 1958 is $1570 in 2021. And what is the price of a Gibson USA non CS Special today?
And honestly the Fender custom shop are better made guitars all around. Ever since the Obama wood scandal the Gibson's are very prone to neck twisting.
They just need to match the neck resonance to the body resonance so you don't get that gronky lifeless tone . Bought a Les Paul in the eighties sounded dead , It's still going on today !
As someone who owns a 2019 standard, it’s actually my number one best playing guitar against many others I’ve built or restored over the years, including a Gibson traditional. They each have their nuances. The pickups and such are lack luster, but the quality and craftsmanship are all there where it counts. Bottom line, I played the standard for many hours before purchase and knew it was a keeper because I simply couldn’t put it down.
I own one, also. Absolutely a great guitar. BTW, no cosmetic defects whatsoever. Rhett, if you cannot understand how a Les Paul Modern works which this is with the push pulls, you need some help. Haha.
I don't get it.... The complaints aren't about the playability, it's about how they aren't keeping the standard traditional? Isn't that what the traditional series is for? Guitar tech can't move ahead because of people like you. This isn't even a Gibson fanboy speaking. Standard should never stand for Tradition, it should stand for where the company stands in the present day. Want heritage? That's what the traditional series is for. So long as it plays well, sounds good, and is reasonably priced, I'm up for it. I want guitar tech to keep moving. And that's my only gripe with Gibson right now. They charge premium prices for their STANDARD models.
I didn't think I would, but I actually find myself agreeing with your opinion on this. Traditional should stand by its meaning and the Standard is where they should be moving forward. Or at least have variations of the wiring etc. ✌💙🎸
well, i agree on the pricing part. especially when you factor in the spotty quality control. remember last year, the blueberry burst was the model with the most issues
@chippster stephens "Sure the car came with an engine that didn't start but I swapped it out and it works fine now" See that's the problem. You pay so much for something that doesn't work from the get go. I can understand that for a guitar that costs 100 bucks but for 3-4k, no. Gibson wants to do guitars at a premium, they better make sure it gives premium performance straight from the factory. Otherwise bring the damn price down. Problem is and never was with the specs.
@chippster stephens I didn't ever say they were doing fine, I said that they will do fine with this direction so long as the guitars played from the factory.
As ridiculously similar to the e-Mustang from Ford. What kind of marketing insanity is that?! I can PROMISE Ford, people who want a Mustang WON'T buy this Aztec ugly car!!
I look back at this video and laugh. It has so many contradictions. The standard has now become the custom shop. The custom shop has become Murphy Lab. And the prices are outrageous. So much for traditional and pure. The simpler the guitar gets the more expensive.
@@josephthibault6999 what I think it's cool is the coil split thing. Now, 25 combinations isn't a thing that many guitar players would want (I've seen strats with 7 or 9 pickups combinations, but they're specific mods that their owners make). To me, the coil split is a cool thing, if you want to save yourself a guitar (maybe money, space or both) again, I agree it's a bonus
@@Fidozo15 to me a Strandberg with Fishman Fluence pickups, voicing switching and individual split functions for every pickup with the ability to choose the coil I want to be working would be perfect
I Agree. I had no interest in a Les Paul until they fixed the neck, heel and weight issues. With my 2018 HP, I have finally found a Les Paul that I like.
yea if you want a gibson name to stand for something you should just buy the les paul traditional, traditional is much more authentic sounding than standard
Red Toaster- Exactly- Company's can't win these days , they release something new and all the traditionalists say, it's shit! They release the same old product for decades and people get tired/ bored with it and accuse the company of not moving with the times......
This is actually the first I am hearing of this model. (I'm a little out of touch these days.) I like that they are thinking outside of the box here. I think the versatility is cool. I do agree that it should not be labeled as the "Standard" model. This seems more like a specialty guitar.....one that I would buy.....but a specialty guitar.
Got one. Septermber 2019 serial. No relief, 4,4 kilos, fat neck 50's, beautiful sounding, awesome playability. Perfect guitar. Got a 1980's LP, not even close. 2019 is a good year. That's for sure.
I got recently the 2018's LP Classic goldtop with two P90s and no weight relief as well. It seems that Gibson has stepped into the right direction with these 2018-2020 models.
No weight relief, as in unmodified mahogany? I don’t know if they do anything to alleviate the weight of the ash bodies, but I got a 2019, and it might be the best Guitar I’ve ever owned, and that is being out in early 80s SG and a solid ash telecaster Frankenstein that I loved
If they're looking for that tone from the guitar itself, then they already failed in their quest. Tone comes from your fingers and, mostly, your amplifier/effects.
@@Axess-sv8nq exactly. the only thing on the guitar that affects tone is the pickups really. yes you can argue the wood affects it and it probably does but its such a miniscule amount that it doesn't even matter.
@The Devious Duck - It's like the argument over types of capacitors. That's nearly as bad as the 'tonewood' nonsense. It's just certain companies using junk science and exaggeration to sell more expensive instruments. You need the hearing of a dog to tell the difference! But, people can convince themselves of anything if they want to bad enough. And they defend it until like their lives depend on it!
The Devious Duck if you put Gibson pickups on an epiphone Les Paul standard then compare it with a true Gibson, plug them into same pedals&s, you’ll find the difference. In fact wood still matters.
Guitar Players: Gibson don't innovate, dead in the water, making the same product for 70 years. Also Guitar Players: WTF Gibson I don't want this tech stuff. Just give me a simple 50's Les Paul.
The lack of quality control is a valid complaint, but the innovation thing is just something little scooter bitches about because he wants an 8 string instead of his grandpas Gibson. They were the first ones I know of who used baked maple for the fretboards and I see that on all kinds of guitars since they did. They also made the memory cable.
No we want metal zero fret nut with a shaved down neck joint with more secure headstock break angle. These are the real innovation that gibson is missing out on and when they do actually have some of these innovation, they force a damn cancerous mini etuner on the damn thing.
I'm confused about your complaint, which seems mostly about semantics. They're experimenting with technology on one of 5 different LP's they offer. Don't like, don't buy it.
+rob oliver: The issue seems largely to be that all this new-fangled nonsense is being pushed as the LP STANDARD. Which is also IMO the wrong way to go. If Gibson wants to make a niche LP, great...call it the LP Modern lineup. Or the LP Tomorrow lineup...whatever. Just don't call it the LP Standard with all these crap-tastic "features".
@@joesatchton212 You just proved his point: it IS about semantics then. If calling this the Les Paul Standard is all that is making people livid, then it's really not worth arguing about. It's just a name. Gibson-bashing has become a hobby and people will find anything they can to complain about.
Nah man... Actually the company attitude always comes before the semantics of it all, not the other way around... There is so much more to it than that! I really think that is kinda missing the point. Given Gibson's recent history and current state id say it's not bashing if it's justified. As a company they ARE confused, they're trying to be the competition instead of doing what THEY do best. That STB (printed straight to board) circuit is one of the worst ideas in the history of guitars! I'm a Les Paul player, I love it, but to be honest I think Gibson will always struggle from here on in
+Tango Whisky: As much as I would like to think semantics don't matter, we both know that they can and often do in terms of modern marketing techniques. Samsung S9 or S9+. Apple Macbook Pro [which triggered even Apple fanboys when it turned out that the Macbook Pro is anything but "pro"]. BMW M5. All basic examples of how marketing semantics can drive [or repel] consumer interest. I agree with Rhett simply because the word "Standard" should imply something meaningful IMO. Just as a Les Paul Custom implies something. Or a Fender Strat Custom Shop. Or a PRS 10 Top. "Standard" implies a consistent, across the board experience or fundamental product specification. Don't know about you but I have absolutely zero interest in this kind of a Les Paul Standard with these finds of questionable features. I might, however, have some level of interest in exploring a Les Paul Modern with these kind of specs. Different strokes.... Bottom line: I think we all obviously like or care about Gibson as a guitar brand to some degree or another. So we all really want the same thing - to see Gibson do well and live up to its many decades of overall quality and historical heritage. cheers!
They totally fixed it. I got a a les Paul standard (60s) which now they offer two standards I guess but in different original configurations, and I love that guitar. The quality has changed also, a lot better than some of the guitars from the era where they were stamping the year on the back of the headstock.
star man I mean, why wouldn't it? I don't own a Gibson, so I am by no means a fanboy, but this is a smart move for them. Coil splitting is a standard feature is most modern guitars today. I don't use it very often, but it's great to have when it's there. I just think it's a strange complaint to say Gibson shouldn't add modern features (that are unobtrusive). I never ever use my volume or tone knobs--they're unnecessary for my playing. But I never would complain that they're there. Gibson has TWO volumes and tones--even worse--but why should I complain about an added feature? It's there if I ever need it. Same is true with the coil split. This makes the Les Paul more versatile and modern without changing anything ro the core design or sound. If you don't like coil splits, you don't have to use it, just like I never use my tone knob.
On the other hand...you guys were very vocal about Gibson doing the same stuff over and over, but when he finally does something different, you say that it would be better to do the same thing over again? I'm confused:) playing the devil's advocat here.
the problem was that gibson would bring out the same product without fixing ongoing issues with their guitars, like tuning instability, poor craftsmanship etc. what they're doing now is even worse because they are giving us products with features no one asked for and still have not fixed the issues that have plagued their guitars for decades, and lets not even talk about the god awful finishes.
exactly, like robot tuners...no one wants it and it doesn't work anyway. Make a guitar that actually stays in tune better. It's too high a price for something plagued with problems. The circuitry makes working on it yourself, which most of us have to do, nearly impossible without spending a bunch of money.
I'll second that. I love Gibson's but you practically need to take a loan out to afford one. Even their cheap ones are out of reach. And that's Why Fender sells so many guitars. They're not even that good. They just cheap
@@dirtywater5336 I saw a video of a dude saying that, if you play a guitar and you feel in love with it, you cant get away without it, if I play a les paul and feel in love with it, I know its already an impossible love, that is gibson guitars in a nutshell, thats why I love ibanez for example, their guitars are amazing, and some of their guitars have a stupidly low price for what they offer, so if you feel in love with an ibanez guitar, you are probably going to buy it and be happy with it, its sad to say, but in 3 years, gibson is going to be dead for sure.
Sounds like something a poor person would say. I'm 24, and I bought a 2020 Standard brand new. Sure, not everyone can justify $3k for a guitar, but the point of the Standard is that it's an aspirational guitar. It's a flagship. Not everyone can afford a Audi R8, does that mean the company is gonna go under? Nah, they sell more basic models that are affordable. A LP studio is just as obtainable as an American Fender. $3k isn't even really a lot of money, it's a month and a half of work at an entry level job.
You set the dip switches once, and leave them. They give you a tuned coil-tap or a true coil split option, and filters for the tone pots. That's it. Tuned Coil taps are what they are... , and those tone filters are optional. So just choose coil-split with the filters off, and you're all done inside the cavity. 😏
So much wrong with this video. I find it funny how music is supposed to be audible entertainment, but when a company comes around tries to give musicians tonal flexibilty the arguments against it are "looks", "tradition" and "heritage". Somehow, a guitar that is able to sound like both a Les Paul or a Strat is now a bad thing. These aren't logical or musically-based criticisms. This is everything I hate about musicians.
I think it is much more about the name STANDARD for a guitar that is not standard any more. Standard with simple but good tuners, wiring and pickups. That would be a good Standard. Call this new guitars 2019 Les Paul Modern PlugNPlay...
Gibson made the Standard series become something entirelly diferent ages ago (in 2009 if im not mistaken) The TRUE Standard is now the traditional. If you want a STANDARD Les Paul, get the traditional, or pre-2009 standard. Thats a problem, yes. Changing a model without changing it's name, but the standard (basic les paul) still exists.
Obviously click bait by riding the hate Gibson bandwagon. I understand a lot of Gibson fans want a very traditional instrument, but if the player doesn't want to use the coming innovations they don't have to. They're not detrimental to the instrument of you don't touch them. I can understand the dislike for robotic tuners as they are visually different, but when all the bells and whistles are internal and do nothing as long as you let them be? That's just illogical reasoning. As far as the paintjob, I understand people want their classic bursts and ebony and flame tops and gold tops. That's understandable, but what is wrong with variety? I personally think the new colors look awesome, but I do think they should've kept their staple looks. The real issue with Gibson when it comes to models is the lines are very blurred in terms of trims. It's incredibly difficult to keep track of where an instrument sits in terms of prestige in comparison to other companies. Also, I can't believe you're complaining about the weight relief when the next video that played in my cue was you on Rick Beato's video "GIBSON LES PAUL VS FENDER STRAT | A CLOSER LOOK" literally complaining about the weight of Les Pauls and the reason you sold yours was because it gave you shoulder pain. Be honest, this video is you just reaching for views, making you sound like a hypocrite again. I mean, do I need to mention your Silver Sky video too?
You have a poor grasp of Gibson history. Gibson has always pushed the boundaries. The Les Paul Standard always changed. '52 trapeze tailpiece, p90s, 53,54 wraparound bridge, 56 tune-o-matic, 57 humbuckers, 58-60, sunburst finish, 61- 63 SG body. So 9years after it's introduction it was unrecognisable. The neck to body angle changed from 2 to 5 degrees in that time. No standard made from 63 to 68. '68 the 56 model is back but with a 14% headstock pitch and a different neck set angle than orig. '69 it gets a big headstock and looses the long neck tennon and the cool top carve, and gets mini buckers and three piece neck. (Yeh I know'Deluxe').1970 it gets a pancake body. It goes on and on. Tar backs, Shaw's, Bill Lawrences, Klusons, Grovers, Schallers, threaded bridge inserts, Nashville Tuneomatic, volutes, years of those 300k pots,3 piece Maple necks etc etc etc. The one that everyone wants to call 'the Standard's is just from a small timeframe in the models development. So, it's probably more correct to call the one we all like, the Traditional, and the one they mess with, the Standard.And yes I know, Gibson haven't always called it the Standard but I hope you get my drift
Good points. It's an interesting question, as to whether the experimentation and innovation Gibson pursued in earlier decades (when they had significantly less serious competition) is going to work for them in the 21st century. There's a lot less at stake when you change up the design of a guitar that debuted 5-10 years ago vs changing a guitar that's been on the market for 60-70 years and is considered one of 3-4 iconic electric guitar designs. I don't really care what they do, but I'm fascinated by how the guitar marketplace functions vs. that for automobiles or for other recreational / tech durable goods like watches or phones.
@@jesusonazareth4752 I suppose my point is - Which design shouldn't they change? There have been continual changes of spec and design in 66 years. We all think of the Standard as being 1 piece solid mahogany body, 1 piece mahogany neck with 1&11/16" nut width and 17% headstock pitch, bound rosewood fretboard with 12" radius, block inlays. 2 piece bookmatched maple top with German carve, PAF style humbuckers with 4 X 500k pots, Tuneomatic, stop tail. It's rarely been that in 66years.
You get to choose your tonal options that way--stuff you use instead of selecting from an absurdly long menu. I'm in the middle of a build that's going to have a push-pull master tone because I want to be able to switch caps on the fly. I don't expect that standard on a guitar.
This is actually a really good example of why Gibson is screwed. They pushed the Heritage marketing propaganda so well that their most loyal customers won't accept change, yet selling the same guitar for 70 years just isn't enough anymore. So what can they do? I guess they could become super litigious and sue anyone with a guitar that remotely resembles a Gibson, that way the only way to get a Les Paul style guitar is to pay Gibson for one. No way that could snowball or blow up in their face...
While you’re not wrong, the argument is not important. Gibson got in this whole mess because they dumped money into R&D for guitars that had diminishing returns, because nobody wanted them (ie, robot tuners). This guitar is just the latest version. If they continue with guitars like this, they’ll file chapter 11 again within the next decade.
So the crux of your argument is boiled down to a truss rod cover and marketing? I think you’re making a mountain out of a mole hill. The Traditional is your answer and Gibson does make it abundantly clear who the Traditional is for. I can’t find anything terribly wrong with the 2019 lineup in so far as models and features. The color offerings for the studio and tribute don’t get me excited, I think the old faded brown was more inspiring than BBQ.The big disappointment is price, you’d think it would held steady for a year, but their price increases are like clock work. Further to that the prices are approaching PRS. Just compare the S2 SC to the Tribute or Studio. To me Gibson’s salvation is to tighten quality and make sure every guitar is stage ready, similar marketing to PRS which will quietly change the current negative sentiment about their quality. Then hopefully in 2020 things will be looking up for them on all fronts.
Michael Trevino yeah but what if you don't want a 50s neck and you want a slim taper them what Micheal you tell me ok cause i want hear it i would hate a baseball bat neck
Michael Trevino There aren't very many people who buy new Gibsons, period. There are even fewer people to buy new LP Standards. LP Standards have a long history of, well, being and sounding like LP Standards. You will probably disagree with me, but I would be willing to bet that most people who ever have or who ever will buy a Les Paul Standard want, well, a Les Paul Standard. Most people don't buy LP Standards because it can sound like other guitars. If I want a guitar that sounds like a Telecaster, I would buy a Tele. Oh, wait, I did. If I want a guitar that sounds like a Les Paul Standard, I could buy one. Oh, wait, I did that, too. I bought my Tele new, and I found a used LP in mint condition. I will never buy a new Gibson; they are over priced because Gibson has lost their minds.
Gibson's problems are their quality control, price and fans. People who expect the Standard to be the old style les paul are extremelly misinformed because thats the Traditional. Then theres the fact that you pay 3000U$ for a Gibson to have the chance of getting a instrument with major problems.
+Phelipe Costa 'extremely misinformed', huh? The Gibson Les Paul Standard was introduced in 1958, and ran through 1960 and was reintroduced in 1968. When were dip switches and push/pull knobs added to the Gibson Les Paul Standard?
@@jamesallen5591 Push/ Pull pots were added in 2009 to the Standard. The Dip Switch system has been on various Les Pauls for 4 or 5 years. Though there was this odd British chap named Jimmy Page I believe who added push pull pots and switches top HIS Les Paul early into his Zeppelin career. There was another British bloke named Peter Green who did similar odd things to HIS Les Paul. So it's been a fairly common thing to do to Les Pauls for DECADES. This is just a bunch of whining. Sorry but a flagship model SHOULD have advanced features. But guitar players just HATE change.
..."GET OF MY LAWN!" 🙄 So Gibson still offers all 50 of grandpa's Les Paul models that all look and mostly sound the same and don't have any of those new-fangled options that are so disturbing to you. Seriously... none of the big guitar stores have replaced all of the 50 Les Pauls on their Les Paul walls with only modern glitter versions. "They're adding options I didn't ask for!".... what a joke.
you’re complaining about diversity... if you want to just want to use 2 humbuckers then leave the push pull pots alone.. you’re way too upset that they’re giving it features that most mid-priced guitars have!
flipper2gv If you can solder the capacitor to the pot then doing it to a pcb takes very little extra effort. It can actually be easier depending on the PCB.
Panic42000 is right. i don't see the problem, that's just this years model, next year will be something else. Your standard Les Paul's have often changed throughout the years, it's just this time it's the electronics but in the past it might've been neck size or whatever. it's never been a guitar that stayed the same, that's why people seek out Les Paul's from certain years, because that particular year appeals to them and their needs. This one will also appeal to some people's needs and they will seek out this model. There's nothing in the history of Gibson to suggest they stick to the same pickups, electronics, neck size etc on their standard models. it's always been ever changing and this model is no different.
@@averydeadhorse - I hope they don't use a lot of surface-mount parts, which most of us don't have the ability to repair or modify. On the other hand, they can build those circuit boards 100,000 at a time and get them for a very cheap unit price, so if it fails you can just unplug it and pop in a replacement. They could even sell them stand-alone for modding any guitar with 2 humbuckers. I wonder if you can already buy such a thing online? hmmm now I have to do a google search...
This reminds me of a conversation I had years ago with a luthier friend: guitarists are conservative. The vast majority of us don't want anything new. We just want the same old thing, expect then we complain the the 1970s models were the best, or the 1990s models were the best. Each new version appears worse than the last. I don't think companies should rely on producing the same old thing all the time, but at the same time, Gibson fans don't really let the company freely experiment. There is a toxicity that goes both ways: the fans want the same old thing but complain when Gibson delivers. The fans want new stuff from Gibson but complain when Gibson delivers. Gibson ignores the fan and buyer base to do something different and they get shit on. This is easily the weirdest company-customer relationship I have ever seen. I am not a huge fan of Gibson. I own a 2014 SG but prefer my Ibanez lawsuit SG over it, so I am trying to say this as a neutral observer. Do Gibson fans want the compnay to change, or not? Either way, most of you aren't going to be happy. If you want a company that delivers more to you preferences, there are other smaller brands and independent luthiers who can give you what you want. Otherwise, why worry about what Gibson does? Anyways, great video as usual.
Well said! Just a few years ago I remember seeing a lot of people saying that Gibson was building guitars that were way outdated and they needed to get with the modern world and update it's guitar designs to meet today's players wants and needs. Gibson listened and delivered a brand new fully modern guitar. Within no time at all everyone completely turned on them and became appalled that Gibson would ever change it's designs/specs in the 1st place. The same guys calling them outdated and antiquated just a few years back are now demanding 50's and 60's spec guitars. It's almost like no matter what direction the company goes, the majority will disapprove. I feel bad for Gibson, it's customer base can't be satisfied no matter what they do
It's funny because most of the people complaining are likely the same ones that will turn around and tell you "oh it doesn't matter what it says on the headstock as long as it plays great" etc. Well clearly it does matter what's on the headstock, otherwise you wouldn't have a bunch of people crying that it says "traditional" instead of "standard". My 2c is that Gibson is free to "set a new standard" (handy little expression for times like these, isn't it?) and people who want a guitar built in the traditional way can buy a traditional. Seems like it makes sense. The complaint that it would make more sense to have a "standard" and a "modern" instead is quite literally semantics. It would be effectively the same lineup, with the only exception being what the TR cover says. I don't even particularly like Gibson to be perfectly honest, but my god do we (guitarists) sound like a bunch of pedantic fossils when we start throwing temper tantrums over a -1 cent- (sorry, 13 cent... 'Murica manufacturing etc) piece of plastic on the headstock.
I totally agree but I think the concern here is that people who love gibson don't want it spending millons to go experimental with traditional models instead of fixing some old and flawed design choices like the headstock or making new models
Maybe you should stop ragging on Gibson for trying to come up with something a bit different. Why should they cater to your idea of what a Les Paul should be? There are millions of used traditional style LP's you could buy. This would be like Chevy keeping the Corvette the same since 1953 to maintain tradition. Sometimes tradition can be re-thought. I give Gibson credit for being a little bold, else things stay the same forever and ever.
I gotta through my hat in with Gibson here. If I could afford the 2019 Standard, I would want all of those features even knowing that I probably wouldn't regularly use a quarter of them. The more sounds I can get out of my gear, the better. It seems like your big complaint is that they didn't call the Traditional model the Standard, which is just kind of... silly.
@@DamianoftheRyans I've got 5 Gibson's and they are all great ! I got PRS se custom 22 and it's pretty good to but the Gibson have far stronger better fret work.
I must add that I don't like the new made in Indonesia prs se guitars, I only like the old Korean prs se and the USA ones for some reason, maybe the frets and necks are better proportioned for my hands?
no way these are fake innovations, real innovations would be a zero fret metal nut with a shaved down neck joint and a more ergonomic body on the back that is chambered. This would be the modern les paul but gibson isn't going to do that and if they do, they will throw one of those goddamn mini etuner cancer on it.
a real innovation would be a volute on the headstock (like old guild) and better tuner positions so the strings cross the nut right. Like PRS, Musicman etc.
@@hubblebublumbubwub5215 actually it was the Les Paul custom that later became the SG after les pulled his endorsement cuz he hated the shape. Ever seen a 1961 single cutaway Les Paul? Nope cuz the sg shape replaced the old one entirely in 1961.
@@LittleJack2105 - That weight on the non-weight-relieved GLP is part of the tone. I did not know this when I bought my first electric guitar, a GLP Classic, which is weight-relieved at over 9 lbs. On the good side, I find that I really like the sound of a 335, which is mostly hollow except for the spar down the center of the body, and this Les Paul is a little closer to that sound than a Traditional. On the bad side, I don't quite get the full GLP experience.
I was at Sam ash the other day and they had a brand new traditional for around $2800 I believe. The thing looked gorgeous in the classic sunburst, but I couldn’t help but think that instead of wasting my money on that I could buy a used les Paul from the early 2000s or even 90s and still have extra spending money. I think that’s why Gibson is struggling so much lately, the second hand market is too vibrant and quite frankly a better alternative for most players.
Yes, also for overseas players the prices are frankly ridiculous due to local conditions many times. In the UK Gibson's prices can be awful due to the extra taxes on them here. In Australia the prices are absurd and unreal. People will often buy used guitars there or local alternative makes.
Danny Sands good point. For me it’s not so much the features (not opposed necessarily to some limited modern elements, the Standard always had that and I added a roll-off coil split to my ‘95) but the built quality. Dirty secret: I’d actually pay more for a good 90s LP than a brand new one or one from the last number of years. Devil is in the detail.
Rhett, is this your worst video ever? Lots of options is a good thing. Buy a Traditional or a Custom if that's what you want. A better complaint is that Gibson's prices are through the damn roof now.
Agree. I like Rhett generally, but this video is just utter trash. He's complaining that a guitar has too many features. Um... Don't buy it then? They offer exactly the guitar you want, it's just called something else. Or go buy a vintage guitar if you want an exact 50's/60's version. And does he think he knows their "customers" better than they do? Their "customers" aren't you, Rhett. They're the doctors and lawyers and engineers, etc. who make big bucks and want to buy the "coolest" "classic" guitar. And yes, they WANT the blueberry burst and the push/pull pots.
I highly enjoy my LP Standard HP from this year, named "Blue." Definitely my #1. Do I mess around with the dip switches and push pull pots? Sometimes, and you can get some awesome tones out of them. But at the end of the day, it's still a Les Paul and after switching the nut out for bone, it can sing and scream as I need it to. And I got the blueberry fade top on mine, which consistently gets complimented on how unique it looks.
That iPaul sht is genuinely fun but tbh, some people may actually find this new gibson useful. I mean, I started my guitar playing with a les paul copy and nowdays I find myself playing strat cuz it has the sound I'm looking for but I don't know if I could go to lespaul model with all the sounds. Now the big IF is that the les paul has all the genuine sounds. I mean I can use both, humbucker and single coil.
Ayy Arnold! same here lol. One of the nice things about an over-saturated market is we have quality companies to choose from rather than giving Gibson $2600+ for a rosewood fretboard and the same flagship design. Some dads still think slash is the only shredder guitarist lol
@M.r. Moon I've got kids and bills and more important things to buy. I have friends with expensive and Relic guitars I'll play them if I want to play inexpensive instrument
@M.r. Moon ive had a fender jazz from the 60s and a wilshire, and a les laul sG and I liked them fine. Dont regret selling them. I just have different priorities now . I'm not playing Madison Square Garden.
Compared to what's on the shelves these days it's quite possible that a epiphone with some mods is just as "quality" as most gibsons. Gibson dropped the ball on quality vs price a long time ago. The guys that are paying 2k and up for a gibson are just chasing ghosts, or they have to see a certain name on the headstock to feel they're playing a real guitar.
@M.r. Moon inexpensive guitars these days are way better than inexpensive 40 years ago. lots of inexpensive guitars are up there with the expensive shit in sound and playability. finish quality might be lower, but that's it. I have the money to buy more expensive, and I don't. I am only upgrading the pickups on my Epiphone and the nut. the rest of the hardware (grover tuners from the factory) are perfectly fine. tbh, my car cost me less than a Gibson guitar would. I could buy one. I could buy a new car. it is a choice that I don't. have I played Gibson guitars? yes. do I feel like I need to own one? no. am I stupid? you are free to believe that.
Those features are actually EXACTLY why I love my Standard so much. The primary reason my interest was sparked to begin with, not to mention they've been on the Standard for yearssss. The dip-switches are the only addition. Not to mention if you want your regular traditional Les Paul, that is what the Traditional is for. Oh my god I have never seen a more negatively biased and uninformed review of something make itself so obvious so early. I usually like your stuff but man, try and employ some other perspectives and less bias. Oh and saying "who asked for blueberry burst"? LOL everyone did. It was the fastest selling and most in demand les paul colour in decades as stated by basically every shop and collector you can talk to. Wow this review.. I'm a professional touring musician, own several Les Pauls, and those features make my Standard the guitar I play easily the most. It covers the most tonal ground, while still getting the gnarliest core les paul tone out of all of my les pauls. "Let the Les Paul Standard stand for something", it stands for innovation. That is everything Les Paul the man stood for, the standard should stand for the same thing.
I don’t know, calling something the “Standard” model of a 65 year old guitar design doesn’t exactly scream innovation. There’s so many different versions, you’d think they would make the Standard, standard. Gibson has gotten out of control, I’m not surprised they had to file for bankruptcy protection. If you go to the website and look at the different LP models, they have 21 pages with 12 models per page.Too many choices will kill sales and inventory problems will kill a business. They need to cut it down to the 15 or 20 top sellers, keep the Standard, standard. Make the Traditional look and sound like the original, keep the Studio a very basic model and then clear out the warehouse with a fire sale on everything else. Does anyone really need a $6700 Chinese New Year Les Paul? Gibson needs to get a grip on their business
Les Paul the player was a consummate tinkerer. Always modifying and experimenting with his sound. His favorite model in his later years is the recording. I like having options and while it looks like more switches than I would want I know I would find a few new sounds I like. Send me the guitar if it upsets you so much. He should have done his research before spending that kind of coin.
Yes pull push pots to create more tones is a great idea. You could have pickups in and out of fase. A single coil sound if you want. Jimmy page retro fitted it to his Les Paul. You don't like it? Don't use it!
I wouldn't be surprised if lots of recording artists would jump at these options What's better than having the guitar that feels the most comfortable to you also be the most versatile?
wijk89 you’re missing the point, those features are already offered on guitars like the studio, but by making this the standard you’re losing the classic flagship guitar.
Looks like Gibson solved these issues w/the (2019/2020) 1950’s & 1960’s LP Standards - back to basics and lower price too ! 👍 Besides, the “Standard” in past 5 years has been the experimental spec guitar - until now. Traditional is gone... it takes time to get new models and direction into production (and get rid of already created parts).
Absolutely, the 50s and 60s standards are some of the best guitars Gibson has ever made. I have a 50s standard myself and my goodness, it sounds and plays better than even my buddies 2018 Costom shop. They finally figured it out
when they don't change they are damned, when they do change they are damned, just shows some guitar players think they know what they want but deep down haven't a clue what they really want,,,,,,,,, why not design your own guitar and have it made and blow Gibson out of the water with your expertise?
I think it's more a matter of this being the "standard" instead of calling it something like "modern" or whatever else they can come up with. He kind of says it in the video repeatedly..
Its 2019...they still make traditional models...buy those ..I imagine in the late 50s you would be saying wtf gibson when they came out with the explorer and flying V...why is the guitar world so stagnant. .would you want to drive a 58 chevy today as your everyday ride? What is astonishing is how the electric guitar and especially the solid body guitar came and inspired innovation and creativity...and the magic was that musicians were really in the need of innovation ..and were at the root of all this innovation...and manufactures worked to help move that forward...that magic seems to be gone ..
Its bcuz its all been done and prefected already my man and now their just reaching for any dumbass thing they can come up with to justify a higher price tag... i see your point but cmon how much can you really change and modify a guitar, its funny how vintage gear is so sought after and worth a fortune and all these companies are constantly making reissues of things from the past its bcuz most people just want what is simple and works....
You make a good point. People like to complain and criticize others. What about a person that can only afford 1guitar. In this case they would be spending a lot for that 1 guitar, but they want lots of different tones. Hey, if you don't like it, then don't buy it. Gibson will get it. You know anyone who innovates has to put up with remarks and criticisms from the peanut gallery. It comes with the territory.
The answer is quite simple IMHO. This guitar is not meant for gigging players. It's for someone who wants to futz around in the den with a guitar in hand.
I got one, mainly because of the color and the neck profile. I fell in love with the Blueberry Burst one my local guitar store had, so I pulled the trigger. I dont really care about the HP-4 and all its functions, I mean its nice to have those options, but for me it would suffice with just regular old CTS pots. I agree that they should have just made the Standards like they used to be. They got the "High Performance" series to play around with those things...
I disagree with more or less every view expressed in this video! I don't want one of these Les Pauls but it's innovators like Les Paul himself who can/will pick up these guitars and use them to find their new sound.
Really, Gibson can't win. If it's traditional, people bitch about not moving with the times. If they do something new, they bitch. I love the idea of the coil splitting, especially in the neck pickup. You are absolutely correct about Les Paul himself...he was constantly tinkering with his guitars.
After a very long search, last may I bought an used "as new" 2017 Gibson Les Paul Standard in honey burst. It was visually stunning, played awesome, incredibly balanced, and the price was more than right... so I fell in love and I bought it EVEN THOUGH the electronics were absolute crap. It sounded incredibly nasal and very very far from the classic sound of a Les Paul Standard. I immediately removed all that crap single PCB piece electronics and the two Burstbuckers Pro as well, replacing it all with best quality 50s wiring and a pair of custom pickups made by the famous Monty in London. It is now one of the best playing and best sounding guitars I've ever tried, and I play guitar since 1995... This long story to say YES, Gibson needs to unfuck itself and start having a bit of common sense, because they CAN deliver awesome guitars if they just make some simple changes. P.S. in my new electronics I put in a single push-pull to split the neck hubmucker... just in case... Number of times I used it since last may: zero. If you have a REAL Les Paul, you don't want it to sound anything but a Les Paul.
David RF I did the same with my 2014 L.P. I went with a set if 57 classics from a 90s vintage Gibson. Except it still played like crap. I found out that Gibson changed the process and they didn't level the frets. So I had to pay for that on top of changing out the electronics and the bridge and tail piece to aluminum pieces. I was not very happy about that but I now love the guitar. When before I hated it. I regretted buying it.
David RF agreed. Fundamentally their guitars are great. I bought my first Gibson at the peak of the bankruptcy interest. It’s a 2017 limited run walnut es 335 (I love the walnut finish, I know it’s a take it or leave it color). The price was way below what you’d encounter this guitar for (1800usd new), so I had to spring for it. Out the box it played remarkable but I did want more vintage tonality so I swapped the 57 classics for some throbaks I had (best paf in my opinion) and an rs guitar works 50s harness - the guitar has seen about 50 gigs since I got it 6 months ago, it’s really killer. Wouldn’t be hard for Gibson to get their feet again if they pay attention.
In 2013 when I bought mine, they called it a 'Les Paul Standard Plus' and the LP Standard was still available. Personally I like having the single coil option (although I could just grab my Strat), but I'm surprised that they pushed this on all Standards.
The contoured heel is great and would probably make sense for the Standard (Keeping the old heel on the Traditional, re-issue's, and the Classic). They would probably get too much negative feedback though, with a good portion of players that want the "old" heel design for historic reasons.
The answer to any question that starts with "would anyone complain" is ALWAYS yes. Especially when it comes to Gibson. People are hellbent on bitching about everything that company does. I bought the HP faded specifically for the contoured heel. I removed the electronic tuners and replaced them with Grovers and the guitar is perfect for me now. They really should put the contoured heel on all LPs, but you know people would lose their shit (probably the same people who bitch about them doing the same thing year after year and never improving)
I bought the sea foam two days ago, I'm intermediate at best, but I think everybody should relax and enjoy what an absolutely gorgeous, stunning, and beautiful instrument. It really makes me happy like I've never known. I don't know man, this is my first les, but I like that they're at least trying things I guess. And I suppose you can't make everybody happy..... I've dreamed of owning a les, anybody reading this is going to feel overwhelmed, but trust me playing its the finest instrument I've ever owned.... and I put the poker chip on but left the pick guard off.... seriously don't let the technical stuff frighten you, she's a slice of heaven, you won't regret it!!!
@@RhettShull Thanks man man! After being the care taker for a family member the last several years and really needed this for my spiritual, emotional, and mental well being.
Okay, so Gibson is putting modern electronics into their Standard and the traditional electronics in the...Traditional? Even Fender is still working on improving their American Standard models. I bet you would have flipped your shit if you were in the 50s when Gibson dropped humbuckers into Les Pauls in 1958 because the PAFs were a radical change from the old P90s :P
I bought a Mexican Fender Player series Sratocaster it came with a 2 point tremolo, I added 2 roller string trees a Graph-Tech nut and Machined saddles for the tremolo. I have 700 bucks into it and it plays and sounds fantastic. The tremolo I can abuse like a Floyd Rose and stays in tune.
Yeah, I picked up a Player Series (polar white, maple board) and love the shit out of it. All I plan on doing to it is putting Fender locking tuners on it. $700 well spent. I might put Graph Tech saddles, but that'll come later.
I love that shortly after this video was made Gibson did exactly what Rhett has suggested. Not that they got the idea from him, but it shows that they did listen to the customer base.
There is a 2019 version on Reverb that is labeled High Performance, in a blueberry finish. This is the kind of guitar that appeals to collectors like Trogly.
🤣🤣🤣🤣 it is sad to think Bucky LOL. I don't care what colors they put on Les Paul's, but for a working player like me who's been playing for 30 years plus, just make the damn Les Paul like you always have and if you want to do something like these 2019 standards give them a different name. Like I said in a comment to someone else it feels like they're almost trying to do competition with Paul Reed Smith by offering stuff like this when they don't need to compete with Paul Reed Smith they're a different company and some people swear by Gibson and would never touch a Paul Reed Smith( although I love my Paul Reed Smith and it reminds me of a early 90s Les Paul that I have except for the body shape. It plays like my old Les Paul does).
@@ziggylayneable As many other comments have said buy a Traditional. If you can't stand the thought of having Traditional on the truss cover then replace it.
Its to bad that some of the cheap so called mid level guitars play better then ones that cost 4 figures. There still hoping people will buy just for the name. Not me cant afford that expansive sticker on the headstock.
I bought a 2019 . Ive had a few Lps . This one is a killer. I dont use the push pull. It doesnt do single coil. I just switch bridge neck and bridge pup. Im very happy with it
Just purchased a 2020 50's and a 2020 60's........Gibson is heading back in the right direction, love them both, void of pull pots, dip switches, chambering and funky colors! This video nails it :)
What's wrong with the idea of having a Les Paul that has the capability of being an allround guitar instead of just a blues rock one trick pony and a very expensive one ? Everything ? Well at least there are PRS guitars and their copies available with two humbuckers and no bloody Clapton Page Green purists to hinder their usability or switching.
It can be a modernised version of it if allowed. It makes all the sense, a guitar that is capable of traditional Gibson sound as well as something new. Of course you can say that Gibson is famous for the certain sound and it takes the traditional approach. But then you can argue that the traditional sound won't work unless the music itself is traditional..in other words the guitar would dictate the music you play, which should not be the case.
Getting a PRS is the best idea I've seen so far in this comment string if you want a guitar that sounds and performs like a '59 LP Standard. And the PRS is much more player-friendly.
@@alfredfarber3385 Gibson should just make a 1959 Les Paul reproduction that sounds as good, with some real improvements- lighter, stays in tune better, more comfortable. Not as easy to break the headstock. I would also like to see a new 1963 split window Corvette body with a modern engine and tranny, at a reasonable price. For guitars, a headless tele and strat and SG bolt on neck option to keep up with the Kiesels.
@@jeffruebens8355 I agree completely about Les Pauls. PAF pickup design, MUCH more weight reduction, deeper cutaway. Staying in tune would be revolutionary. The only thing I liked about my LP when I had one was the tone, which was classic. I had what were called 1961 zebra-coil reissue humbuckers, and they sounded like the real deal. The weight just about killed my arthritic back, and it was a bitch to play. The notion that you need 15 pounds of solid mahogany and maple to get sustain is about 65 years obsolete. Maple is pretty, but insanely heavy. How about ash or alder with a carved, arch top? I'll bet it could be designed to sound as good as a '59 Standard.
I've been really happy with my LP Standard 50's, though I can't remember whether it's a 2019 or a 2020 model. I liked that they went with the maple top, orange drop caps, nitro finish and kept it simple, which is what I wanted gibson to do for a long time. It doesn't have any of the push-pull crap or circuit boards or anything and it sounds fantastic, I sold a lot of LP's I didn't like but have kept this one so far.
So this guy says "what about the people that like to try different pickups and change pots and capacitors to get different sounds" but he doesnt understand that Gibson just gave him that very ability without having to buy more parts and do work. All he has to do is flip switches and there are over 500 different combinations. Sounds to me like the people that said the internet was a fad and wouldnt go anywhere.
You actually have a point. I didn't think of it that way. But it's just electrons moving through a circuit -- so in theory a PCB wouldn't be particularly offensive. I mean I remember when I became obsessed years ago with the Peter Green sound and I tried to solder things up -- had no experience soldering and it was a huge pain. If i'd just had to flip a dip switch, that would have been awesome
In theory but have you ever noticed that modeling amps never sound like th real thing the sound this guitar gives is probably an approximation of a sound not the real thing
This video popped up in my feed, but I noticed that it was published in September 5th of 2018, but I figured I would reply to it anyhow, because the topic covered in it is one I think someone should talk about. So here we go :) I just don't get why anyone would have went so far as to suggest this may be the worst Les Paul Ever from Gibson. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong in the design to me, not the sweet new finishes or the pickups or the push pull pots. It all seems like the middle point between the Les Paul Traditional and the Les Paul Modern to me. The way I understand how this all works is like this. The Traditional in intended to reflect the guitar from the past, the Modern is intended to reflect the guitar of the Future, and the Standard is intended to reflect the guitar of the present. So the Modern has all the cool features and updates to the design, the Traditional has the same features it started with, and the Standard is something in the middle. There have been some things changed about guitars sense the 50s, and new features have become a thing. It is only natural that the Standard would have some of those new features. Now a little about the finishes on these guitars, as that is sometimes just as important to people as the sound its self when it comes to if someone is going to buy the guitar. This is a personal opinion of mine, but I want updated finishes to be offered as well as there old finishes as well, and for many reasons. To name just a couple, I want them to cover the market as a whole and not just cater to the one group of people I personally fall in. I want to see those old dirt cheap finishes they used to use on the Les Paul Standard for the corner of the market that loves that look, just as much as I want to see the more expensive and corrected finishes they can offer today. That may sound like I am insulting people, but let me explain that real fast. In the 50's, just like today by the way, the finishes that Gibson and Fender offered were the cheapest they could while maintaining what we would call the "Cool Factor". This is something I can see pretty well considering they fade pretty quickly really, as only cheap paint could. We have paintings from the 1700's that have barely faded at all, look at a guitar from the 50's and compare it to when it was new and there are massive differences when it comes to fading lol. So when I say it was a cheap finish, I am not just saying it because I don't like it, I am saying it because all company's will use the cheapest materials possible to make there product while maintaining the lie that they are giving you quality. Gibson is not special when it comes to this, as I really do mean all company's do it. Another reason I want to see new finishes is, everyone I have ever met wants there guitar to be special and to reflect them personally. It used to be that you would have to put stickers on it or strip the paint of and refinish it, or bang it up and all that. But offering new finishes makes this less of a issue, sure they will make millions of the Blueberry Burst, which I like by the way, but at least it doesn't look like your great grandads guitar. So to me, I want to see new finishes on these guitars along with the same old finishes that people have been taught to love. .. I can honestly go on and on about finishes, but considering its not likely anyone will read even this and I am wasting my time to write this out, I should stop here. lfaf
Bravo! I love the Nitro finishes Gibson uses, but I also like the Poly finish options for some of my Fender Guitars. My Strat Deluxe gets the bulk of my daily abuse, and it sports a nice Poly finish (and a bolt-on maple neck) making it almost bullet proof. While I also love my Les Paul, I baby it because it has a more delicate Mahogany neck, and a nitro finish that literally "breathes" and which requires a little extra love to keep looking nice. :)
Here's an idea. Don't even get a Gibson. Get a Heritage guitar, made in Kalamazoo Michigan, by the original Gibson makers. Don't get a Gibson. Get a Heritage.
There are many Les Paul copies and similar designs that would easily rival Gibson's offerings if you slapped a pair of SD or Dimarzio pickups in it and gave it a thorough setup.
watching this in 2023 and one thing that i gotta ask is why be mad that gibson is trying to innovate its stuff with features that some guitar brands think is somewhat standard. plus its cool to see colors besides the old and ugly tobacco burst.
@@SPotter1973idk i feel like the modern should be the one to be called the standard since they have traditional and class lines going all the time that cover the historic aspect. kinda like how a 'standard' jag or jm from fender arent the traditional ones
You are talking nonsense man, Gibson must stay ahead of the game, the Les Pauls are the most copied guitars in the world so if they keep doing the same thing over and over they will end up failling. The Standard with all those features are great and flexible, if you want a basic Gibson which was the Standard years ago and as mentioned in the video you still have a model like that and is called traditional. And modern players don't want to have ten guitars anymore, at least for live use, ins't it much better to take one guitar only to gigs then to carry dozen guitars every time? That is what the Standard is focused on and you don't get it.
Jimmy Page would beg to differ with your opinion about splitting the pickups on a Les Paul. His #1 has them and more and he used it to record most of the classic Zeppelin songs and play massive concerts. And, why are you using live shows as your sole point of proof? How about recording? Not everyone wants multiple guitars, some people want a versatile instrument to cover tons of tonal ground. And yeah, while initially the switching configuration may seem complicated, I would think when you own one and get to know it, it would become second nature. What if you want to have the Peter Green sound but not all the time? And regarding the designation, Les Paul Standard, you do realize in 1961 the Les Paul Standard was an SG right? Are you outraged about that too?
@@anestis5742 Fender tried different design concepts in the past. They all flopped. The Meteora is just a Telecaster with a different body design. Revolutionary ? And I really don't see the point of a Stratocaster with push button switches on the pot controls. The Strat already has a five way switch, for five different tones. Its enough. The American Standard Strats and Teles, had the best neck profile ever, and they changed it ! Fortunately the new Player series, made in Mexico, has the same specs as the American Standard series, previously made in Corona. The only change being the Player series pickups in place of the custom shop Fat 50s. I will be buying Mexican from now on, and recently purchased a Mexican Strat. Don't get me wrong, I love Fender, owning 7 of their guitars. BUT, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, Fender.
kjatexas it’s not ‘just a Tele with a different body design’.. obviously it’s not revolutionary but at least they are trying to come up with smth new .. u will never know if there will be a better guitar than a strat or a tele if nothing new is gonna be released u know what I mean? We all know Gibson is in big trouble lately and they are just taking a risk Many people won’t like dip switches but some other may.. I’ll have to agree that maybe it’s a little unnecessary and it’ll sure be hella confusing .. but I haven’t tried it out myself so I’m not judging I’m just telling u that it is an upgrade (which isn’t always a good thing)
Whole video is a giant appeal to tradition logical fallacy. None of these changes are gonna make the guitar play worse, all they do is add more options. Not sure why more options is a bad thing to some people
Can't you still buy a standard 50s or 60s Les Paul for 2019? Isn't that a more 'traditional' standard? I dunno', I quite like the idea of a Les Paul that sounds like a Les Paul but has the potential to adapt the sound in different ways. Sounds pretty flexible to me, and I like guitars that give you more tonal options. I'm actually thinking of buying a new Les Paul and I've been looking at the 2019 Standard, but I have to say I'm not a real Les Paul lover or follower (although I do have a 2003/04 Les Paul Classic), I just like them as I like a lot of other guitars, so maybe I'm not as troubled about the changes as a real aficionado or connoisseur might be. I do think though that there's nothing wrong with adapting products, even guitars, to be more relevant in the future. Times change, music changes, nothing stands still so I don't have a problem with change and adaptation. I believe if you don't change you die, that's pretty much a key rule of evolution I think.
This is 100% correct. NOBODY buys a Les Paul to sound like a Strat. There are too many different models, tribute, studio, classic, and 'T' - whatever that means. Gibson needs to look at what Fender has done with price and quality. At Fender, quality has gone up drastically while prices have stayed the same or dropped. All Gibson needs to do is what Fender is doing, no crazy robot tuners, dip switches and push-pull pots. Just give us a Classic Vibe Les Paul made in China for $400, a standard Les Paul made in Mexico for $750, a standard Les Paul made by machine in Nashville for $1,000, a Les Paul made by hand using traditional methods in Nashville for $2,000, a custom shop Les Paul made by the finest craftsmen using the best tonewoods for $3,500 and ditto for all other models. Give us choices in quality for price, not new modern features for an old technology. Then give us one new model to try out that is completely different - maybe computerized with no traditional pickups and guitar modeling for example.
I think part of the problem is: Gibson KNOWS there are these rich idiots out there that are _willing_ to pay $3,500 for a shoddy-made guitar (shoddy as far as the guitar itself, not electronics). Because the people who can spend that much aren't that good at guitar, don't play that often, and wouldn't know the difference between a *real* quality-built guitar and these Gibsons.
@@Vichedges I agree with everything you said. I now have a PRS (USA-made, but relatively modest cost) with which I can fairly well approximate the tone of an LP, Strat, or Tele for the price of one guitar. OR, I can sound like a PRS, which also is pretty cool. And all of the U.S. manufacturers make decent foreign guitars at a reasonable price under their own name or a subsidiary name like Epiphone.
My first video course, The Tone Course is now available check it out below!
flatfiv.co/collections/rhett-shull/products/the-tone-course
Gibson has been giving RUclips people sponsored guitars to change their tune abs help build up the buzz for new Gibson guitars.
One problem though, Gibson still has super dry fret board and fret sprout and terrible binding nibs scrape jobs, finish drips on binding rosewood fret boards not fully seated on the neck with gaps between the maple neck and rosewood fretboard, among many other problems that make these guitars far too expensive for what you get. Heritage Is still making superior instruments and so is PRS but if Gibson can get a bunch of buzzword RUclips people to use the guitars in the videos they will get the attention in hopes the attention turns into sales!
So in the end your exclamation of Gibson's poor craftsmanship paid off because they just gave you $3,000 les Paul to join the dark side and tow the corporate line, which you did perfectly and will be rewarded for by Gibson with guitar's and maybe cash for a couple videos.
@@AuntAlnico4 I've owned two Gibsons in my life. A '72 Black Beauty Custom LP and '80 Explorer E2 ....sold the 72 for a ridiculous low price back then and still regret it today. Toured with the Explorer and it was a workhorse that I beat the shit out of. I wouldn't buy a Gibson today for the money they ask without trying at least 10 of them out before hand and it is still too much money! for that kind of money, a PRS is a much better model , even the cheap PRS's have basically zero issues. Gibson had it's day...now they are overpriced and underwhelming.
If you push/pull and dip the wrong combo it turns into a Decepticon.
LMAO!
Dude, they're not supposed to know that. Keep your voice down!
Perfect Answer 🙌
Or you launch a couple of ICBM's somewhere in the world as the sequence is activated.
😂😂
“Call it the Les Paul Modern”
Congratulations, you're a prophet
Nicholas Fothergill they probably took the name from this vid cos I know for a fact they* watched this 😂
@@stevewilson9778 I've been looking at the new fenders and you're 100% right. They saw what people really liked and wanted, and re-branded it as something completely different. That's why I'm building a Warmoth and putting a pre-wired pick guard on it. You get sooo much more guitar for the money when its done. And have exactly what you want.
Good, Gibson is listening, my faith in them has returned
1. Buy Les Paul Traditional
2. Put "standard" truss rod cover on it.
+Marty Shwaartz: all in all, this is the thing people should do. I understand why people want a "Standard" name on a Les Paul: it's iconic. Probably what their guitar idols used. No beloved player used a "Traditional" Les Paul. So, change the truss rod cover, and be happy.
But the Les paul Standart often has nicer and higher graded tops than the traditional so its still unfair to us conservative players that just want a standart "standart" and don't want to spend 5k on the cc
@@aaron99man It is a typo, or more accurately a typographical error. It's when you try to spell a word and make an error. If you remove the T at the end of Standart and replace it with a D you end up with the word Standard, as in the Gibson Les Paul Standard.
I'm guessing he is german or eastern european and english is not his first laungage, it's pretty common for germanic languages to use a T instead of a D due to the pronunciation in german being closer to a T instead of a D.
I almost did that and realized it's getting more iconic to have the truss rod cover say "Traditional" on it. lol
RUclipsrs: “Gibson is so behind the times. They don’t add modern features or innovate in any way!”
Gibson: * adds modern features and innovates. *
RUclipsr: “why are there all these switches? I don’t want to make my Les Paul sound like other guitars at the flick of a switch!”
Gibsons new motto is....."If it ain't broke.......fix it until it is"...
+jocko john: Man that is so on the money. Well-played, sir.
Somehow, I just knew Gibson wouldn't learn a thing from Chapter 11. If they keep doing stuff like this LP, they'll never recover.
Lol
ROFL.
That made my day JJ!
I want my new Les paul to have a kazoo rack attachment
I would love it if they put a vanity mirror on the back of it.
Mine has an ash tray and cigarette holder
@M.r. Moon ha ha ha ha ha NO KIDDING!!!! Yall crazy!!!
Hahaahaha true!
LOL
When I want my LP to sound like a Stratocaster. ..... I put it back on the rack, and get my stratocaster out. =D
...unless you don't like the feel of a strat,... then what do you do?
@@Nightdare have you play a strat...? you can bend twice the width with the same effort, but then again my dream would be a strat setup with a gibs fretboard and an ibanez neck.... where in japan can i get this?
@@Nightdare play drums 😂🙈
Adam z... that's because you fender has 9 gauge strings... and your fingers are probably soft
@@Quietly_Loud Try an older ESP vintage plus preferably the reliced one. 12 inch radius, very nice modern neck profile Seymour duncan ssl1 set. I went to the shop to buy an american standard that day but it felt like a toy compared to the ESP.
I like the push-pulls, the locking tuners and the 57's in my 2010 professional. I can get beautiful clean tones from that thing and it never goes out tuning.
But I totally agree that Gibson should reserve the Standard name for a 58 based model. Simple, beautiful and efficient.
Funny thing that Jimmy Page used these extras on his 59 burst 😂
They could have given it a rainbow paint job and call it the "Ru Paul". I would have bought one, then.
Holy shit dude. LMFAOOOOO
That is funny!
Make it Sky blue with white pickguard and headstock and call it "Les Smurf"
I would legit buy one
No! No! You can’t say that! That is too funny to be uttered. This man does not need a metronome...his timing is perfect!
Gibson....the Harley Davidson of guitars
That's why I love Honda Goldwings!
the 911 of guitars
Truth
yep , still love the fxdls though.
Smoked, Harley puts out solid bikes year after year, just because they dabble with different tech doesn't mean there garbage. A lot of their new stuff is actually pretty cool and super fun to ride.
Here's my take. Look at the namesake: Les Paul himself. He was an innovator and an envelope pusher. Without him, we might all still recording full band in one room with one mic and hoping for the best. Who knows where we'd be without Les trying new things and defying the "traditional" die hards.
I'm all for Gibson trying something new and attempting to set a new "standard," simply because I think that's a fantastic way to honor the man that originally inspired the whole line. Les didn't sit back satisfied with the status quo, why should his guitar?
Innovation would be sweet. But the question is what are the changes that could be usefull.
Imo.:
1: Changing the headstock angle & the tuner location(so that the strings are not bend as much after the nut)
2: adding a bit to the scale lengh (for stable down tunings)
I mean even the epiphone adresses at least the headstock angle ...
The problem with gibsons les pauls isn't their "bad sound" but tuning stability (especially with down/drop tunings that are veeeerrryyy popular with punk/rock/metal/... today)
I've got a lot of respect for Les Paul the guy, not the guitar (the guitar is fine for a 1950s era design, I don't think it stands up as well against some more modern designs). He was a genius who came up with some genuinely clever solutions to real musical problems of his day and age. There's nobody else who's been inducted both into the American Inventor's Hall of Fame and the Rock & Roll hall of fame.
@M.r. Moon The SG wasn't the end-all, be-all of Guitars. The SG was an attempt by Gibson to produce a double-cut guitar to compete with Fender's Stratocaster. But the guys at Gibson never understood the point of the Stratocasters double-cut shape (down-scaled from the P-bass where it premiered) was to make the guitar balance properly, despite having a lighter body (because of the tremolo cavity). As a result, the SG ended up balancing even worse than the Les Paul, thanks to the thinner body. A bunch of guys like Angus Young played them to great results despite the shortcomings of the design, but you shouldn't let Gibson off the hook just because some players worked around them. It was a bad design that could've easily been corrected by just slightly changing the body shape and moving the strap pins.
@M.r. Moon I just as soon string my coffee table as play an SG, but that's my preference. I don't see how that had anything to do with the video or my comment, though.
Have you ever seen the guitars that Les Paul played? They're nothing like the regular guitars that Gibson makes.
Hope one of those 500 combinations turns it into a theremin.
The thing is, nobody really knows that yet. It might turn the LP into a grand piano, an aeroplane or gravel. Everything is possible in the 2019 HP Les Paul Standard
if only it could tune itself, mid song to dadgad, then raise the action in open E for slide, automatically at the touch of the hidden fret switches
@@krisberntzen lmao
So, they don't want to be copied,but they are happy to copy 'sounds' that are unique to other company's products?......
The contradiction is painful. It's also funny that they don't want to be copied. The chinese have already their hands on it so, no ones gonna stop making copies anytime soon. Even I have a LP copy.
I wouldn't mind my Gibson being a gibson and also capable of sounding like other guitars. Doesn't prs have the same thing?
I mean play authentic right?
"Old man yells at dip switches"
That don't exist, swatting at floaters thinking that they are gnats.
This video reminds me of the classic joke:
How many guitarists does it take to change a lightbulb?
Two. One to change the lightbulb, and one to stand there and complain about how much better the old ones were.
How many guitarists does it need to change the strings?
One to change the strings
and
99 more to complain about how they would've done it.
I think still one of the main complaints of Gibson is the damn price a standard american made Gibson costs the same as a lot of custom shop Fenders.
I invite anyone to use an inflation calculator on guitar prices, like Kieth Williams (5 Watt World) does in his short history videos. You will find that prices have barely gone up. Example I just did today, $159 for a LP Special in 1958 is $1570 in 2021. And what is the price of a Gibson USA non CS Special today?
@@davetoepfer inflation calculators are not accurate
And honestly the Fender custom shop are better made guitars all around. Ever since the Obama wood scandal the Gibson's are very prone to neck twisting.
@@taylorjeremy71 No wages have not stayed the same, genius.
They just need to match the neck resonance to the body resonance so you don't get that gronky lifeless tone . Bought a Les Paul in the eighties sounded dead , It's still going on today !
As someone who owns a 2019 standard, it’s actually my number one best playing guitar against many others I’ve built or restored over the years, including a Gibson traditional. They each have their nuances. The pickups and such are lack luster, but the quality and craftsmanship are all there where it counts. Bottom line, I played the standard for many hours before purchase and knew it was a keeper because I simply couldn’t put it down.
M@ I agree, I bought a 2019 Standard & it’s great. No flaws, well made, sounds great, plays great
100% unlike This ass hat Rhett, I have not only played one I own one and I love it.
I love mine. He’s totally missed the fact that with all buttons down it has a 50s Les Paul tone.
I own one, also. Absolutely a great guitar. BTW, no cosmetic defects whatsoever. Rhett, if you cannot understand how a Les Paul Modern works which this is with the push pulls, you need some help. Haha.
Gibson is catering to all of those customers who come in the store and say: i want that strat sound. Show me your les pauls.
Jesus
That came in on their 2019 Harleys.
I don't get it.... The complaints aren't about the playability, it's about how they aren't keeping the standard traditional? Isn't that what the traditional series is for? Guitar tech can't move ahead because of people like you. This isn't even a Gibson fanboy speaking.
Standard should never stand for Tradition, it should stand for where the company stands in the present day. Want heritage? That's what the traditional series is for. So long as it plays well, sounds good, and is reasonably priced, I'm up for it. I want guitar tech to keep moving.
And that's my only gripe with Gibson right now. They charge premium prices for their STANDARD models.
I didn't think I would, but I actually find myself agreeing with your opinion on this. Traditional should stand by its meaning and the Standard is where they should be moving forward. Or at least have variations of the wiring etc. ✌💙🎸
well, i agree on the pricing part. especially when you factor in the spotty quality control. remember last year, the blueberry burst was the model with the most issues
@chippster stephens "Sure the car came with an engine that didn't start but I swapped it out and it works fine now"
See that's the problem. You pay so much for something that doesn't work from the get go. I can understand that for a guitar that costs 100 bucks but for 3-4k, no.
Gibson wants to do guitars at a premium, they better make sure it gives premium performance straight from the factory. Otherwise bring the damn price down. Problem is and never was with the specs.
@chippster stephens I didn't ever say they were doing fine, I said that they will do fine with this direction so long as the guitars played from the factory.
3 years later i rewatch this and still laugh at iPaul
As ridiculously similar to the e-Mustang from Ford. What kind of marketing insanity is that?! I can PROMISE Ford, people who want a Mustang WON'T buy this Aztec ugly car!!
I look back at this video and laugh. It has so many contradictions. The standard has now become the custom shop. The custom shop has become Murphy Lab. And the prices are outrageous. So much for traditional and pure. The simpler the guitar gets the more expensive.
Gibson's trend in guitar design reminds me of the time Homer Simpson designed his own car.....
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 you hit the nail on the head there buddy 🤟🏼🕶🤟🏼 nice one 👍
Spot on!
I'll bet you're still mad minorities can vote and women have jobs.
With what was it like 12 horns lol
@@guntherabrahamowicz4659 WTF?
In their defense, the push pull coil split isn't that bad. It's something I'd add to my guitar... But I understand your point
So many buttons though. I am sure there are people that would remember all the combos, I however am not one of them.
@@josephthibault6999 what I think it's cool is the coil split thing. Now, 25 combinations isn't a thing that many guitar players would want (I've seen strats with 7 or 9 pickups combinations, but they're specific mods that their owners make). To me, the coil split is a cool thing, if you want to save yourself a guitar (maybe money, space or both) again, I agree it's a bonus
@@Fidozo15 to me 25 different tones isn't even enough
@@Mr.Goldbar lol that's what I mean. Maybe this new LP is your thing. Maybe not, Idk
@@Fidozo15 to me a Strandberg with Fishman Fluence pickups, voicing switching and individual split functions for every pickup with the ability to choose the coil I want to be working would be perfect
I'm just happy that Gibson isn't one of those companies that makes the same shit every year, I like the new Les Paul. Pls don't attack me.
I Agree. I had no interest in a Les Paul until they fixed the neck, heel and weight issues. With my 2018 HP, I have finally found a Les Paul that I like.
yea if you want a gibson name to stand for something you should just buy the les paul traditional, traditional is much more authentic sounding than standard
Red Toaster- Exactly- Company's can't win these days , they release something new and all the traditionalists say, it's shit! They release the same old product for decades and people get tired/ bored with it and accuse the company of not moving with the times......
This is actually the first I am hearing of this model. (I'm a little out of touch these days.) I like that they are thinking outside of the box here. I think the versatility is cool. I do agree that it should not be labeled as the "Standard" model. This seems more like a specialty guitar.....one that I would buy.....but a specialty guitar.
But are you gonna buy it?
Got one. Septermber 2019 serial. No relief, 4,4 kilos, fat neck 50's, beautiful sounding, awesome playability.
Perfect guitar. Got a 1980's LP, not even close. 2019 is a good year. That's for sure.
I got recently the 2018's LP Classic goldtop with two P90s and no weight relief as well. It seems that Gibson has stepped into the right direction with these 2018-2020 models.
No weight relief, as in unmodified mahogany? I don’t know if they do anything to alleviate the weight of the ash bodies, but I got a 2019, and it might be the best Guitar I’ve ever owned, and that is being out in early 80s SG and a solid ash telecaster Frankenstein that I loved
Electric players seem to constantly chase a mythical "tone". I think they're catering to those never-satisfied tone chasers.
If they're looking for that tone from the guitar itself, then they already failed in their quest. Tone comes from your fingers and, mostly, your amplifier/effects.
@@Axess-sv8nq exactly. the only thing on the guitar that affects tone is the pickups really. yes you can argue the wood affects it and it probably does but its such a miniscule amount that it doesn't even matter.
@The Devious Duck - It's like the argument over types of capacitors. That's nearly as bad as the 'tonewood' nonsense. It's just certain companies using junk science and exaggeration to sell more expensive instruments. You need the hearing of a dog to tell the difference! But, people can convince themselves of anything if they want to bad enough. And they defend it until like their lives depend on it!
Except tone isn’t mythical. To say that it is, you would have to be pretty ignorant.
Don’t be pretty ignorant.
The Devious Duck if you put Gibson pickups on an epiphone Les Paul standard then compare it with a true Gibson, plug them into same pedals&s, you’ll find the difference. In fact wood still matters.
Guitar Players: Gibson don't innovate, dead in the water, making the same product for 70 years.
Also Guitar Players: WTF Gibson I don't want this tech stuff. Just give me a simple 50's Les Paul.
The lack of quality control is a valid complaint, but the innovation thing is just something little scooter bitches about because he wants an 8 string instead of his grandpas Gibson. They were the first ones I know of who used baked maple for the fretboards and I see that on all kinds of guitars since they did. They also made the memory cable.
No we want metal zero fret nut with a shaved down neck joint with more secure headstock break angle. These are the real innovation that gibson is missing out on and when they do actually have some of these innovation, they force a damn cancerous mini etuner on the damn thing.
Thats not innovation, thats catch up. Other people are already doing all of those things and have for a while.
yes "innovation" my bad.
Bingo. they can't win.
I'm confused about your complaint, which seems mostly about semantics. They're experimenting with technology on one of 5 different LP's they offer. Don't like, don't buy it.
I think his over arching point about Gibson's attitude and direction still stands! I mean... c'mon!
+rob oliver: The issue seems largely to be that all this new-fangled nonsense is being pushed as the LP STANDARD. Which is also IMO the wrong way to go.
If Gibson wants to make a niche LP, great...call it the LP Modern lineup. Or the LP Tomorrow lineup...whatever.
Just don't call it the LP Standard with all these crap-tastic "features".
@@joesatchton212 You just proved his point: it IS about semantics then. If calling this the Les Paul Standard is all that is making people livid, then it's really not worth arguing about. It's just a name. Gibson-bashing has become a hobby and people will find anything they can to complain about.
Nah man... Actually the company attitude always comes before the semantics of it all, not the other way around... There is so much more to it than that! I really think that is kinda missing the point. Given Gibson's recent history and current state id say it's not bashing if it's justified. As a company they ARE confused, they're trying to be the competition instead of doing what THEY do best. That STB (printed straight to board) circuit is one of the worst ideas in the history of guitars! I'm a Les Paul player, I love it, but to be honest I think Gibson will always struggle from here on in
+Tango Whisky: As much as I would like to think semantics don't matter, we both know that they can and often do in terms of modern marketing techniques.
Samsung S9 or S9+. Apple Macbook Pro [which triggered even Apple fanboys when it turned out that the Macbook Pro is anything but "pro"]. BMW M5. All basic examples of how marketing semantics can drive [or repel] consumer interest.
I agree with Rhett simply because the word "Standard" should imply something meaningful IMO. Just as a Les Paul Custom implies something. Or a Fender Strat Custom Shop. Or a PRS 10 Top. "Standard" implies a consistent, across the board experience or fundamental product specification.
Don't know about you but I have absolutely zero interest in this kind of a Les Paul Standard with these finds of questionable features. I might, however, have some level of interest in exploring a Les Paul Modern with these kind of specs.
Different strokes....
Bottom line: I think we all obviously like or care about Gibson as a guitar brand to some degree or another. So we all really want the same thing - to see Gibson do well and live up to its many decades of overall quality and historical heritage.
cheers!
I’d say you were 100% accurate and Gibson noticed. They heeded your warning and the new Standards are fantastic.
They totally fixed it. I got a a les Paul standard (60s) which now they offer two standards I guess but in different original configurations, and I love that guitar. The quality has changed also, a lot better than some of the guitars from the era where they were stamping the year on the back of the headstock.
@@carlosp7233 Now just install some Throwbaks or Monty pickups?
The blueberry burst looks great. Why wouldn't I want split coils on a Les Paul. That's a great feature.
That's understandable. But why would that feature be on a Standard model?
star man I mean, why wouldn't it? I don't own a Gibson, so I am by no means a fanboy, but this is a smart move for them. Coil splitting is a standard feature is most modern guitars today. I don't use it very often, but it's great to have when it's there. I just think it's a strange complaint to say Gibson shouldn't add modern features (that are unobtrusive). I never ever use my volume or tone knobs--they're unnecessary for my playing. But I never would complain that they're there. Gibson has TWO volumes and tones--even worse--but why should I complain about an added feature? It's there if I ever need it. Same is true with the coil split. This makes the Les Paul more versatile and modern without changing anything ro the core design or sound. If you don't like coil splits, you don't have to use it, just like I never use my tone knob.
I have it on most my Les Pauls since 2014. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, shockingly difficult to comprehend.
He’s gotta whine to get views
star man Are you serious? It literally adds a function and takes away nothing. Why would anyone complain about adding function to a standard?
On the other hand...you guys were very vocal about Gibson doing the same stuff over and over, but when he finally does something different, you say that it would be better to do the same thing over again? I'm confused:) playing the devil's advocat here.
I’ve never faulted them for building guitars the way they have in the past, not sure who you’re referring to here.
the problem was that gibson would bring out the same product without fixing ongoing issues with their guitars, like tuning instability, poor craftsmanship etc. what they're doing now is even worse because they are giving us products with features no one asked for and still have not fixed the issues that have plagued their guitars for decades, and lets not even talk about the god awful finishes.
exactly, like robot tuners...no one wants it and it doesn't work anyway. Make a guitar that actually stays in tune better. It's too high a price for something plagued with problems. The circuitry makes working on it yourself, which most of us have to do, nearly impossible without spending a bunch of money.
Gibson is a corporation not a "he"
I remember Andertons offering free replacements if you bought a set of grovers with your robot Les Paul because of the controversy.
Gibson has one problem...too expensive. It’s the elephant in the living room.
I'll second that. I love Gibson's but you practically need to take a loan out to afford one. Even their cheap ones are out of reach. And that's Why Fender sells so many guitars. They're not even that good. They just cheap
@@dirtywater5336 I saw a video of a dude saying that, if you play a guitar and you feel in love with it, you cant get away without it, if I play a les paul and feel in love with it, I know its already an impossible love, that is gibson guitars in a nutshell, thats why I love ibanez for example, their guitars are amazing, and some of their guitars have a stupidly low price for what they offer, so if you feel in love with an ibanez guitar, you are probably going to buy it and be happy with it, its sad to say, but in 3 years, gibson is going to be dead for sure.
That's why I play Epiphone. Thinking about some Seymour Duncan pickups for it. Tricking out an Epiphone Les Paul or SG is good enough.
I agree. I dont understand how a piece of wood with simple electronics costs around 3k? Like how..
Sounds like something a poor person would say. I'm 24, and I bought a 2020 Standard brand new. Sure, not everyone can justify $3k for a guitar, but the point of the Standard is that it's an aspirational guitar. It's a flagship. Not everyone can afford a Audi R8, does that mean the company is gonna go under? Nah, they sell more basic models that are affordable. A LP studio is just as obtainable as an American Fender. $3k isn't even really a lot of money, it's a month and a half of work at an entry level job.
Just curious which of the 500 switch combinations would make it sound like a Les Paul? Lol
Haha best comment
priceless
@@kenichi407 yessir I was 😏 a joke founded in reality.
You set the dip switches once, and leave them. They give you a tuned coil-tap or a true coil split option,
and filters for the tone pots. That's it. Tuned Coil taps are what they are... , and those tone filters are optional.
So just choose coil-split with the filters off, and you're all done inside the cavity. 😏
Honestly, I love the blueberry burst.
the surf green is gorgeous too, and i usually dont like green guitars.
Its okay at best. Does not suit the "standard" model in my opinion.
well stop it
Go get a opl
Tom zebroski Woodsboro Maryland I love the blueberry burst
So much wrong with this video. I find it funny how music is supposed to be audible entertainment, but when a company comes around tries to give musicians tonal flexibilty the arguments against it are "looks", "tradition" and "heritage". Somehow, a guitar that is able to sound like both a Les Paul or a Strat is now a bad thing. These aren't logical or musically-based criticisms. This is everything I hate about musicians.
I think it is much more about the name STANDARD for a guitar that is not standard any more. Standard with simple but good tuners, wiring and pickups. That would be a good Standard. Call this new guitars 2019 Les Paul Modern PlugNPlay...
So we're mad because of the name? How petty.
Not mad but I understand the point of view. I have personally a german Gibson called Framus :-)
when the headstock says “Dickhead” you’ll get to call them anything you choose
Gibson made the Standard series become something entirelly diferent ages ago (in 2009 if im not mistaken)
The TRUE Standard is now the traditional. If you want a STANDARD Les Paul, get the traditional, or pre-2009 standard.
Thats a problem, yes. Changing a model without changing it's name, but the standard (basic les paul) still exists.
Funny. The push/pull configuration didnt seem to be an issue for Jimmy Page.
said Robert
And he knows how to play apprently
Who's Jimmy page??
He played the triangle on Dont Fear the Reaper. Helluva triangle player.
@@SDFitz shit that's pretty neat.
Got a 2020 60’s standard coming in today. None of the bs circuitry, just an old school LP. Excited!
Obviously click bait by riding the hate Gibson bandwagon.
I understand a lot of Gibson fans want a very traditional instrument, but if the player doesn't want to use the coming innovations they don't have to. They're not detrimental to the instrument of you don't touch them. I can understand the dislike for robotic tuners as they are visually different, but when all the bells and whistles are internal and do nothing as long as you let them be? That's just illogical reasoning.
As far as the paintjob, I understand people want their classic bursts and ebony and flame tops and gold tops. That's understandable, but what is wrong with variety? I personally think the new colors look awesome, but I do think they should've kept their staple looks.
The real issue with Gibson when it comes to models is the lines are very blurred in terms of trims. It's incredibly difficult to keep track of where an instrument sits in terms of prestige in comparison to other companies.
Also, I can't believe you're complaining about the weight relief when the next video that played in my cue was you on Rick Beato's video "GIBSON LES PAUL VS FENDER STRAT | A CLOSER LOOK" literally complaining about the weight of Les Pauls and the reason you sold yours was because it gave you shoulder pain.
Be honest, this video is you just reaching for views, making you sound like a hypocrite again. I mean, do I need to mention your Silver Sky video too?
Couldn't have said it better. Finally a comment which is calling out his bs
You have a poor grasp of Gibson history. Gibson has always pushed the boundaries. The Les Paul Standard always changed. '52 trapeze tailpiece, p90s, 53,54 wraparound bridge, 56 tune-o-matic, 57 humbuckers, 58-60, sunburst finish, 61- 63 SG body. So 9years after it's introduction it was unrecognisable. The neck to body angle changed from 2 to 5 degrees in that time. No standard made from 63 to 68. '68 the 56 model is back but with a 14% headstock pitch and a different neck set angle than orig. '69 it gets a big headstock and looses the long neck tennon and the cool top carve, and gets mini buckers and three piece neck. (Yeh I know'Deluxe').1970 it gets a pancake body. It goes on and on. Tar backs, Shaw's, Bill Lawrences, Klusons, Grovers, Schallers, threaded bridge inserts, Nashville Tuneomatic, volutes, years of those 300k pots,3 piece Maple necks etc etc etc. The one that everyone wants to call 'the Standard's is just from a small timeframe in the models development. So, it's probably more correct to call the one we all like, the Traditional, and the one they mess with, the Standard.And yes I know, Gibson haven't always called it the Standard but I hope you get my drift
Good points. It's an interesting question, as to whether the experimentation and innovation Gibson pursued in earlier decades (when they had significantly less serious competition) is going to work for them in the 21st century. There's a lot less at stake when you change up the design of a guitar that debuted 5-10 years ago vs changing a guitar that's been on the market for 60-70 years and is considered one of 3-4 iconic electric guitar designs. I don't really care what they do, but I'm fascinated by how the guitar marketplace functions vs. that for automobiles or for other recreational / tech durable goods like watches or phones.
@@jesusonazareth4752 I suppose my point is - Which design shouldn't they change? There have been continual changes of spec and design in 66 years. We all think of the Standard as being 1 piece solid mahogany body, 1 piece mahogany neck with 1&11/16" nut width and 17% headstock pitch, bound rosewood fretboard with 12" radius, block inlays. 2 piece bookmatched maple top with German carve, PAF style humbuckers with 4 X 500k pots, Tuneomatic, stop tail. It's rarely been that in 66years.
Make your point respectfully without the subtle slam “you have a poor grasp”. That first sentence nullifies your credibility. A word to the wise...
@@picassoboy52 Fair point. Probably should have said that history didn't necessarily support his point of view.
I added push/pull pots to my les paul and love it...more tonal options.
What is Your Cause Me too. It’s epic... especially if you combine it with out of phase and series/parallel.
You get to choose your tonal options that way--stuff you use instead of selecting from an absurdly long menu. I'm in the middle of a build that's going to have a push-pull master tone because I want to be able to switch caps on the fly. I don't expect that standard on a guitar.
Brilliant! That's just wrecked the video. Make the same old stuff = bad make new stuff = bad. You guys have the right idea, make it YOUR instrument.
Good for studio tho
I prefer single coils in an LP. It doesn’t sound like a Strat to me. After all, it did have P90s originally in 1953.
This is actually a really good example of why Gibson is screwed. They pushed the Heritage marketing propaganda so well that their most loyal customers won't accept change, yet selling the same guitar for 70 years just isn't enough anymore. So what can they do? I guess they could become super litigious and sue anyone with a guitar that remotely resembles a Gibson, that way the only way to get a Les Paul style guitar is to pay Gibson for one. No way that could snowball or blow up in their face...
4:31 should sum it for you... This is a standard not a traditional... Useless rant, if you don’t like it, don’t buy it.
Rocco Rodriguez 🙏 preach. I don’t get why people moan about it. They’re not gonna by buy it any way so dont worry about it lol
While you’re not wrong, the argument is not important. Gibson got in this whole mess because they dumped money into R&D for guitars that had diminishing returns, because nobody wanted them (ie, robot tuners). This guitar is just the latest version. If they continue with guitars like this, they’ll file chapter 11 again within the next decade.
@@feedingfiction smh Robo tuners what an abomination. it will try to "tune you up" if you play an open tuning. what a disaster.
I actually like all the push pull pots on my 2018 standard. Ive used it in gigs now without switching out guitars. I love it. To each his own.
Nooo, Rhett hates it, you suck!
So the crux of your argument is boiled down to a truss rod cover and marketing? I think you’re making a mountain out of a mole hill. The Traditional is your answer and Gibson does make it abundantly clear who the Traditional is for. I can’t find anything terribly wrong with the 2019 lineup in so far as models and features. The color offerings for the studio and tribute don’t get me excited, I think the old faded brown was more inspiring than BBQ.The big disappointment is price, you’d think it would held steady for a year, but their price increases are like clock work. Further to that the prices are approaching PRS. Just compare the S2 SC to the Tribute or Studio. To me Gibson’s salvation is to tighten quality and make sure every guitar is stage ready, similar marketing to PRS which will quietly change the current negative sentiment about their quality. Then hopefully in 2020 things will be looking up for them on all fronts.
Michael Trevino yeah but what if you don't want a 50s neck and you want a slim taper them what Micheal you tell me ok cause i want hear it i would hate a baseball bat neck
Michael Trevino There aren't very many people who buy new Gibsons, period. There are even fewer people to buy new LP Standards. LP Standards have a long history of, well, being and sounding like LP Standards. You will probably disagree with me, but I would be willing to bet that most people who ever have or who ever will buy a Les Paul Standard want, well, a Les Paul Standard. Most people don't buy LP Standards because it can sound like other guitars. If I want a guitar that sounds like a Telecaster, I would buy a Tele. Oh, wait, I did. If I want a guitar that sounds like a Les Paul Standard, I could buy one. Oh, wait, I did that, too. I bought my Tele new, and I found a used LP in mint condition. I will never buy a new Gibson; they are over priced because Gibson has lost their minds.
Gibson's problems are their quality control, price and fans. People who expect the Standard to be the old style les paul are extremelly misinformed because thats the Traditional. Then theres the fact that you pay 3000U$ for a Gibson to have the chance of getting a instrument with major problems.
+Phelipe Costa 'extremely misinformed', huh? The Gibson Les Paul Standard was introduced in 1958, and ran through 1960 and was reintroduced in 1968. When were dip switches and push/pull knobs added to the Gibson Les Paul Standard?
@@jamesallen5591 Push/ Pull pots were added in 2009 to the Standard. The Dip Switch system has been on various Les Pauls for 4 or 5 years. Though there was this odd British chap named Jimmy Page I believe who added push pull pots and switches top HIS Les Paul early into his Zeppelin career. There was another British bloke named Peter Green who did similar odd things to HIS Les Paul. So it's been a fairly common thing to do to Les Pauls for DECADES. This is just a bunch of whining. Sorry but a flagship model SHOULD have advanced features. But guitar players just HATE change.
..."GET OF MY LAWN!" 🙄
So Gibson still offers all 50 of grandpa's Les Paul models that all look and mostly sound the same and don't have any of those new-fangled options that are so disturbing to you.
Seriously... none of the big guitar stores have replaced all of the 50 Les Pauls on their Les Paul walls with only modern glitter versions.
"They're adding options I didn't ask for!".... what a joke.
you’re complaining about diversity... if you want to just want to use 2 humbuckers then leave the push pull pots alone.. you’re way too upset that they’re giving it features that most mid-priced guitars have!
flipper2gv If you can solder the capacitor to the pot then doing it to a pcb takes very little extra effort. It can actually be easier depending on the PCB.
Panic42000 is right. i don't see the problem, that's just this years model, next year will be something else. Your standard Les Paul's have often changed throughout the years, it's just this time it's the electronics but in the past it might've been neck size or whatever. it's never been a guitar that stayed the same, that's why people seek out Les Paul's from certain years, because that particular year appeals to them and their needs. This one will also appeal to some people's needs and they will seek out this model. There's nothing in the history of Gibson to suggest they stick to the same pickups, electronics, neck size etc on their standard models. it's always been ever changing and this model is no different.
@@Panic42000, well said, the standard sets the STANDARD..so many idiots out there
@@averydeadhorse - I hope they don't use a lot of surface-mount parts, which most of us don't have the ability to repair or modify. On the other hand, they can build those circuit boards 100,000 at a time and get them for a very cheap unit price, so if it fails you can just unplug it and pop in a replacement. They could even sell them stand-alone for modding any guitar with 2 humbuckers. I wonder if you can already buy such a thing online? hmmm now I have to do a google search...
This reminds me of a conversation I had years ago with a luthier friend: guitarists are conservative. The vast majority of us don't want anything new. We just want the same old thing, expect then we complain the the 1970s models were the best, or the 1990s models were the best. Each new version appears worse than the last.
I don't think companies should rely on producing the same old thing all the time, but at the same time, Gibson fans don't really let the company freely experiment. There is a toxicity that goes both ways: the fans want the same old thing but complain when Gibson delivers. The fans want new stuff from Gibson but complain when Gibson delivers. Gibson ignores the fan and buyer base to do something different and they get shit on. This is easily the weirdest company-customer relationship I have ever seen.
I am not a huge fan of Gibson. I own a 2014 SG but prefer my Ibanez lawsuit SG over it, so I am trying to say this as a neutral observer. Do Gibson fans want the compnay to change, or not? Either way, most of you aren't going to be happy.
If you want a company that delivers more to you preferences, there are other smaller brands and independent luthiers who can give you what you want. Otherwise, why worry about what Gibson does?
Anyways, great video as usual.
Well said! Just a few years ago I remember seeing a lot of people saying that Gibson was building guitars that were way outdated and they needed to get with the modern world and update it's guitar designs to meet today's players wants and needs. Gibson listened and delivered a brand new fully modern guitar. Within no time at all everyone completely turned on them and became appalled that Gibson would ever change it's designs/specs in the 1st place. The same guys calling them outdated and antiquated just a few years back are now demanding 50's and 60's spec guitars. It's almost like no matter what direction the company goes, the majority will disapprove. I feel bad for Gibson, it's customer base can't be satisfied no matter what they do
It's funny because most of the people complaining are likely the same ones that will turn around and tell you "oh it doesn't matter what it says on the headstock as long as it plays great" etc. Well clearly it does matter what's on the headstock, otherwise you wouldn't have a bunch of people crying that it says "traditional" instead of "standard". My 2c is that Gibson is free to "set a new standard" (handy little expression for times like these, isn't it?) and people who want a guitar built in the traditional way can buy a traditional. Seems like it makes sense. The complaint that it would make more sense to have a "standard" and a "modern" instead is quite literally semantics. It would be effectively the same lineup, with the only exception being what the TR cover says.
I don't even particularly like Gibson to be perfectly honest, but my god do we (guitarists) sound like a bunch of pedantic fossils when we start throwing temper tantrums over a -1 cent- (sorry, 13 cent... 'Murica manufacturing etc) piece of plastic on the headstock.
I totally agree but I think the concern here is that people who love gibson don't want it spending millons to go experimental with traditional models instead of fixing some old and flawed design choices like the headstock or making new models
Exactly !
Leave the stanard to the purist, and the make the les Paul millenial series...with all the dip switches.....jus sayin
Maybe play it first, could be awesome. Kind of like reviewing a movie from the trailer.
Maybe you should stop ragging on Gibson for trying to come up with something a bit different. Why should they cater to your idea of what a Les Paul should be? There are millions of used traditional style LP's you could buy. This would be like Chevy keeping the Corvette the same since 1953 to maintain tradition. Sometimes tradition can be re-thought. I give Gibson credit for being a little bold, else things stay the same forever and ever.
Then they should bring out a new model for that, not mess with a classic. Most people want the classic.
I gotta through my hat in with Gibson here. If I could afford the 2019 Standard, I would want all of those features even knowing that I probably wouldn't regularly use a quarter of them. The more sounds I can get out of my gear, the better. It seems like your big complaint is that they didn't call the Traditional model the Standard, which is just kind of... silly.
I'm a Fender - PRS guy... but I can see your point, it's not "the Standard" of Les Paul.
@@DamianoftheRyans I've got 5 Gibson's and they are all great ! I got PRS se custom 22 and it's pretty good to but the Gibson have far stronger better fret work.
I must add that I don't like the new made in Indonesia prs se guitars, I only like the old Korean prs se and the USA ones for some reason, maybe the frets and necks are better proportioned for my hands?
I AGREE 100%. This new Les Paul shouldn't be the new standard....it should be Les Paul MODERN! That would actually be such a sick name!
no way these are fake innovations, real innovations would be a zero fret metal nut with a shaved down neck joint and a more ergonomic body on the back that is chambered. This would be the modern les paul but gibson isn't going to do that and if they do, they will throw one of those goddamn mini etuner cancer on it.
a real innovation would be a volute on the headstock (like old guild) and better tuner positions so the strings cross the nut right. Like PRS, Musicman etc.
It should get a unique shape and name like how the Les Paul Jr turned into the SG
@@hubblebublumbubwub5215 actually it was the Les Paul custom that later became the SG after les pulled his endorsement cuz he hated the shape. Ever seen a 1961 single cutaway Les Paul? Nope cuz the sg shape replaced the old one entirely in 1961.
@@ashleyjohansson230 just because they didn't fix certain things doesnt give the right to credit other very cool innovations
I don’t get why people hate the push pull switches, like if you don’t care for them just don’t use them.
So are the HH sounds still there? If so whats the problem? Buy a traditional if thats a problem for you.
The traditional which is more heavy than a bass
LittleJack2105 isn't that what he wants? A solid body les paul with no chambering whatsoever?
@@LittleJack2105 - That weight on the non-weight-relieved GLP is part of the tone. I did not know this when I bought my first electric guitar, a GLP Classic, which is weight-relieved at over 9 lbs. On the good side, I find that I really like the sound of a 335, which is mostly hollow except for the spar down the center of the body, and this Les Paul is a little closer to that sound than a Traditional. On the bad side, I don't quite get the full GLP experience.
I was at Sam ash the other day and they had a brand new traditional for around $2800 I believe. The thing looked gorgeous in the classic sunburst, but I couldn’t help but think that instead of wasting my money on that I could buy a used les Paul from the early 2000s or even 90s and still have extra spending money.
I think that’s why Gibson is struggling so much lately, the second hand market is too vibrant and quite frankly a better alternative for most players.
Yes, also for overseas players the prices are frankly ridiculous due to local conditions many times. In the UK Gibson's prices can be awful due to the extra taxes on them here. In Australia the prices are absurd and unreal. People will often buy used guitars there or local alternative makes.
Danny Sands good point. For me it’s not so much the features (not opposed necessarily to some limited modern elements, the Standard always had that and I added a roll-off coil split to my ‘95) but the built quality. Dirty secret: I’d actually pay more for a good 90s LP than a brand new one or one from the last number of years. Devil is in the detail.
I recently brought an 09 ebony Standard for £1400 (mint condition not a scratch on it), better guitar (imo) & half the price of a modern day standard
Rhett, is this your worst video ever? Lots of options is a good thing. Buy a Traditional or a Custom if that's what you want. A better complaint is that Gibson's prices are through the damn roof now.
Agree. I like Rhett generally, but this video is just utter trash. He's complaining that a guitar has too many features. Um... Don't buy it then? They offer exactly the guitar you want, it's just called something else. Or go buy a vintage guitar if you want an exact 50's/60's version. And does he think he knows their "customers" better than they do? Their "customers" aren't you, Rhett. They're the doctors and lawyers and engineers, etc. who make big bucks and want to buy the "coolest" "classic" guitar. And yes, they WANT the blueberry burst and the push/pull pots.
@@SundayMatinee This didn't age well
@@SundayMatinee I'd say given the runaway success of Gibson's current Standard '50s and '60s, he was right about what Gibson customers wanted.
I highly enjoy my LP Standard HP from this year, named "Blue." Definitely my #1. Do I mess around with the dip switches and push pull pots? Sometimes, and you can get some awesome tones out of them. But at the end of the day, it's still a Les Paul and after switching the nut out for bone, it can sing and scream as I need it to. And I got the blueberry fade top on mine, which consistently gets complimented on how unique it looks.
I legit cry-laughed at "iPaul." I agree with all of this.
That iPaul sht is genuinely fun but tbh, some people may actually find this new gibson useful. I mean, I started my guitar playing with a les paul copy and nowdays I find myself playing strat cuz it has the sound I'm looking for but I don't know if I could go to lespaul model with all the sounds. Now the big IF is that the les paul has all the genuine sounds. I mean I can use both, humbucker and single coil.
i did too
Ayy Arnold! same here lol. One of the nice things about an over-saturated market is we have quality companies to choose from rather than giving Gibson $2600+ for a rosewood fretboard and the same flagship design. Some dads still think slash is the only shredder guitarist lol
Same.
ArnoldPlaysGuitar Gibson is the Apple of guitars.
I've been playing a $75 Epiphone for 10 years. put Grover tuners on it and I don't need anything more
@M.r. Moon I've got kids and bills and more important things to buy. I have friends with expensive and Relic guitars I'll play them if I want to play inexpensive instrument
@M.r. Moon ive had a fender jazz from the 60s and a wilshire, and a les laul sG and I liked them fine. Dont regret selling them. I just have different priorities now . I'm not playing Madison Square Garden.
Compared to what's on the shelves these days it's quite possible that a epiphone with some mods is just as "quality" as most gibsons. Gibson dropped the ball on quality vs price a long time ago. The guys that are paying 2k and up for a gibson are just chasing ghosts, or they have to see a certain name on the headstock to feel they're playing a real guitar.
@M.r. Moon inexpensive guitars these days are way better than inexpensive 40 years ago. lots of inexpensive guitars are up there with the expensive shit in sound and playability. finish quality might be lower, but that's it. I have the money to buy more expensive, and I don't. I am only upgrading the pickups on my Epiphone and the nut. the rest of the hardware (grover tuners from the factory) are perfectly fine. tbh, my car cost me less than a Gibson guitar would. I could buy one. I could buy a new car. it is a choice that I don't. have I played Gibson guitars? yes. do I feel like I need to own one? no. am I stupid? you are free to believe that.
@M.r. Moon Yeah, lots of junk, and lots of gems by now. Gotta be knowledgeable of what you are buying.
Those features are actually EXACTLY why I love my Standard so much. The primary reason my interest was sparked to begin with, not to mention they've been on the Standard for yearssss. The dip-switches are the only addition. Not to mention if you want your regular traditional Les Paul, that is what the Traditional is for. Oh my god I have never seen a more negatively biased and uninformed review of something make itself so obvious so early. I usually like your stuff but man, try and employ some other perspectives and less bias. Oh and saying "who asked for blueberry burst"? LOL everyone did. It was the fastest selling and most in demand les paul colour in decades as stated by basically every shop and collector you can talk to. Wow this review..
I'm a professional touring musician, own several Les Pauls, and those features make my Standard the guitar I play easily the most. It covers the most tonal ground, while still getting the gnarliest core les paul tone out of all of my les pauls. "Let the Les Paul Standard stand for something", it stands for innovation. That is everything Les Paul the man stood for, the standard should stand for the same thing.
I don’t know, calling something the “Standard” model of a 65 year old guitar design doesn’t exactly scream innovation. There’s so many different versions, you’d think they would make the Standard, standard.
Gibson has gotten out of control, I’m not surprised they had to file for bankruptcy protection. If you go to the website and look at the different LP models, they have 21 pages with 12 models per page.Too many choices will kill sales and inventory problems will kill a business.
They need to cut it down to the 15 or 20 top sellers, keep the Standard, standard. Make the Traditional look and sound like the original, keep the Studio a very basic model and then clear out the warehouse with a fire sale on everything else. Does anyone really need a $6700 Chinese New Year Les Paul?
Gibson needs to get a grip on their business
THANK YOU. Someone said it.
Les Paul the player was a consummate tinkerer. Always modifying and experimenting with his sound. His favorite model in his later years is the recording. I like having options and while it looks like more switches than I would want I know I would find a few new sounds I like. Send me the guitar if it upsets you so much. He should have done his research before spending that kind of coin.
That blueberry burst is sexy as hell. The second I saw that a couple years ago my jaw hit the floor. Absolutely gorgeous!
It's an opinion, not a review.
Are you seriously upset that they added more modern features that increase the versatility of the guitar??
My friend, I don’t think you are a Gibson fan. I think you’re an ES335 fan. There shouldn’t be a difference...
But there is.
The 335 is hands down one of the best guitar designs of all time.
Of course there is! Gibson Memphis under Mike Voltz is superb. Gibson USA is worse each year.
I’m in that camp. ES-335s and Explorers. I can do without any other Gibson.
What's the difference between theory and reality? In theory, there is no difference. In reality, there is a difference.
Buy a traditional.. that’s what I bought and in blueberry burst .. and very happy :)
No one is interested in solutions, they're on a bandwagon of never ending complaints.
That's a good choice man !
Nice!
Yes pull push pots to create more tones is a great idea.
You could have pickups in and out of fase.
A single coil sound if you want.
Jimmy page retro fitted it to his Les Paul.
You don't like it?
Don't use it!
Well said.
Word.
I wouldn't be surprised if lots of recording artists would jump at these options
What's better than having the guitar that feels the most comfortable to you also be the most versatile?
wijk89 you’re missing the point, those features are already offered on guitars like the studio, but by making this the standard you’re losing the classic flagship guitar.
It' top simple to understand for a middle guitarist
Looks like Gibson solved these issues w/the (2019/2020) 1950’s & 1960’s LP Standards - back to basics and lower price too ! 👍 Besides, the “Standard” in past 5 years has been the experimental spec guitar - until now.
Traditional is gone... it takes time to get new models and direction into production (and get rid of already created parts).
Absolutely, the 50s and 60s standards are some of the best guitars Gibson has ever made. I have a 50s standard myself and my goodness, it sounds and plays better than even my buddies 2018 Costom shop. They finally figured it out
when they don't change they are damned, when they do change they are damned, just shows some guitar players think they know what they want but deep down haven't a clue what they really want,,,,,,,,, why not design your own guitar and have it made and blow Gibson out of the water with your expertise?
I think it's more a matter of this being the "standard" instead of calling it something like "modern" or whatever else they can come up with. He kind of says it in the video repeatedly..
yes standard NOW, its not a standard 67
Its 2019...they still make traditional models...buy those ..I imagine in the late 50s you would be saying wtf gibson when they came out with the explorer and flying V...why is the guitar world so stagnant. .would you want to drive a 58 chevy today as your everyday ride? What is astonishing is how the electric guitar and especially the solid body guitar came and inspired innovation and creativity...and the magic was that musicians were really in the need of innovation ..and were at the root of all this innovation...and manufactures worked to help move that forward...that magic seems to be gone ..
Its bcuz its all been done and prefected already my man and now their just reaching for any dumbass thing they can come up with to justify a higher price tag... i see your point but cmon how much can you really change and modify a guitar, its funny how vintage gear is so sought after and worth a fortune and all these companies are constantly making reissues of things from the past its bcuz most people just want what is simple and works....
YES! To the ‘58 Chevy!
You make a good point. People like to complain and criticize others. What about a person that can only afford 1guitar. In this case they would be spending a lot for that 1 guitar, but they want lots of different tones. Hey, if you don't like it, then don't buy it. Gibson will get it.
You know anyone who innovates has to put up with remarks and criticisms from the peanut gallery. It comes with the territory.
The answer is quite simple IMHO. This guitar is not meant for gigging players. It's for someone who wants to futz around in the den with a guitar in hand.
I got one, mainly because of the color and the neck profile. I fell in love with the Blueberry Burst one my local guitar store had, so I pulled the trigger.
I dont really care about the HP-4 and all its functions, I mean its nice to have those options, but for me it would suffice with just regular old CTS pots.
I agree that they should have just made the Standards like they used to be.
They got the "High Performance" series to play around with those things...
I disagree with more or less every view expressed in this video! I don't want one of these Les Pauls but it's innovators like Les Paul himself who can/will pick up these guitars and use them to find their new sound.
Really, Gibson can't win. If it's traditional, people bitch about not moving with the times. If they do something new, they bitch. I love the idea of the coil splitting, especially in the neck pickup. You are absolutely correct about Les Paul himself...he was constantly tinkering with his guitars.
damn, you don't like the color...lol, the color is actually the ONLY thing I like about the 2019 LPS
Yup. Thought the same thing.
i like the color but the problem is that they only offer two choices. thats unnaceptable on the frontrunner models.
Sloppy Jalopy hit the nail on the head. More choices and I would add ACTUAL quality control.
After a very long search, last may I bought an used "as new" 2017 Gibson Les Paul Standard in honey burst. It was visually stunning, played awesome, incredibly balanced, and the price was more than right... so I fell in love and I bought it EVEN THOUGH the electronics were absolute crap. It sounded incredibly nasal and very very far from the classic sound of a Les Paul Standard. I immediately removed all that crap single PCB piece electronics and the two Burstbuckers Pro as well, replacing it all with best quality 50s wiring and a pair of custom pickups made by the famous Monty in London. It is now one of the best playing and best sounding guitars I've ever tried, and I play guitar since 1995... This long story to say YES, Gibson needs to unfuck itself and start having a bit of common sense, because they CAN deliver awesome guitars if they just make some simple changes.
P.S. in my new electronics I put in a single push-pull to split the neck hubmucker... just in case... Number of times I used it since last may: zero. If you have a REAL Les Paul, you don't want it to sound anything but a Les Paul.
David RF I did the same with my 2014 L.P. I went with a set if 57 classics from a 90s vintage Gibson. Except it still played like crap. I found out that Gibson changed the process and they didn't level the frets. So I had to pay for that on top of changing out the electronics and the bridge and tail piece to aluminum pieces. I was not very happy about that but I now love the guitar. When before I hated it. I regretted buying it.
David RF agreed. Fundamentally their guitars are great. I bought my first Gibson at the peak of the bankruptcy interest. It’s a 2017 limited run walnut es 335 (I love the walnut finish, I know it’s a take it or leave it color). The price was way below what you’d encounter this guitar for (1800usd new), so I had to spring for it. Out the box it played remarkable but I did want more vintage tonality so I swapped the 57 classics for some throbaks I had (best paf in my opinion) and an rs guitar works 50s harness - the guitar has seen about 50 gigs since I got it 6 months ago, it’s really killer. Wouldn’t be hard for Gibson to get their feet again if they pay attention.
Jeffrey Richardson I'm sorry to hear that, luckilu my Les Paul came out of the factory with flawless frets.
Justin Garcia really nice deal you got there :)
David RF I know! Got lucky, the deal popped up in a forum and was over in a couple days.
In 2013 when I bought mine, they called it a 'Les Paul Standard Plus' and the LP Standard was still available. Personally I like having the single coil option (although I could just grab my Strat), but I'm surprised that they pushed this on all Standards.
Would anyone complain if the gave us a Real Les Paul Standard with a contoured heel for better fret access? That’s all I want for modernization
And stainless frets!
@@RhettShull and headstock angle, plus better string tree.
And locking tuners
The contoured heel is great and would probably make sense for the Standard (Keeping the old heel on the Traditional, re-issue's, and the Classic). They would probably get too much negative feedback though, with a good portion of players that want the "old" heel design for historic reasons.
The answer to any question that starts with "would anyone complain" is ALWAYS yes. Especially when it comes to Gibson. People are hellbent on bitching about everything that company does. I bought the HP faded specifically for the contoured heel. I removed the electronic tuners and replaced them with Grovers and the guitar is perfect for me now. They really should put the contoured heel on all LPs, but you know people would lose their shit (probably the same people who bitch about them doing the same thing year after year and never improving)
I bought the sea foam two days ago, I'm intermediate at best, but I think everybody should relax and enjoy what an absolutely gorgeous, stunning, and beautiful instrument. It really makes me happy like I've never known. I don't know man, this is my first les, but I like that they're at least trying things I guess. And I suppose you can't make everybody happy..... I've dreamed of owning a les, anybody reading this is going to feel overwhelmed, but trust me playing its the finest instrument I've ever owned.... and I put the poker chip on but left the pick guard off.... seriously don't let the technical stuff frighten you, she's a slice of heaven, you won't regret it!!!
If it makes you happy, play it!
@@RhettShull Thanks man man! After being the care taker for a family member the last several years and really needed this for my spiritual, emotional, and mental well being.
Okay, so Gibson is putting modern electronics into their Standard and the traditional electronics in the...Traditional? Even Fender is still working on improving their American Standard models.
I bet you would have flipped your shit if you were in the 50s when Gibson dropped humbuckers into Les Pauls in 1958 because the PAFs were a radical change from the old P90s :P
I bought a Mexican Fender Player series Sratocaster it came with a 2 point tremolo, I added 2 roller string trees a Graph-Tech nut and Machined saddles for the tremolo. I have 700 bucks into it and it plays and sounds fantastic. The tremolo I can abuse like a Floyd Rose and stays in tune.
Yeah, I picked up a Player Series (polar white, maple board) and love the shit out of it. All I plan on doing to it is putting Fender locking tuners on it. $700 well spent. I might put Graph Tech saddles, but that'll come later.
Remember the disaster that is the Strat S1 circuit?
@@Kylora2112 Don't get the fender locking tunners, most players say aftermarket ones are better.
I love that shortly after this video was made Gibson did exactly what Rhett has suggested. Not that they got the idea from him, but it shows that they did listen to the customer base.
There is a 2019 version on Reverb that is labeled High Performance, in a blueberry finish. This is the kind of guitar that appeals to collectors like Trogly.
Sad to think that the best new 2018 Les Paul might be the Fender Troublemaker.
Bucky Gomez I own the troublemaker Tele and it’s a great guitar! I went in to look at a les Paul and I just didn’t get a good vibe from it.
Bucky: I think you are absolutely right! Cheers.
🤣🤣🤣🤣 it is sad to think Bucky LOL. I don't care what colors they put on Les Paul's, but for a working player like me who's been playing for 30 years plus, just make the damn Les Paul like you always have and if you want to do something like these 2019 standards give them a different name. Like I said in a comment to someone else it feels like they're almost trying to do competition with Paul Reed Smith by offering stuff like this when they don't need to compete with Paul Reed Smith they're a different company and some people swear by Gibson and would never touch a Paul Reed Smith( although I love my Paul Reed Smith and it reminds me of a early 90s Les Paul that I have except for the body shape. It plays like my old Les Paul does).
@@ziggylayneable As many other comments have said buy a Traditional. If you can't stand the thought of having Traditional on the truss cover then replace it.
I love Gibson and I'm all for tonal diversity with push/pull knobs but man, quality control is not Gibson's forte nowadays...
Nor is it fenders. I bought a strat a few months ago ... Not impressed for $1500.
Its to bad that some of the cheap so called mid level guitars play better then ones that cost 4 figures. There still hoping people will buy just for the name. Not me cant afford that expansive sticker on the headstock.
I bought a 2019 . Ive had a few Lps . This one is a killer. I dont use the push pull. It doesnt do single coil. I just switch bridge neck and bridge pup. Im very happy with it
Just purchased a 2020 50's and a 2020 60's........Gibson is heading back in the right direction, love them both, void of pull pots, dip switches, chambering and funky colors! This video nails it :)
What's wrong with the idea of having a Les Paul that has the capability of being an allround guitar instead of just a blues rock one trick pony and a very expensive one ? Everything ? Well at least there are PRS guitars and their copies available with two humbuckers and no bloody Clapton Page Green purists to hinder their usability or switching.
It can be a modernised version of it if allowed. It makes all the sense, a guitar that is capable of traditional Gibson sound as well as something new. Of course you can say that Gibson is famous for the certain sound and it takes the traditional approach. But then you can argue that the traditional sound won't work unless the music itself is traditional..in other words the guitar would dictate the music you play, which should not be the case.
Getting a PRS is the best idea I've seen so far in this comment string if you want a guitar that sounds and performs like a '59 LP Standard. And the PRS is much more player-friendly.
@@alfredfarber3385 Gibson should just make a 1959 Les Paul reproduction that sounds as good, with some real improvements- lighter, stays in tune better, more comfortable. Not as easy to break the headstock. I would also like to see a new 1963 split window Corvette body with a modern engine and tranny, at a reasonable price. For guitars, a headless tele and strat and SG bolt on neck option to keep up with the Kiesels.
@@jeffruebens8355 I agree completely about Les Pauls. PAF pickup design, MUCH more weight reduction, deeper cutaway. Staying in tune would be revolutionary. The only thing I liked about my LP when I had one was the tone, which was classic. I had what were called 1961 zebra-coil reissue humbuckers, and they sounded like the real deal. The weight just about killed my arthritic back, and it was a bitch to play. The notion that you need 15 pounds of solid mahogany and maple to get sustain is about 65 years obsolete. Maple is pretty, but insanely heavy. How about ash or alder with a carved, arch top? I'll bet it could be designed to sound as good as a '59 Standard.
Do you seriously complain about having MORE options?
Right?!
Yes, he did. Prime example of people who are hell bent on staying in the past
lol, THAT's complicated for you? @@archiguitarchi
No one is going to a gig, and wants to screw with push pull nonsense. Tele, strat, OP, all do what they do
I've been really happy with my LP Standard 50's, though I can't remember whether it's a 2019 or a 2020 model. I liked that they went with the maple top, orange drop caps, nitro finish and kept it simple, which is what I wanted gibson to do for a long time. It doesn't have any of the push-pull crap or circuit boards or anything and it sounds fantastic, I sold a lot of LP's I didn't like but have kept this one so far.
I love Blueberry Burst, I think it looks amazing.
They forgot the dip switch that plays a pre-recorded track. Now that would make it useful.
So this guy says "what about the people that like to try different pickups and change pots and capacitors to get different sounds" but he doesnt understand that Gibson just gave him that very ability without having to buy more parts and do work. All he has to do is flip switches and there are over 500 different combinations. Sounds to me like the people that said the internet was a fad and wouldnt go anywhere.
You actually have a point. I didn't think of it that way. But it's just electrons moving through a circuit -- so in theory a PCB wouldn't be particularly offensive. I mean I remember when I became obsessed years ago with the Peter Green sound and I tried to solder things up -- had no experience soldering and it was a huge pain. If i'd just had to flip a dip switch, that would have been awesome
In theory but have you ever noticed that modeling amps never sound like th real thing the sound this guitar gives is probably an approximation of a sound not the real thing
Who realistically has time to pull 3 knobs in a sing for a tone change?
@@frankgreen178 anyone who has about 1-2 seconds.
I was one of those who thought this internet thing is just a gimmick, a passing phase. I was wrong... i think.
No Robotuners!?! PASS !
Sooby gotta have them robots athought they a pain in the ass when you restring
This video popped up in my feed, but I noticed that it was published in September 5th of 2018, but I figured I would reply to it anyhow, because the topic covered in it is one I think someone should talk about. So here we go :)
I just don't get why anyone would have went so far as to suggest this may be the worst Les Paul Ever from Gibson. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong in the design to me, not the sweet new finishes or the pickups or the push pull pots. It all seems like the middle point between the Les Paul Traditional and the Les Paul Modern to me. The way I understand how this all works is like this. The Traditional in intended to reflect the guitar from the past, the Modern is intended to reflect the guitar of the Future, and the Standard is intended to reflect the guitar of the present. So the Modern has all the cool features and updates to the design, the Traditional has the same features it started with, and the Standard is something in the middle. There have been some things changed about guitars sense the 50s, and new features have become a thing. It is only natural that the Standard would have some of those new features.
Now a little about the finishes on these guitars, as that is sometimes just as important to people as the sound its self when it comes to if someone is going to buy the guitar. This is a personal opinion of mine, but I want updated finishes to be offered as well as there old finishes as well, and for many reasons. To name just a couple, I want them to cover the market as a whole and not just cater to the one group of people I personally fall in. I want to see those old dirt cheap finishes they used to use on the Les Paul Standard for the corner of the market that loves that look, just as much as I want to see the more expensive and corrected finishes they can offer today. That may sound like I am insulting people, but let me explain that real fast.
In the 50's, just like today by the way, the finishes that Gibson and Fender offered were the cheapest they could while maintaining what we would call the "Cool Factor". This is something I can see pretty well considering they fade pretty quickly really, as only cheap paint could. We have paintings from the 1700's that have barely faded at all, look at a guitar from the 50's and compare it to when it was new and there are massive differences when it comes to fading lol. So when I say it was a cheap finish, I am not just saying it because I don't like it, I am saying it because all company's will use the cheapest materials possible to make there product while maintaining the lie that they are giving you quality. Gibson is not special when it comes to this, as I really do mean all company's do it.
Another reason I want to see new finishes is, everyone I have ever met wants there guitar to be special and to reflect them personally. It used to be that you would have to put stickers on it or strip the paint of and refinish it, or bang it up and all that. But offering new finishes makes this less of a issue, sure they will make millions of the Blueberry Burst, which I like by the way, but at least it doesn't look like your great grandads guitar. So to me, I want to see new finishes on these guitars along with the same old finishes that people have been taught to love. ..
I can honestly go on and on about finishes, but considering its not likely anyone will read even this and I am wasting my time to write this out, I should stop here.
lfaf
Man.. you are 100% correct, that's exactly what I thought.
Bravo! I love the Nitro finishes Gibson uses, but I also like the Poly finish options for some of my Fender Guitars. My Strat Deluxe gets the bulk of my daily abuse, and it sports a nice Poly finish (and a bolt-on maple neck) making it almost bullet proof. While I also love my Les Paul, I baby it because it has a more delicate Mahogany neck, and a nitro finish that literally "breathes" and which requires a little extra love to keep looking nice. :)
Here's an idea. Don't even get a Gibson. Get a Heritage guitar, made in Kalamazoo Michigan, by the original Gibson makers. Don't get a Gibson. Get a Heritage.
PATRIOTIC RockARoller but but they have an ugly headstock
There are many Les Paul copies and similar designs that would easily rival Gibson's offerings if you slapped a pair of SD or Dimarzio pickups in it and gave it a thorough setup.
I have a Kalamazoo built Gibson Les Paul, it plays better than any modern one I've owned!
Kind of a, “Get off of my lawn” commentary. I have one. It’s a dream and it isn’t hard to operate. I hope I’m a real player after 50 years or so.
watching this in 2023 and one thing that i gotta ask is why be mad that gibson is trying to innovate its stuff with features that some guitar brands think is somewhat standard. plus its cool to see colors besides the old and ugly tobacco burst.
True, although they should give it a new designation. Like the 2019 Dipshit....sorry.... Les Paul Asto¿
@@SPotter1973idk i feel like the modern should be the one to be called the standard since they have traditional and class lines going all the time that cover the historic aspect. kinda like how a 'standard' jag or jm from fender arent the traditional ones
The funny thing is that, if we didn't
love Gibsons no one would care whether they made shit guitars or not.
If you think they make shit guitars then you don't love them lol
You are talking nonsense man, Gibson must stay ahead of the game, the Les Pauls are the most copied guitars in the world so if they keep doing the same thing over and over they will end up failling. The Standard with all those features are great and flexible, if you want a basic Gibson which was the Standard years ago and as mentioned in the video you still have a model like that and is called traditional. And modern players don't want to have ten guitars anymore, at least for live use, ins't it much better to take one guitar only to gigs then to carry dozen guitars every time? That is what the Standard is focused on and you don't get it.
Jimmy Page would beg to differ with your opinion about splitting the pickups on a Les Paul. His #1 has them and more and he used it to record most of the classic Zeppelin songs and play massive concerts. And, why are you using live shows as your sole point of proof? How about recording? Not everyone wants multiple guitars, some people want a versatile instrument to cover tons of tonal ground. And yeah, while initially the switching configuration may seem complicated, I would think when you own one and get to know it, it would become second nature. What if you want to have the Peter Green sound but not all the time?
And regarding the designation, Les Paul Standard, you do realize in 1961 the Les Paul Standard was an SG right? Are you outraged about that too?
The split pickup thing was a much later addition... some time in the 80s.
He also used a Tele most of the time contrary to popular belief
hunter martin I knew Page played one live in the early days but did he continue to use a Telecaster for most of the studio works?
Robert Herrick he recorded with it, famously on the stairway to heaven solo but to say he used it most of the time is a stretch
Daniel Kelley Howard Thanks for the info. I'll do some more reading about how much Page used the Telecaster.
Dudes just making a change it’s 2019 they cant stay with the same colors same hardware etc forever what’s the point of making new models then
Did Fender have any problem selling guitars when they just had Telecaster, Stratocaster, Jazzmaster?
Of course not but as u can see fender stratacoustic and meteora
Why not upgrade there’s so much technology out there that we ain’t appreciating
@@anestis5742 Fender tried different design concepts in the past. They all flopped. The Meteora is just a Telecaster with a different body design. Revolutionary ? And I really don't see the point of a Stratocaster with push button switches on the pot controls. The Strat already has a five way switch, for five different tones. Its enough.
The American Standard Strats and Teles, had the best neck profile ever, and they changed it ! Fortunately the new Player series, made in Mexico, has the same specs as the American Standard series, previously made in Corona. The only change being the Player series pickups in place of the custom shop Fat 50s. I will be buying Mexican from now on, and recently purchased a Mexican Strat. Don't get me wrong, I love Fender, owning 7 of their guitars. BUT, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, Fender.
kjatexas it’s not ‘just a Tele with a different body design’.. obviously it’s not revolutionary but at least they are trying to come up with smth new .. u will never know if there will be a better guitar than a strat or a tele if nothing new is gonna be released u know what I mean?
We all know Gibson is in big trouble lately and they are just taking a risk
Many people won’t like dip switches but some other may.. I’ll have to agree that maybe it’s a little unnecessary and it’ll sure be hella confusing .. but I haven’t tried it out myself so I’m not judging I’m just telling u that it is an upgrade (which isn’t always a good thing)
kjatexas and it’s not that u don’t have the option to buy a traditional..
Whole video is a giant appeal to tradition logical fallacy. None of these changes are gonna make the guitar play worse, all they do is add more options. Not sure why more options is a bad thing to some people
Can't you still buy a standard 50s or 60s Les Paul for 2019? Isn't that a more 'traditional' standard? I dunno', I quite like the idea of a Les Paul that sounds like a Les Paul but has the potential to adapt the sound in different ways. Sounds pretty flexible to me, and I like guitars that give you more tonal options. I'm actually thinking of buying a new Les Paul and I've been looking at the 2019 Standard, but I have to say I'm not a real Les Paul lover or follower (although I do have a 2003/04 Les Paul Classic), I just like them as I like a lot of other guitars, so maybe I'm not as troubled about the changes as a real aficionado or connoisseur might be. I do think though that there's nothing wrong with adapting products, even guitars, to be more relevant in the future. Times change, music changes, nothing stands still so I don't have a problem with change and adaptation. I believe if you don't change you die, that's pretty much a key rule of evolution I think.
I like guitars with variety as well, especially if I'm paying a lot of money. I honestly don't have money to be a Les Paul lover.
They are building high quality instruments. Just because this guy doesn't like the options, doesn't make it bad.
Started the video with a kinda “stop whining” attitude, but was glad to watch all the way through to find out that I totally agree with your points.
Thanks for sticking through!
Same here. Never seen his videos before. But i really enjoyed hearing his thoughts and concerns and i just subscribed
This is 100% correct. NOBODY buys a Les Paul to sound like a Strat. There are too many different models, tribute, studio, classic, and 'T' - whatever that means. Gibson needs to look at what Fender has done with price and quality. At Fender, quality has gone up drastically while prices have stayed the same or dropped. All Gibson needs to do is what Fender is doing, no crazy robot tuners, dip switches and push-pull pots. Just give us a Classic Vibe Les Paul made in China for $400, a standard Les Paul made in Mexico for $750, a standard Les Paul made by machine in Nashville for $1,000, a Les Paul made by hand using traditional methods in Nashville for $2,000, a custom shop Les Paul made by the finest craftsmen using the best tonewoods for $3,500 and ditto for all other models. Give us choices in quality for price, not new modern features for an old technology. Then give us one new model to try out that is completely different - maybe computerized with no traditional pickups and guitar modeling for example.
Right on!!! You should be senior level management.
I think part of the problem is: Gibson KNOWS there are these rich idiots out there that are _willing_ to pay $3,500 for a shoddy-made guitar (shoddy as far as the guitar itself, not electronics). Because the people who can spend that much aren't that good at guitar, don't play that often, and wouldn't know the difference between a *real* quality-built guitar and these Gibsons.
Epiphone makes great LPs for about $750. No gimmicks, just a good guitar.
@@Vichedges I agree with everything you said. I now have a PRS (USA-made, but relatively modest cost) with which I can fairly well approximate the tone of an LP, Strat, or Tele for the price of one guitar. OR, I can sound like a PRS, which also is pretty cool. And all of the U.S. manufacturers make decent foreign guitars at a reasonable price under their own name or a subsidiary name like Epiphone.
@@alfredfarber3385 they should ditch the Epiphone label and make them all Gibson's. I bet sales would go up just by doing that.