70's Era Gibsons
- Thread starter jimmy
- Start date
Lucid_Lunatic
Rebelyellologist
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
I have been jonesing for a 77 Custom, (the year I was born) and have played about 7, but all were complete duds. Anything from being a dead boat anchor to warped necks. Someday I will find one worth keeping and playing. I have had a 73 Custom that was a killer guitar when I was around 18, but stupidity hit me and I traded it for a Steve Vai Jem. Man I wish I could go back in time and never do that!
I have been jonesing for a 77 Custom, (the year I was born) and have played about 7, but all were complete duds. Anything from being a dead boat anchor to warped necks. Someday I will find one worth keeping and playing. I have had a 73 Custom that was a killer guitar when I was around 18, but stupidity hit me and I traded it for a Steve Vai Jem. Man I wish I could go back in time and never do that!
the guy who invented fire
Fuzzy. Guitars
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
I am really amazed that Im getting personally attacked here...the subject was brought up and I gave my opinions and stated some facts but not once did I single anyone out and take pot shots at them. There are some forum members here that are still going through teenage hero worship and because of it simply refuse to see and here the truth...like I said before...There is no eye as blind as one that will not see, and on the heels of that there is no ear so deaf as one that will not hear.
If you can't (or won't) admit the short comings of something thats not my fault...everybody knows that Norlin era Gibson, CBS era Fender, Baldwin era Gretsch, etc suffered when compared to their oldser and newer counterparts...
Im not saying that EVERY guitar Gibson made during that time is a dud but in my experience most of them sure are. My biggiest point is now and has been that those guitars are no where near the quality of new Gibson guitars and at the amazingly high inflated cost of them you could have 1-2 CS Gibsons or 3-4 off the shelf Gibsons and IMO have more MUCH better guitars.
This will be my last post in this thread since everytime I make a post I get attacked and/or get a load of PM's from various disgruntled members...if you like Norlin era Gibson guitars thats great, whatever saves more good guitars for me.
I am really amazed that Im getting personally attacked here...the subject was brought up and I gave my opinions and stated some facts but not once did I single anyone out and take pot shots at them. There are some forum members here that are still going through teenage hero worship and because of it simply refuse to see and here the truth...like I said before...There is no eye as blind as one that will not see, and on the heels of that there is no ear so deaf as one that will not hear.
If you can't (or won't) admit the short comings of something thats not my fault...everybody knows that Norlin era Gibson, CBS era Fender, Baldwin era Gretsch, etc suffered when compared to their oldser and newer counterparts...
Im not saying that EVERY guitar Gibson made during that time is a dud but in my experience most of them sure are. My biggiest point is now and has been that those guitars are no where near the quality of new Gibson guitars and at the amazingly high inflated cost of them you could have 1-2 CS Gibsons or 3-4 off the shelf Gibsons and IMO have more MUCH better guitars.
This will be my last post in this thread since everytime I make a post I get attacked and/or get a load of PM's from various disgruntled members...if you like Norlin era Gibson guitars thats great, whatever saves more good guitars for me.
Pastor of Muppets
New member
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
I've owned a dozen or so LP's in my 22 years of playing, Gibson Standards and Customs from the 70s, 80s, 90s and noughties, a Historic RI, plus Orville by Gibsons and Edwards, and I have to say I agree and disagree with you here...in terms of sheer quality the Historic was way above the rest BUT if I had to have one of them back it'd be the 71 Custom, cos it felt right and sounded better to my ears, even though I agree that the 'quality' (now there's a word that got Mr Pirsig into a lot of trouble..) is inferior.
I also think that T-Tops blow the **** outta Burstbuckers and 57 Classics.
I further think that the two protoganists of this thread are both erudite, witty and wise posters and I hope this post antogonises neither of you, cos you both seem like good guys.
Wait, I'm 8,000 miles away aren't I? **** it - you are both twats.
I've owned a dozen or so LP's in my 22 years of playing, Gibson Standards and Customs from the 70s, 80s, 90s and noughties, a Historic RI, plus Orville by Gibsons and Edwards, and I have to say I agree and disagree with you here...in terms of sheer quality the Historic was way above the rest BUT if I had to have one of them back it'd be the 71 Custom, cos it felt right and sounded better to my ears, even though I agree that the 'quality' (now there's a word that got Mr Pirsig into a lot of trouble..) is inferior.
I also think that T-Tops blow the **** outta Burstbuckers and 57 Classics.
I further think that the two protoganists of this thread are both erudite, witty and wise posters and I hope this post antogonises neither of you, cos you both seem like good guys.
Wait, I'm 8,000 miles away aren't I? **** it - you are both twats.
jimmy
New member
Aceman
I am your doctor of love!
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
This begs a real question: As TGWIF is a fan of the old build - can he (or anyone) - tell by feel or by sound a short tenon vs. a long tenon? I bet not...We are talking about some subtle mojo here. Maybe voodoo levels of mojo. We can legitimately ask this question about any of a dozen build issues.
While we are dogging the 70's QC the fact is we don't have much info about the 50's QC. RI's ma be a different issue, but I have to say that I expect that kind of QC on a 1000 dollar guitar.
I'm standing by the build of a 70's LP is simply more to my liking. There is no single kabala of tone that defines what an LP MUST sound like. That's like saying that an all mahog custom with an ebony board is a horrible sounding LP because they ruined it by not putting the cap on or using the brittle sounding ebony....that's just weak. There are great and tragic Les Pauls of all eras. It's all about what you prefer and what gets your tone.
and jimmy - I meant exactly what I typed (technically incorrect as it was...)
(Go ahead Christian...you KNOW you want to type something. Let your anger flow. Perhaps I am league with jimmy. Or the devil. Perhaps I am both. Go ahead - lay finger to key....make my day!)
This begs a real question: As TGWIF is a fan of the old build - can he (or anyone) - tell by feel or by sound a short tenon vs. a long tenon? I bet not...We are talking about some subtle mojo here. Maybe voodoo levels of mojo. We can legitimately ask this question about any of a dozen build issues.
While we are dogging the 70's QC the fact is we don't have much info about the 50's QC. RI's ma be a different issue, but I have to say that I expect that kind of QC on a 1000 dollar guitar.
I'm standing by the build of a 70's LP is simply more to my liking. There is no single kabala of tone that defines what an LP MUST sound like. That's like saying that an all mahog custom with an ebony board is a horrible sounding LP because they ruined it by not putting the cap on or using the brittle sounding ebony....that's just weak. There are great and tragic Les Pauls of all eras. It's all about what you prefer and what gets your tone.
and jimmy - I meant exactly what I typed (technically incorrect as it was...)
(Go ahead Christian...you KNOW you want to type something. Let your anger flow. Perhaps I am league with jimmy. Or the devil. Perhaps I am both. Go ahead - lay finger to key....make my day!)
Last edited:
JeffB
Let it B
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
If you weren't making a potshot before Christian, that was sure a doozy :lmao:
I hear ya about volutes, I did not say it was a "cure" simply that it was better and at least they tried to address the issue (I suspect the lack of headstock angle on Norlins was another attempt) . My big point was simply "it's different" and because of that, many "blues lawyers" hate it, even when it really has no bearing on anything meaningful tone or playability-wise. These "blues lawyers" in fact poo-poo anything thats different and often don't judge an instrument on it's own merits and instead judge based on generalities, which IMO is plainly stupid.
I'm of the mindset that a really good Gibson is a really good Gibson and it's not restricted to or exclusive to any any particular time period (this actually goes for pretty much alot of guitars). Even the vintage late 50s and early 60s guitars I've played, some I was saying to myself "meh" for one reason or another, and a couple were glorious. I feel my old R8 is still THE best Les Paul overall I've ever handled-play-wise, tone-wise, and build-wise. - I really wish I could have got a decent clip of it posted (the one I have was recorded very poorly). Next to that was my 82 Norlin Custom Shop, and then prolly my 91-92-ish Standard.
TGWIF said:
If you weren't making a potshot before Christian, that was sure a doozy :lmao:I hear ya about volutes, I did not say it was a "cure" simply that it was better and at least they tried to address the issue (I suspect the lack of headstock angle on Norlins was another attempt) . My big point was simply "it's different" and because of that, many "blues lawyers" hate it, even when it really has no bearing on anything meaningful tone or playability-wise. These "blues lawyers" in fact poo-poo anything thats different and often don't judge an instrument on it's own merits and instead judge based on generalities, which IMO is plainly stupid.
I'm of the mindset that a really good Gibson is a really good Gibson and it's not restricted to or exclusive to any any particular time period (this actually goes for pretty much alot of guitars). Even the vintage late 50s and early 60s guitars I've played, some I was saying to myself "meh" for one reason or another, and a couple were glorious. I feel my old R8 is still THE best Les Paul overall I've ever handled-play-wise, tone-wise, and build-wise. - I really wish I could have got a decent clip of it posted (the one I have was recorded very poorly). Next to that was my 82 Norlin Custom Shop, and then prolly my 91-92-ish Standard.
Aceman
I am your doctor of love!
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
I agree that the volute is weak. Actually, this is not a matter of agreement. A volute increases the strength of the wood at the neck/headstock joint. The thinnest wood then is on the headstock and the pressure is greatest against it because of short distance between the nut and the tuners. That means any drop is most likely to break the headstock - not the neck. Headstock breaks are a beyotch to fix - if fixable. a nice clean neck break can usually be repaired totally okay-fine.
So - who has seen a neck come off at the heel? IF you have seen any I would expect it was a short tenon....but I bet almost no one has seen that.
We could have had a good critical discussion of 70's Gibson. But Christian threw out the "All 70's skunk." That's no better than Blueman's "All A2's skunk in the neck"
Statements like that are just un-defendable. If we are gonna throw crap, let's be men and throw crap at each other. But we are talking guitars here - this is important stuff. And if you are gonna sling poo, don't get upset if there is a stink about you from picking it up in the first place.
And as always - choose your words carefully. Blueman for example comes across to most as being the ultimate authority on all things magnet. And he pretty much is. But then he goes and slips in the "A2's are awful for the neck" thing. He states it as a fact - and it's really just his opinion. I think thousands of PG neck LP dudes pretty much demonstrate that.
But if you can't laugh at whatever comes your way from making outrageous statements, don't make them. I stick with my basic premise: If it feels good, and sounds good, then it IS good. And the only opinion that counts is your own. If you need more than that you are a collector or as JeffB said a "Blues Lawyer" or "Gibson Lawyer" or whatever.
Guitars are peculiar things. I don't think ANY year or any model are 100% GOLD. And I don't think any are even 50% crap. And few of any from any time are truly great instruments.
same thing with amps. There are guys who will listen to an album and say "Yeah - only a pure tube driven screamin vintage Marshall gets you that tone." And it's actually a DS-1 straight into the board with a speaker sim and little Orange practice amp blended. LIke I said - the blind "taste test" is the only way to know...and I bet a lot of Norlins would pass it, barring neck profile "preferences"
I agree that the volute is weak. Actually, this is not a matter of agreement. A volute increases the strength of the wood at the neck/headstock joint. The thinnest wood then is on the headstock and the pressure is greatest against it because of short distance between the nut and the tuners. That means any drop is most likely to break the headstock - not the neck. Headstock breaks are a beyotch to fix - if fixable. a nice clean neck break can usually be repaired totally okay-fine.
So - who has seen a neck come off at the heel? IF you have seen any I would expect it was a short tenon....but I bet almost no one has seen that.
We could have had a good critical discussion of 70's Gibson. But Christian threw out the "All 70's skunk." That's no better than Blueman's "All A2's skunk in the neck"
Statements like that are just un-defendable. If we are gonna throw crap, let's be men and throw crap at each other. But we are talking guitars here - this is important stuff. And if you are gonna sling poo, don't get upset if there is a stink about you from picking it up in the first place.
And as always - choose your words carefully. Blueman for example comes across to most as being the ultimate authority on all things magnet. And he pretty much is. But then he goes and slips in the "A2's are awful for the neck" thing. He states it as a fact - and it's really just his opinion. I think thousands of PG neck LP dudes pretty much demonstrate that.
But if you can't laugh at whatever comes your way from making outrageous statements, don't make them. I stick with my basic premise: If it feels good, and sounds good, then it IS good. And the only opinion that counts is your own. If you need more than that you are a collector or as JeffB said a "Blues Lawyer" or "Gibson Lawyer" or whatever.
Guitars are peculiar things. I don't think ANY year or any model are 100% GOLD. And I don't think any are even 50% crap. And few of any from any time are truly great instruments.
same thing with amps. There are guys who will listen to an album and say "Yeah - only a pure tube driven screamin vintage Marshall gets you that tone." And it's actually a DS-1 straight into the board with a speaker sim and little Orange practice amp blended. LIke I said - the blind "taste test" is the only way to know...and I bet a lot of Norlins would pass it, barring neck profile "preferences"
Last edited:
Pink Unicorn Horsey
Megä Pöny Rÿdr
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
Hey Bill,
Did Gibson turn a corner with their Les Pauls in '96? I own a '94, and I wonder how the quality compares with something manufactured a few years later.
- Keith
Hey Bill,
Did Gibson turn a corner with their Les Pauls in '96? I own a '94, and I wonder how the quality compares with something manufactured a few years later.
- Keith
Aceman
I am your doctor of love!
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
Is it an investment or an instrument? Play that sucker for all it's worth. Play it to hell and back. And love every glorious note that comes from it.
Otherwise, case it with a little dry bag is a cool dry place and put it on the bay a decade from now. For investments, I buy stock.
Is it an investment or an instrument? Play that sucker for all it's worth. Play it to hell and back. And love every glorious note that comes from it.
Otherwise, case it with a little dry bag is a cool dry place and put it on the bay a decade from now. For investments, I buy stock.
BTMN
LifeIsGoodologist
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
I really dig my '79 The Paul. Warm and woody sounding with "Woman" tone in the neck position and the Tone knob backed down. A really good friend whom is a Jazz player was over one night and REALLY made it sound sweet. He wanted it real bad. After hearing how great it CAN sound I'm hard pressed to let it go and get it out of the case fairly frequently. :approve: :cool2:
Let's not forget Norlin era had some nice runs with Explorers in '76 and a couple V runs among others. :scratchch
I really dig my '79 The Paul. Warm and woody sounding with "Woman" tone in the neck position and the Tone knob backed down. A really good friend whom is a Jazz player was over one night and REALLY made it sound sweet. He wanted it real bad. After hearing how great it CAN sound I'm hard pressed to let it go and get it out of the case fairly frequently. :approve: :cool2:
Let's not forget Norlin era had some nice runs with Explorers in '76 and a couple V runs among others. :scratchch
jimmy
New member
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
I see it as a little of both.
I definitely play the hell out of it. It's been my main guitar since I purchased it. I'm addicted to Les Paul's because of it.
I see it as a little of both.
I definitely play the hell out of it. It's been my main guitar since I purchased it. I'm addicted to Les Paul's because of it.
Luke Duke
PRSlustologist
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
Don't you think you're taking this personally? Your gloss is going to be changed to Showingassologist if you aren't careful.
I think the parallel Christian is trying to draw is that the 80s Ford Mustangs with rubberized wheels and 4 cylinders were mustangs in name, not in performance. The same could be said about pancake body maple neck LPs or swamp ash LPs or strat single coil LPs with pine bodies. They have the name.
Although I agree feel is important I think sound/tone trumps it.....and I'm not a Lawyer.
Luke
Don't you think you're taking this personally? Your gloss is going to be changed to Showingassologist if you aren't careful.
I think the parallel Christian is trying to draw is that the 80s Ford Mustangs with rubberized wheels and 4 cylinders were mustangs in name, not in performance. The same could be said about pancake body maple neck LPs or swamp ash LPs or strat single coil LPs with pine bodies. They have the name.
Although I agree feel is important I think sound/tone trumps it.....and I'm not a Lawyer.
Luke
Last edited:
Pastor of Muppets
New member
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
It's a tough one this...I used to think that maybe feel just wins, especially with electrics, given that your amp and FX dictate the way your axe sounds. I read a good interview with Little Steven the other day - among other things he said his main axes were now 90s Strats rather than vintage ones; reckoned the vintage ones sounded a little better but in a band environment no-one but him noticed the difference.
That said, obviously you want both - my no.1 Tele feels better than my new ASAT, but the ASAT sounds better, and as I play with a simple rig I think the ASAT may soon take top spot.
It's a tough one this...I used to think that maybe feel just wins, especially with electrics, given that your amp and FX dictate the way your axe sounds. I read a good interview with Little Steven the other day - among other things he said his main axes were now 90s Strats rather than vintage ones; reckoned the vintage ones sounded a little better but in a band environment no-one but him noticed the difference.
That said, obviously you want both - my no.1 Tele feels better than my new ASAT, but the ASAT sounds better, and as I play with a simple rig I think the ASAT may soon take top spot.
Re: 70's Era Gibsons
You haven't played mine.
I don't see how you can warp a 3 piece maple neck, but I guess anything is possible.
You haven't played mine.
I don't see how you can warp a 3 piece maple neck, but I guess anything is possible.