Fake 59 Gibson

[solspirit]

What do you guys think of a Luthier building 59 Les Paul models with Gibson on the headstock?
. I think it's kind of shady.

[jeremy]

i mean, its illegal isnt it? ive seen guys do it but they made notes inside the control cavity so you could easily tell it wasnt a gibson or vintage if you opened it up. anyone who knows anything will be able to spot a fake '59 before they drop stupid money on it. a custom build 59 lp copy for $5k is fine, if someone is trying to pawn it off as a real one then they should be set alight with their guitar

[ErikH]

It is. Then I laugh knowing that Gibson themselves made a clone of a clone of a Gibson, Slash's Derrig Les Paul.

[Mincer]

I think it is even weird that a player would want that, knowing it isn't real. But I am constantly astounded by people's choices, so...

[solspirit]

They're beautiful guitars but why wouldn't this guy put his own name on them?

[ItsaBass]

I think it's super groovy, for personal use, or sale on the used market with full disclosure. Otherwise, it's fraudulent.

[Spirit of 76]

Not only is it shady, it is a violation of the 1976 Copyright Act (infringing on Gibson's name brand and intellectual property - the Gibson Name) and the person making it, along with anyone possessing it, would be sued by Gibson if their lawyers ever found out.

It would be cheaper to buy 3 of Gibson's most expensive guitars than to pay that lawsuit out. lol

[PFDarkside]

They're beautiful guitars but why wouldn't this guy put his own name on them?

Like Gil Yaron?

it’s so funny how irrational humans are. If a luthier could guarantee an exact copy of a 1959 Les Paul, made with lumber from the era, pickups and electronics from a gibson of that era and the exact glues, dyes and finishes.... but the headstock had to look like an Epiphone and the body had a slight tweak at the cutaway, more players than not would pass in favor of the one that says Gibson and has the exact shapes. I mean, I do it with Strats.... Suhrs are amazing guitars but that beak headstock would make me think twice if I was ever going to drop $3500 on a Strat.

[solspirit]

Like Gil Yaron?

it’s so funny how irrational humans are. If a luthier could guarantee an exact copy of a 1959 Les Paul, made with lumber from the era, pickups and electronics from a gibson of that era and the exact glues, dyes and finishes.... but the headstock had to look like an Epiphone and the body had a slight tweak at the cutaway, more players than not would pass in favor of the one that says Gibson and has the exact shapes. I mean, I do it with Strats.... Suhrs are amazing guitars but that beak headstock would make me think twice if I was ever going to drop $3500 on a Strat.

Gil Yaron is one of them, Steve Hague is another.

[Top-L]

What do you guys think of a Luthier building 59 Les Paul models with Gibson on the headstock?
. I think it's kind of shady.

Some people get a thrill out of lying.

The guy who commisions a guitar like that, was bragging to his buddy that he has one of those, probably a unique/rare variant. His buddy says, "nah man, there were only 50 of those made."

To which the guy calls the builder and has him build one of those with Gibson on the headstock, just so he can prove his buddy wrong.

I have seen people spend thousands of dollars just to prove a point and win a "bet". There are some phenomenally defective people in the world.

[solspirit]

I like guitars that are exactly what they appear to be.

This is how I feel and the Top-L you are absolutely correct, there are some seriously defective people in this world.

[Spirit of 76]

Not to mention that a legit Gibson would have both a Serial Number and Factory Order Number, so a little detective work will quickly flush out the fakes from the real deals.

[3'scompany]

Like Gil Yaron?

it’s so funny how irrational humans are. If a luthier could guarantee an exact copy of a 1959 Les Paul, made with lumber from the era, pickups and electronics from a gibson of that era and the exact glues, dyes and finishes.... but the headstock had to look like an Epiphone and the body had a slight tweak at the cutaway, more players than not would pass in favor of the one that says Gibson and has the exact shapes. I mean, I do it with Strats.... Suhrs are amazing guitars but that beak headstock would make me think twice if I was ever going to drop $3500 on a Strat.

I feel you. Sometimes I think that we guitar players get a little too hung up on aesthetics, but then I think about how if I'm going to be dropping a lot of cash on a guitar, it better damned well tick all the boxes, both sonically and aesthetically.

I'm in the camp that thinks too much stock is put into voodoo and other minute specs and peculiarities (or maybe my ears have just been walloped enough from playing live that I can't tell) - i.e., good (not necessarily great) pickups in a decent guitar that plays well, plugged into a good amp is 99.9% of your tone - and that a good portion of what you're paying for is craftsmanship, playability and aesthetics, so I say looks are pretty important if you're dropping over $1,000 on a guitar.

[GuitarStv]

I think it is even weird that a player would want that, knowing it isn't real. But I am constantly astounded by people's choices, so...

I dunno . . . Slash did OK playing his knock-off Gibson in Guns N'Roses.

[JMP/HBE]

Who cares ?
Most people on planet earth have real problems.
Guitars/toys are luxury first world problems.
250 years ago they made copies of Stradivarius violins, making copies is hardly anything new.