Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

[oldschoolrock]

Is the Murphy Aged worth $2500 more???

Your opinions please on looks and tone. Obviously the murphy should take the cake when it comes to looks but how about tone? Both guitars weigh slightly under 9 lbs. And of course the main question..is the murphy $2500 better?

 

[The Golden Boy]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

You're talking a production Standard with a flamey top vs. a "Murphy'd" Historic?

I wouldn't get a Murphy, but I'd take a Historic over any Standard any day of the week.

 

[TheJangus]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

Flame tops seem gaudy to me. Plain top R8's are pure sex.

 

[Robert S.]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

I wouldn't buy a Murphy, not my style.

I'll "murph" my 59 RI the old fashioned way.

 

[Skarekrough]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

Murphy is tops in his field....

Of course, I think his field appeals mainly to those with more money than brains.

Me, personally, I like the stories that go with the dings and dents.

 

[Gunny47]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

100% agreed with you guys. Im kinda upset that the VOS series replaced the normal gloss historics and now if you want a new looking guitar, you gotta pay $3000 for it instead of the original $2500. And the now standard VOSs are $2700, so you lose either way...

 

[callous_frigid_chill]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

The VOS guitars are barely aged at all, still pretty glossy.

 

[JeffB]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

I'd take a Historic over any Standard any day of the week.

+1.

My local shop has 2 murphs...whole different class of guitar compared to a premium top standard.

Murphs are the upper echelon of current paulas. I'm not sure it's worth $2500 more...but no doubt these are gonna be cream of the crop.

 

[bryvincent]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

according to LPF members who owns/owned/played/heard(i don't) murphs, most of the time murphs have good tone.

 

[Gearjoneser]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

The price points have a lot to do with simply creating price points for the sake of later collectibility. Besides the old vintage LP's, the most collectible will probably be the mid 90's and "millenium guitars." The first Historics will be the ones that fetch real dollars, years from now. Gibson is taking full advantage of their situation, but it shouldn't be any surprise.

 

[Skarekrough]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

according to LPF members who owns/owned/played/heard(i don't) murphs, most of the time murphs have good tone.

I think Murphy gets to cherry-pick out of their stock. The result of this is likely to be that he snaps up the best ones for his service.

 

[That90'sGuy]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

Yep, you guys are dead on. Murphs are phenomenal guitars, but I hate the fake "worn" look (guitars were meant to get that way through years of playing). If I'm going to spend a ridiculous amount of money on a guitar, it'd better be in new condition.

The historics are worth more money than the standard production stuff any day. I don't think I'll ever regret investing the money I did into my SG Custom and LP Special DC. The bad thing is now I've been spoiled and other guitars just don't do anything, I'm a nitro only guy from now on

 

[Hellion]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

I'll take my '76 naturally beat up LPC over anything new. Some things you just can't reproduce.

 

[XSSIVE]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

I think Murphy gets to cherry-pick out of their stock. The result of this is likely to be that he snaps up the best ones for his service.

i don't think that's true i and a few other forum members have all had the "pleasure" of playing a Murphy that is a $8K+ guitar and 100% DOG, one of the worst pauls i've played, very bland lifeless guitar and the color is way way too clown burst for me also (but that's personal). so i hope he didn't pick this one haha.

i can't say i'm a huge fan of the Murphy aged pauls in general, they aren't bad and i have played some sweet ones, some so-so ones and a dog or two. however IMO i don't think they are worth the price over a regular historic that's for sure. heck i've had my hands on several historics and sure i could afford one but i see NO need to buy one over a killer playing standard. granted finding that good playing standard is a bit harder than finding a good historic since the historics on average do tend to be a bit better. however i still stand behind my love of the good ol' standard and would much rather pick through them to find a good one than blow a bunch of extra cash.

-Mike

 

[WhoFan]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

I know this is an LP thread but this fake aging business has me shaking my head sometimes... I mean i like the aged look a lot but the price they charge for beating up a new guitar.... man.. that famous story of Keith Richards sending 10 new Teles back to the Fender Custom Shop and asked them to throw them against the wall a few times so they don't look so new... This i believe is what started the aging business!

I wanted an aged strat like a Clapton Blackie kind of thing.... so i bought a baddly beat up 20 year old strat for cheap used oneday and i have the look i was going for... Someone else wore it out for me. Dings, Dents, Scratches, Chips, sun fadded finnish...

Same could be said of my 30 year old LP.....

 

[JeffB]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

There are some things about a Historic ya just ain't gonna get on a standard....ABR bridge direct into the body...the big necks, long tenon (if ya "believe" in that), and generally just a noticeably better fit and finish.

I don't understand the aging thing either though..I mean..yeah it looks cool, and I can understand wanting it also cos then the guitar is not so pristine /already a little beat up..so ya may not baby it as much..cos lord knows I was scared to death of my R8 and Hamer and PRS.

But 2500 bucks...no way..not me anyways...you could buy another R8 for that and just beat the $hit out of it and keep the other one in "showroom floor" condition :laugh2:

 

[oldschoolrock]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

Seems like everyone is saying that tone wise, a Murphy is really no different then a R8??? People I have talked to seems to think the Murphys have a livlier and fatter tone from better quality wood. Can those who have actually played a Murphy chime in on this?

If it is truly just a worn look, it would be crazy to pay the extra cash.

BTW - I am not rich or anything...I could see myself living in a grass shack filled with cool gear. I wouldn't do it but I do dream about it. Guess I am a Gearjonser wannabe. I do have some extra $$$ from my tax return...YEAH!!!

 

[JeffB]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

Wood varies....I've not played a Murphy..but my R8 sounded quite a bit better than a local R9 I messed around with as well as some R7s.

I've also had/played standards that would go toe to toe with many historics tone-wise.

I would *think* that R9s and Murphys and R0's would get the cream of the crop wood, but if Mike says he heard/played a dog murphy or two, I believe him.

But for one murphy, you could have two R7s/R8s...or just a custom authentic R9 and $1500 left over to play with.Personally I can't stand the R9 neck...so I'd never buy one as a main axe...only to have one.

 

[WhoFan]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

I'd love to own a new R8 or R9 over and aged one anyday..... a friend of mine had an R9 and that neck shape is great..... and the light Aluminum tail piece is a nice touch!!!!

 

[XSSIVE]

Re: Gibson LP Flame AAA top vs. Murphy Aged

Jeff, yeah myself bludave and paultelestrat have all had our hands on the same murphy and all have the same feeling....."well it looks cool in the display case" hahahaha. it's just kinda blah, no real vibe to it very bland overall guitar. i guess it was just a lifeless hunk of wood that looked good but sounded bland.

as for things you get in an R over a standard...the abr..eh not a huge deal to me since i'm changing my standard over to tonepros bridge and aluminum locking tail anyway. long tennon, yeah i guess that's a plus but how much of a plus? i don't think it's big enough to warrant the price change. given the choice of the two, yeah i'd take the long just since there is more wood by a few inches and it can't hurt. neck shape, that's subjective to each player, i'm fine with many neck shapes, 50s, 60s, R8, R9 and i'm even fine with the "59" shape on the studios. i do like the standards 50s a lot since its nice and round and meaty but not a huge log of a neck. as for better fit and finish, you know me, i'm the first to pick at Gibson QC hehe but that's why i said you have to search for the right standard. as i'm sure you will agree, there are standards out there that will kill the average R HOWEVER they aren't that easy to come across. i guess it's all luck of the draw and you need to find the one that will fit you and your needs no matter if it's a studio a standard or an R the right paul is out there for each person....now go hunt LOL.

i'll take some pics of my new standard premium plus top later so you can see the wood quality used on it...everything from the dark dark dark even fretboard to the amazingly flamed top to the back and back of the neck are great hunks of wood. so i lucked out bigtime with what i feel is one of those killer standards that leaves me wanting no more in a paul since i don't think they can get too much better for what i want and need in a paul.

-Mike