I bought a new 1999 Les Paul Classic plus from the ill fated Mars Music in Atlanta. I've put this poor thing through the ringer with different pickups and wiring scenarios. Almost sold it a couple of times because I hated it, but 10 years something amazing happened. I actually learned how to play and realized that the dammed thing was amazing. I've settled on Mojotone low winds and 50's style wiring. So happy I held onto this one.
That's a great shame bud, I have an all original 99 classic and it definitely doesn't need to be altered, if you still have the original parts put it back together, you'll love it even more
I consider them to be collectors items. I had a friend with one from the early 90s. It was the best playing, and sounding LP I've ever touched. That's including his 05 Standard, or any of the ones I played at stores. Something about that combination of 50s style specs, and 80/90s style metalhead pickups just works.
I bought a 95 classic, new in 95. I will never sell it. I just take the pickups way beneath the strings to get a more vintage sound, or close to strings for high gain screaming. It’s by far the best guitar I have. I am amazed they still don’t cost that much to buy second hand
I own a 1995 Les Paul Classic. bought it from sam ash in NYC. one of my best guitars. When i was younger I loved the high gain ceramics 496R 500T but now I'm thinking about swapping for a more vintage PAF hb. and upgrade the volume pots to 500k while at it.
Great video bro. At the beginning you said the Les Paul classic measurements match several of the 1960 examples that you have had your hands-on, however you didn't specify which measurements. I would be interested to know. I love the fact that these have the small pin bridge that goes straight into the body VS the grommets/ferrules. These Classic models are probably the last time Gibson will ever offer that small pin option on a guitar less than $6500 from the factory. Both Tokai and Edwards LP's offer that option and both are extremely high quality if you can live with a non Gibson name. I can. I had a 2006 Les Paul classic honeyburst plain top of course, but I could not live with the green frets! Gosh they were awful, what was that about? I just got a 1997 classic shipped. I separately ordered the "Retrospec Exclusive Series Cellulose Nitrate Les Paul Fingerboard Inlays" from Historic Makeovers. So that will fix the green issue. The non-vintage correct wiring doesn't bother me, I always change that anyways using more modern shielded wire, potted pickups, push pull pot on the neck so that's a wash. I'm more concerned with the look outside the cavity. You didn't talk about the Gibaon water slide logo or the printed on Les Paul decals for certain years of the Les Paul Classics. I thought that was something pretty interesting, that might make this collectible one day. Gibson can give us the small pins on this guitar. But they couldn't give us everything.
I too live in SB and Seymour Duncan’s warehouse re-wound one of my red bobbin Strat pickups for me. I need to locate your shop to install the 50’s wiring kit I purchased from Emerson Custom for my 1992 LP Classic. My biggest question is about weights. My 92 weighs 9lb-12oz. Can you tell us what your 97’ Classic weighs? I’m so curious! And can you tell me/all of us what the 5 original 1960’s that crossed your bench weighed? I also have a 1999 LP Classic plain top in honey burst that weighs 9-1/2lb. You can see this one on my RUclips videos. I like to study/play Fleetwood Mac unique covers exactly like Lindsey Buckingham and I video capture close to the fretboard slowed down a bit to teach/share how to play them. That 1999 Classic sounds so good, I am afraid to change anything else to it. It has Wolftone Dr Vintage pickups and original wiring. I’m guessing 300k pots etc. I’d like to send you a photo of my 92’ Classic Honeyburst. It has a modest beautiful flame top that like yours, may have been rejected for a higher priced model? I hope you can reply to my weight question? I wonder how the tone is closest to original’s based on weight’s. 8-1/2lb to 9-1/2lb vs heavier bodied LP Classic’s? Thank you!!
I have a 2004 version of this exact guitar in honeyburst, I bought it new! I have just swapped out the original ceramic pickups for SD Pearly Gates, and am totally delighted with the results, it gives it a more vintage sound/feel/look.👍👍 I was interested in the wiring change you made in the video as that could further enhance the sound & would be a good match for the pickups! Thanks!👍👍🎶
I have a 2000 Gibson Classic with a flat top and a one-piece mahogany body. The guitar comes with its brown case with a pink interior, like all the Gibson Classics from the 90s. This detail changed in later years of the 2000s, but I always had a doubt. Does my guitar belong to the decade from the 90s to the 2000s? (Decade that I understand as golden for the Gibson Classics for the good woods). Or does my Gibson belong to the next generation? That is, from 2000 onwards... 🤔
Some of the best woods from Gibson that have come across on my test bench are most often from 2000-2001. I have a 2001 Les Paul custom from the custom art and historic department that is super dinged up and abused ( I believe that I am the 4th or 5th owner). And, that is my #1. I absolutely love love love this guitar. Why? For some reason, the wood is super resonant in a kinda of creamy way for lack of better words. Looks like you scored!
Thanks my friend. I'm glad to hear that. I was really thinking about selling my Gibson and getting another 1990 Classic, just because I thought the 1990 one had better woods and because it looks more aesthetically like an R8 ("MODEL" lettering and fine binding) compared to my 2000 Classic. Now that I know that both instruments have the same wood, it's not worth the change. By the way, I have read in some source that the neck of the Classic from the beginning of the 1990s was even thinner, and that at some point in the mid-90s, Gibson corrected it because apparently it had some problems with tuning. That's right? I'm going to look for the source that comments on it, if I find it I'll share it with you so you can read it. Even so, I would like to know your opinion if you have been able to appreciate this in the Gibson Classics that have passed through your test bench. Greeting.
@@Imbroken_Band_HolyGrail_Guitar You are looking for a 1990’s Les Paul Classic? Do it! Why? Because the later Les Paul Classics may be weight relieved. Not good! As far as the neck goes… all of the classics I have come across are very consistent for all dimensions across the board. However the neck set up tends to be widely different from Guitar to guitar. I currently have a 1997 with neck buzz. And this is after a crown level and polish. As far as the neck profile goes.I have found that the original 1960 Les Pauls have a more D shape then the Classics.
Given that you can get a good standard from the 1990's on reverb for approximately as much as the new standard 50's and 60's, would you recommend today's standards or those from the fifties when it comes to the quality of wood, the pickups, maple tops and the overall quality control being employed by gibson usa? This is ofcourse on an average since you get some better examples than others even with the tightest quality control
Have you seen the new Gibson Les Paul standards? These are absolutely beautiful guitars and they are gorgeous to look at. I have 3 of the standards on my test bench now awaiting the full wire harness and paper in oil capacitor replacement. If you are looking for something closer to the original 50s-60s dimensions and tone woods you would be better off choosing the 1990’s Les Paul classic. The cost difference is around $700.00 less then the modern standard for a pristine specimen. You will steel need to replace the wire harness and pickups for both examples. I have found that the 90s 1960’s classic have a slightly consistent better QC overall. I personally love the new standards and would love to own one.
@@FeeserAmplification thanks for the reply. Yes, the 1990's classics do have a more attractive look to them with the plain maple tops which I too prefer over the heavy flames that you see on today's standards (and I don't want to get the current classics), however I have not had the chance to hear one of them being played while there are many examples of the current standards. I personally prefer Gibson's old PAFs over these Seymour Duncans but these sound very good too. I guess the main reason I'm asking about quality control is that I am not going to be able to play the guitar before I buy it because I don't live in the States and so if I get a 90's one, if I have to change the wiring, capacitors, etc., it would be near to impossible with the lockdown. I am less likely to have that problem if I just get one of the new standards off the shelf. However, I am very tempted to get a 90's one. Any things in particular I should find out first before buying an old one? I am going to have to rely completely on the seller's answers.
Also by the way, what do you make of the early 2000's Les Paul Supremes? I love the look of the guitar with the flame at the back as well and I like the 490R/498T pickups. The flame on most of them is quadruple A. At just over $4000 are they worth the jump up from a 1990's classic? They sound great.
Yes. So, I believe that in your case it may be best to pursue the current Gibson Les Paul standard from lets say the vendor Sweetwater. www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LPS6ITNH--gibson-les-paul-standard-60s-iced-tea Free shipping and you can return the instrument for any reason.
I have a 1999 Les Paul classic, honeyburst , just like the one you have shown. The main complaint I have is it doesn’t stay in tune too good. The inlays are aged greenish tint also the tuning pegs.
In around 1995 or so I bought a , 1960 Gibson Les Paul Reissue, and I haven't been able to find out much about it. It has a white pick guard with a gold lettering that says 1960 on it, it's rather heavy. I have a custom case with a pink interior. Can someone let me know anything on this, I've had it put up for years, it's in excellent condition.
When Guitar’s stop being, well, guitars to be played by guitarist and more collectors items, and collected by collectors for the sake of collecting expensive things. I kind of knocked the wind out of what a guitar is really meant for, and that is to be played and to be heard, and in my humble opinion, not on some wall just to be started at. it defeats the purpose but it’s your stuff and you could do what you want with it as for me, I can make a guitar that sounds and plays just as good if not better than any last Paul ever made and yes I will keep on rockin
I have a 78' Les Paul Deluxe with mimi-humbuckers. Although the description of this guitar specifies a mohogany neck my neck is maple. Do you know why the neck is maple?
Les Paul models in the Norlin era (1969-1985) 1974 Custom Subsequent years brought new company ownership to the Gibson Guitar Company. During the "Norlin Era", Gibson Les Paul body designs were greatly altered, most notably, the change to the neck volute. Because the Les Paul had the reputation of having an easily broken neck joint, the volute strengthened the neck where it joined the headstock to avert breakage. To further increase the strength, the neck woods were changed from mahogany to a three-piece maple design. The LP body was changed from a one-piece mahogany with a maple top into multiple slabs of mahogany with multiple pieced maple tops. This is referred to as "multipiece" construction, and sometimes incorrectly referred to as a "pancake" body. The expression "pancake body" actually refers to a body made of a thin layer of maple sandwiched between two slabs of mahogany, with a maple cap. The grain of the maple was placed at 90 degrees to that of the mahogany. The "pancake"-like layers are clearly visible when looking at the edge of the guitar. This process is also known as "crossbanding", and was done for strength and resistance to cupping/warping. Crossbanding was phased out by 1977.
@@FeeserAmplification Makes since considering Maple is harder than Mohogany. My 78' body is one solid piece of Mohogany however not multiple with the Maple top and is a natural finish which some get confused with a gold top. So grateful for your time and feedback. Thank You Sir
@@zeppelinfan9360Mid to late 70’s LPs had three piece maple necks. In my experience they sound a bit brighter and also more stable than mahogany necks. I have an 78’ custom and never have to adjust the truss rod, even though the neck is thinner than my 82’ SG, which needs adjustment frequently.
Interesting stuff. I feel like I’m watching a science documentary from the 1950s! At any rate my father gave me a 1990 LP classic in cherry sunburst in 1990 when I was a sophomore in high school. Quite a gift I know! My father is a guitar player and I was getting pretty good at the time so he spoiled me for sure. I had only ever played his LP copy before that. Decades later I finally played a LP with a 50s neck profile and found that much more to my liking. I now have a 2020 Gibson LP slash signature (November burst) and a 2022. Wildwood select standard in honey burst. While I love my old classic I have to say I really don’t care for that super thin neck (I have average sized hands). I have considers selling it but it has some sentimental value. It’s a solid piece of wood.
I beg to differ, to some of us these are very collectible I have 4 from 95 alone premium plus tops and one quilt, another 3 being plain tops. There were only 2 black ones ever produced. One for the Gibson brochure, and one for a collector who had to have it. He collected all the colors they made at the time and to complete his set he needed the black Gibson agreed to make it for him. That is the only one that ever left the factory in black. The brochure one is still in the Gibson vault.
Very cool video and many good points too. As a wood worker…. they do use the better mahogany wood and maple. African mahogany and not Sepele like Epiphone but Epiphone is still good for what it is.
The 500T pickup is the best pickups EVER. I'm very paranoid about pickups I've tried all sorts of duncan's, DiMarzio's on my gibson les paul claßic and 500T is an absolute winner, highly responsive and can create all the tone you need by controlling amp settings and tone/volume setting on your guitar.
Yes. I can see that you are a man of good taste. I too am very fond of this ceramic high output pickup’s and believe that these pickups will be collectors items in the nearest future. If you switch to the 1950’s style wiring harness and use paper in oil capacitors you will be further blown away.
iN my opinion, is the neck tenon. I cannot understand why it would make any cost difference to have long tenons in all LP's. It is primary to sustain. Everything else can be swapped, hardware, pickups, etc. But, a tenon cannot be replaced to changed. That is some BS.
Yes, I agree with you 100%. As I mentioned in the video. The long neck tenon is one facet of the Les Paul sound. However this is only one small facet. I have no idea why Gibson chose to omit this feature in there general production. Even Epiphone Les Pauls have a long neck tenon. So why did Gibson remove this feature? I have no idea.
You forgot the Les Paul Classic of the 1990’s and into the 2000’s has the 9 hole weight relief wich the originals didn’t have. I don’t think that makes much if any difference in tone though.
Very cool. I have a 2007 Les Paul classic. From what I understand the 2000s Les Paul classics were downgraded somewhat from the 90s ones. Mine has a two piece maple back instead of one piece. The inlays are an aged color that some people aren’t fond of. The headstock actually says Les Paul model instead of Les Paul classic like the 90s ones do, which would probably help if trying to convert to a more original Les Paul look. Although I think the color and placement that they use for the gibson logo inlay is different from the original Les Paul’s. I’m not sure if the 90s Les Paul classics were as affordable, but I know the mid 2000s Les Paul classics were the cheapest gibson Les Paul guitar you could get that had full binding. My guess is that they ended up making a bunch of changes to Les Paul classic - introducing weird colors and knobs and cranked the price way up because the ones from the 2000s could almost be seen as an affordable cheaper reissue.
gibson used the les paul model decal from 1989-1994ish, and they changed it to be les paul classic. Until, got the decal changed back again to the les paul model in mid-2000s. All Les Paul Classic, I believe, have either one or two-piece mahogany body. cheers
I have a 2003, ink stamp serial, ABR1 bridge, smaller headstock, fat binding in the cutaway. 2 piece mahogany back, 1 piece neck. Outstanding value guitar for what I paid. IMO, with the TRUE ABR1 bridge and the ink stamp serial, it’s the closest you’ll get to a reissue outside the custom shop. The ABR1 bridge changed to Nashville in 2004, as did the binding in the cutaway, it was then thin as per historic specs, however the ink stamp serial remained for a while. So for me, any classic up to 2003 is the best bet and bang for buck. I paid £1350 for mine, bargain.
Yes. Although I feel that these particular guitars are predominantly PLAYER guitars and there seems to be some saturation in the general market for Gibson between 1990-2000. You bring up a very, very good point. The prices for these Gibsons from 1990-2000 have been creeping up over time. Would you considers these instruments as collectors items?
@@FeeserAmplification "Would you considers these instruments as collectors items?" I personally don't. But on that note, it's highly doubtful anyone buying a new Les Paul back in 1959 would even dream up such a crazy idea either. :)
You mentioned you’ve handle 5 x original bursts and swear that these ‘90s era classics got identical necks? I don’t think so. I have played a real ‘60 burst and the neck was nowhere as skinny as my ‘93 Classic. Also Seymour Duncan that you put in are average at best
not all the necks on 1960 bursts are the exact same shape and size. not all early classics are the same exact shape and size either. have experience with both the originals and early classics.
Helping Musicians to blow more money and waste time not playing. Changing the pots and caps do not change tone unless you change the value of capacitance and or resistant. Changing pick ups is another story. No such thing as a P.A.F. sound .Do you want a bobbin wound by Sue on Monday or a bobbin wound Betty on Friday . Learn to play first . Most great players sound great from the hands not the pickups or tubes or orange caps. Sorry but I am electronics amp/gtr tech for 40 yrs and have tried out most of the this snake oil. By the way wanna buy a 67 black face Princeton Reverb amp?
I bought a new 1999 Les Paul Classic plus from the ill fated Mars Music in Atlanta. I've put this poor thing through the ringer with different pickups and wiring scenarios. Almost sold it a couple of times because I hated it, but 10 years something amazing happened. I actually learned how to play and realized that the dammed thing was amazing. I've settled on Mojotone low winds and 50's style wiring. So happy I held onto this one.
That's a great shame bud, I have an all original 99 classic and it definitely doesn't need to be altered, if you still have the original parts put it back together, you'll love it even more
I consider them to be collectors items. I had a friend with one from the early 90s. It was the best playing, and sounding LP I've ever touched. That's including his 05 Standard, or any of the ones I played at stores. Something about that combination of 50s style specs, and 80/90s style metalhead pickups just works.
I disagree. The post thru bridge does something. Along with the ceramic pickups.
I really liking that up grade for my 97 classic LP
I bought a 95 classic, new in 95. I will never sell it. I just take the pickups way beneath the strings to get a more vintage sound, or close to strings for high gain screaming. It’s by far the best guitar I have. I am amazed they still don’t cost that much to buy second hand
I own a 1995 Les Paul Classic. bought it from sam ash in NYC.
one of my best guitars. When i was younger I loved the high gain ceramics 496R 500T but now I'm thinking about swapping for a more vintage PAF hb. and upgrade the volume pots to 500k while at it.
Bravo! I love all of those ideas and if you need help in any way please do not hesitate to ask.😊
One thing I recently noticed on my 1999 LP classic is the nitro finish on the headstock is starting to crack, adding character to the guitar.
Great video bro. At the beginning you said the Les Paul classic measurements match several of the 1960 examples that you have had your hands-on, however you didn't specify which measurements. I would be interested to know.
I love the fact that these have the small pin bridge that goes straight into the body VS the grommets/ferrules.
These Classic models are probably the last time Gibson will ever offer that small pin option on a guitar less than $6500 from the factory.
Both Tokai and Edwards LP's offer that option and both are extremely high quality if you can live with a non Gibson name. I can.
I had a 2006 Les Paul classic honeyburst plain top of course, but I could not live with the green frets! Gosh they were awful, what was that about?
I just got a 1997 classic shipped. I separately ordered the "Retrospec Exclusive Series Cellulose Nitrate Les Paul Fingerboard Inlays" from Historic Makeovers. So that will fix the green issue.
The non-vintage correct wiring doesn't bother me, I always change that anyways using more modern shielded wire, potted pickups, push pull pot on the neck so that's a wash. I'm more concerned with the look outside the cavity.
You didn't talk about the Gibaon water slide logo or the printed on Les Paul decals for certain years of the Les Paul Classics. I thought that was something pretty interesting, that might make this collectible one day. Gibson can give us the small pins on this guitar. But they couldn't give us everything.
I own a 2000 one and it’s my main guitar. They are the best les Paul’s ever made other than the originals.
I agree with you 100%!
@@FeeserAmplificationI just bought a prs custom 24 that rivals my classic
I too live in SB and Seymour Duncan’s warehouse re-wound one of my red bobbin Strat pickups for me. I need to locate your shop to install the 50’s wiring kit I purchased from Emerson Custom for my 1992 LP Classic. My biggest question is about weights. My 92 weighs 9lb-12oz. Can you tell us what your 97’ Classic weighs? I’m so curious! And can you tell me/all of us what the 5 original 1960’s that crossed your bench weighed? I also have a 1999 LP Classic plain top in honey burst that weighs 9-1/2lb. You can see this one on my RUclips videos. I like to study/play Fleetwood Mac unique covers exactly like Lindsey Buckingham and I video capture close to the fretboard slowed down a bit to teach/share how to play them. That 1999 Classic sounds so good, I am afraid to change anything else to it. It has Wolftone Dr Vintage pickups and original wiring. I’m guessing 300k pots etc. I’d like to send you a photo of my 92’ Classic Honeyburst. It has a modest beautiful flame top that like yours, may have been rejected for a higher priced model? I hope you can reply to my weight question? I wonder how the tone is closest to original’s based on weight’s. 8-1/2lb to 9-1/2lb vs heavier bodied LP Classic’s? Thank you!!
I have a 2004 version of this exact guitar in honeyburst, I bought it new! I have just swapped out the original ceramic pickups for SD Pearly Gates, and am totally delighted with the results, it gives it a more vintage sound/feel/look.👍👍 I was interested in the wiring change you made in the video as that could further enhance the sound & would be a good match for the pickups! Thanks!👍👍🎶
I have a 2000 Gibson Classic with a flat top and a one-piece mahogany body. The guitar comes with its brown case with a pink interior, like all the Gibson Classics from the 90s. This detail changed in later years of the 2000s, but I always had a doubt. Does my guitar belong to the decade from the 90s to the 2000s? (Decade that I understand as golden for the Gibson Classics for the good woods). Or does my Gibson belong to the next generation? That is, from 2000 onwards... 🤔
Some of the best woods from Gibson that have come across on my test bench are most often from 2000-2001. I have a 2001 Les Paul custom from the custom art and historic department that is super dinged up and abused ( I believe that I am the 4th or 5th owner). And, that is my #1. I absolutely love love love this guitar. Why? For some reason, the wood is super resonant in a kinda of creamy way for lack of better words. Looks like you scored!
Thanks my friend. I'm glad to hear that. I was really thinking about selling my Gibson and getting another 1990 Classic, just because I thought the 1990 one had better woods and because it looks more aesthetically like an R8 ("MODEL" lettering and fine binding) compared to my 2000 Classic. Now that I know that both instruments have the same wood, it's not worth the change. By the way, I have read in some source that the neck of the Classic from the beginning of the 1990s was even thinner, and that at some point in the mid-90s, Gibson corrected it because apparently it had some problems with tuning. That's right? I'm going to look for the source that comments on it, if I find it I'll share it with you so you can read it. Even so, I would like to know your opinion if you have been able to appreciate this in the Gibson Classics that have passed through your test bench. Greeting.
@@Imbroken_Band_HolyGrail_Guitar You are looking for a 1990’s Les Paul Classic? Do it! Why? Because the later Les Paul Classics may be weight relieved. Not good!
As far as the neck goes… all of the classics I have come across are very consistent for all dimensions across the board. However the neck set up tends to be widely different from Guitar to guitar. I currently have a 1997 with neck buzz. And this is after a crown level and polish. As far as the neck profile goes.I have found that the original 1960 Les Pauls have a more D shape then the Classics.
Given that you can get a good standard from the 1990's on reverb for approximately as much as the new standard 50's and 60's, would you recommend today's standards or those from the fifties when it comes to the quality of wood, the pickups, maple tops and the overall quality control being employed by gibson usa? This is ofcourse on an average since you get some better examples than others even with the tightest quality control
Have you seen the new Gibson Les Paul standards? These are absolutely beautiful guitars and they are gorgeous to look at. I have 3 of the standards on my test bench now awaiting the full wire harness and paper in oil capacitor replacement. If you are looking for something closer to the original 50s-60s dimensions and tone woods you would be better off choosing the 1990’s Les Paul classic. The cost difference is around $700.00 less then the modern standard for a pristine specimen. You will steel need to replace the wire harness and pickups for both examples. I have found that the 90s 1960’s classic have a slightly consistent better QC overall.
I personally love the new standards and would love to own one.
@@FeeserAmplification thanks for the reply. Yes, the 1990's classics do have a more attractive look to them with the plain maple tops which I too prefer over the heavy flames that you see on today's standards (and I don't want to get the current classics), however I have not had the chance to hear one of them being played while there are many examples of the current standards. I personally prefer Gibson's old PAFs over these Seymour Duncans but these sound very good too. I guess the main reason I'm asking about quality control is that I am not going to be able to play the guitar before I buy it because I don't live in the States and so if I get a 90's one, if I have to change the wiring, capacitors, etc., it would be near to impossible with the lockdown. I am less likely to have that problem if I just get one of the new standards off the shelf. However, I am very tempted to get a 90's one.
Any things in particular I should find out first before buying an old one? I am going to have to rely completely on the seller's answers.
Also by the way, what do you make of the early 2000's Les Paul Supremes? I love the look of the guitar with the flame at the back as well and I like the 490R/498T pickups. The flame on most of them is quadruple A. At just over $4000 are they worth the jump up from a 1990's classic? They sound great.
Yes. So, I believe that in your case it may be best to pursue the current Gibson Les Paul standard from lets say the vendor Sweetwater. www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LPS6ITNH--gibson-les-paul-standard-60s-iced-tea Free shipping and you can return the instrument for any reason.
Okay, @@FeeserAmplification thanks for the input! Yes, I'll probably resort to that.
I had one of these in tobacco sunburst , had 490 pickups that were mediocre at best… great case!
I have a 1999 Les Paul classic, honeyburst , just like the one you have shown. The main complaint I have is it doesn’t stay in tune too good. The inlays are aged greenish tint also the tuning pegs.
lub the nut, i lub it just fine with vaseline
tuning problems with these would definitely be centered around either the nut, or the tuning peg itself.
In around 1995 or so I bought a , 1960 Gibson Les Paul Reissue, and I haven't been able to find out much about it. It has a white pick guard with a gold lettering that says 1960 on it, it's rather heavy. I have a custom case with a pink interior. Can someone let me know anything on this, I've had it put up for years, it's in excellent condition.
It's called a Les Paul classic
When Guitar’s stop being, well, guitars to be played by guitarist and more collectors items, and collected by collectors for the sake of collecting expensive things. I kind of knocked the wind out of what a guitar is really meant for, and that is to be played and to be heard, and in my humble opinion, not on some wall just to be started at. it defeats the purpose but it’s your stuff and you could do what you want with it as for me, I can make a guitar that sounds and plays just as good if not better than any last Paul ever made and yes I will keep on rockin
I think gibson hit it spot on in 2005 just before the VOS.. the R8/9s were simply amazing,, and true spec. Much more detailed guitars i think
I have a 78' Les Paul Deluxe with mimi-humbuckers. Although the description of this guitar specifies a mohogany neck my neck is maple.
Do you know why the neck is maple?
Les Paul models in the Norlin era (1969-1985)
1974 Custom
Subsequent years brought new company ownership to the Gibson Guitar Company. During the "Norlin Era", Gibson Les Paul body designs were greatly altered, most notably, the change to the neck volute. Because the Les Paul had the reputation of having an easily broken neck joint, the volute strengthened the neck where it joined the headstock to avert breakage. To further increase the strength, the neck woods were changed from mahogany to a three-piece maple design. The LP body was changed from a one-piece mahogany with a maple top into multiple slabs of mahogany with multiple pieced maple tops. This is referred to as "multipiece" construction, and sometimes incorrectly referred to as a "pancake" body. The expression "pancake body" actually refers to a body made of a thin layer of maple sandwiched between two slabs of mahogany, with a maple cap. The grain of the maple was placed at 90 degrees to that of the mahogany. The "pancake"-like layers are clearly visible when looking at the edge of the guitar. This process is also known as "crossbanding", and was done for strength and resistance to cupping/warping. Crossbanding was phased out by 1977.
@@FeeserAmplification Makes since considering Maple is harder than Mohogany. My 78' body is one solid piece of Mohogany however not multiple with the Maple top and is a natural finish which some get confused with a gold top.
So grateful for your time and feedback. Thank You Sir
@@zeppelinfan9360Mid to late 70’s LPs had three piece maple necks. In my experience they sound a bit brighter and also more stable than mahogany necks. I have an 78’ custom and never have to adjust the truss rod, even though the neck is thinner than my 82’ SG, which needs adjustment frequently.
Neck pickup was a 496R I believe.
Interesting stuff. I feel like I’m watching a science documentary from the 1950s! At any rate my father gave me a 1990 LP classic in cherry sunburst in 1990 when I was a sophomore in high school. Quite a gift I know! My father is a guitar player and I was getting pretty good at the time so he spoiled me for sure. I had only ever played his LP copy before that. Decades later I finally played a LP with a 50s neck profile and found that much more to my liking. I now have a 2020 Gibson LP slash signature (November burst) and a 2022. Wildwood select standard in honey burst. While I love my old classic I have to say I really don’t care for that super thin neck (I have average sized hands). I have considers selling it but it has some sentimental value. It’s a solid piece of wood.
Yes, it's like Carl Sagan talks whammy bars.
I beg to differ, to some of us these are very collectible I have 4 from 95 alone premium plus tops and one quilt, another 3 being plain tops.
There were only 2 black ones ever produced. One for the Gibson brochure, and one for a collector who had to have it. He collected all the colors they made at the time and to complete his set he needed the black Gibson agreed to make it for him. That is the only one that ever left the factory in black. The brochure one is still in the Gibson vault.
Hi, how could i get bithdate of my Les Paul Classic Premium Plus ?
@@EddyLeger-r1j serial number on headstock. Tell me the number.
@@FeeserAmplification Les Paul Classic Premium plus 004487 thank you
What about the 2000 to the 2003.
The have the real post thru and bridge.
I own a 2003.
Pls help me obi wan.
I just pickup a 2001 Custom Art and Historic 1957 Les Paul Custom. It’s the best sounding guitar I own to date.
These were weight relieved?
Where is your shop?
Very cool video and many good points too. As a wood worker…. they do use the better mahogany wood and maple. African mahogany and not Sepele like Epiphone but Epiphone is still good for what it is.
Yes.Very well stated. I am curious to see what the tonal characteristics of the new Gibsons are of today.
what size fret wire?
The 500T pickup is the best pickups EVER. I'm very paranoid about pickups I've tried all sorts of duncan's, DiMarzio's on my gibson les paul claßic and 500T is an absolute winner, highly responsive and can create all the tone you need by controlling amp settings and tone/volume setting on your guitar.
Yes. I can see that you are a man of good taste. I too am very fond of this ceramic high output pickup’s and believe that these pickups will be collectors items in the nearest future. If you switch to the 1950’s style wiring harness and use paper in oil capacitors you will be further blown away.
I got a 97 ebony Les Paul studio. I went all through it changing pups, pots, wire, bridge, tuners,nut. Now it's as nice as any Paul I've ever played.
iN my opinion, is the neck tenon. I cannot understand why it would make any cost difference to have long tenons in all LP's. It is primary to sustain. Everything else can be swapped, hardware, pickups, etc. But, a tenon cannot be replaced to changed. That is some BS.
Yes, I agree with you 100%. As I mentioned in the video. The long neck tenon is one facet of the Les Paul sound. However this is only one small facet. I have no idea why Gibson chose to omit this feature in there general production. Even Epiphone Les Pauls have a long neck tenon. So why did Gibson remove this feature? I have no idea.
@@FeeserAmplification the long neck tenon doesn't make that much difference. it's more the wood quality, mainly the mahogany used.
If you're fortunate enough to own a Gibson Les Paul your fortunate enough to own a collectors piece. I have 7... How lucky a man am I
I am supper, super jealous! Please send me pictures at your leisure. I would love to see this very special collection.
Hi, yes I would be proud to send you pictures of my collection but not on RUclips , not sure how else I could without email etc.
Regards
You forgot the Les Paul Classic of the 1990’s and into the 2000’s has the 9 hole weight relief wich the originals didn’t have. I don’t think that makes much if any difference in tone though.
I’m looking at a 2001… is this the same quality? Or could the advertisement be a typo?
@@congerz83
I would recommend the purchase if you can verify if the guitar is NOT weight relieved.
Very cool. I have a 2007 Les Paul classic. From what I understand the 2000s Les Paul classics were downgraded somewhat from the 90s ones.
Mine has a two piece maple back instead of one piece. The inlays are an aged color that some people aren’t fond of. The headstock actually says Les Paul model instead of Les Paul classic like the 90s ones do, which would probably help if trying to convert to a more original Les Paul look. Although I think the color and placement that they use for the gibson logo inlay is different from the original Les Paul’s.
I’m not sure if the 90s Les Paul classics were as affordable, but I know the mid 2000s Les Paul classics were the cheapest gibson Les Paul guitar you could get that had full binding.
My guess is that they ended up making a bunch of changes to Les Paul classic - introducing weird colors and knobs and cranked the price way up because the ones from the 2000s could almost be seen as an affordable cheaper reissue.
What about a 2003?
Are they a little bit like yours and the older?
gibson used the les paul model decal from 1989-1994ish, and they changed it to be les paul classic. Until, got the decal changed back again to the les paul model in mid-2000s. All Les Paul Classic, I believe, have either one or two-piece mahogany body. cheers
I have a 2003, ink stamp serial, ABR1 bridge, smaller headstock, fat binding in the cutaway. 2 piece mahogany back, 1 piece neck. Outstanding value guitar for what I paid. IMO, with the TRUE ABR1 bridge and the ink stamp serial, it’s the closest you’ll get to a reissue outside the custom shop. The ABR1 bridge changed to Nashville in 2004, as did the binding in the cutaway, it was then thin as per historic specs, however the ink stamp serial remained for a while. So for me, any classic up to 2003 is the best bet and bang for buck. I paid £1350 for mine, bargain.
@@Burtronic Binding in the cutaway changed in roughly 93 or 94 to thick style. ABR-1 you are correct phased out in 2004. Brilliant Guitars.
@@GeordieGuitarGuy I had a 2004 that had thin binding in the cutaway as well. Seems like they went back to that and ditched the ABR.
And specifically what part of the electric guitar pickup is designed to pick up signals from wood?
Ahh. Snarky.
What do you mean correct wiring, it's a 1960's replica not 50's so why do a 50's wiring on it?
Almost broke character at the end there.
“There are no known collectors with this..................................specimen.”
LMAO! You don't consider them collectable! I'm glad YOU don't think so while the prices for the years you've mentioned just keep on going up and up!
Yes. Although I feel that these particular guitars are predominantly PLAYER guitars and there seems to be some saturation in the general market for Gibson between 1990-2000. You bring up a very, very good point. The prices for these Gibsons from 1990-2000 have been creeping up over time. Would you considers these instruments as collectors items?
@@FeeserAmplification "Would you considers these instruments as collectors items?"
I personally don't. But on that note, it's highly doubtful anyone buying a new Les Paul back in 1959 would even dream up such a crazy idea either. :)
Lol tenyins and potencheemeeters
You mentioned you’ve handle 5 x original bursts and swear that these ‘90s era classics got identical necks? I don’t think so. I have played a real ‘60 burst and the neck was nowhere as skinny as my ‘93 Classic. Also Seymour Duncan that you put in are average at best
Yes. Again, this is what I found from my personal experience as a engineer technician working in the repair business for over 20 years.
What color is your ‘93? I hope it’s not a wine burst. Those things are haunted
@@darthsensei3838 lol, no it’s a flame top Classic Plus / Honey Burst
not all the necks on 1960 bursts are the exact same shape and size. not all early classics are the same exact shape and size either. have experience with both the originals and early classics.
Helping Musicians to blow more money and waste time not playing. Changing the pots and caps do not change tone unless you change the value of capacitance and or resistant. Changing pick ups is another story. No such thing as a P.A.F. sound .Do you want a bobbin wound by Sue on Monday or a bobbin wound Betty on Friday . Learn to play first . Most great players sound great from the hands not the pickups or tubes or orange caps. Sorry but I am electronics amp/gtr tech for 40 yrs and have tried out most of the this snake oil. By the way wanna buy a 67 black face Princeton Reverb amp?
Dude! The word is "te-non," not "ten-yon." Also, it's "po-ten-ti-ah-meter," not whatever you're saying.
Peace.
Thank you. I always have had trouble pronouncing certain words. Please forgive my poor pronunciations...
I have reason to believe this guy has no idea what he’s talking about