Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

This is reason to lose your temper?

I haven't lost my temper I am actually in the best mood I have been all day. When I lose my temper it is more like this.

giphy.gif
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

I'm just curious. What is wrong with robotuners? Do they not work or something?
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

I'm just curious. What is wrong with robotuners? Do they not work or something?

IMO one of the first important lesson in playing guitar is learning how to tune a guitar. It is your very first lesson in ear training. With cheap electronic tuners flooding the market I see more and more young guitarists that can not tune their instruments by ear. I find that to be troubling. Robotuners take it to the next level. The guitarist need not know the name of their strings. I do not see the benefit of the product and think it adds little to nothing to the guitar community. I actually think it robs young guitarists of a valuable ear training lesson.
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

I think all the talk of versatility in guitars is redundant if you only ever use one scale.
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

IMO one of the first important lesson in playing guitar is learning how to tune a guitar. It is your very first lesson in ear training. With cheap electronic tuners flooding the market I see more and more young guitarists that can not tune their instruments by ear. I find that to be troubling. Robotuners take it to the next level. The guitarist need not know the name of their strings. I do not see the benefit of the product and think it adds little to nothing to the guitar community. I actually think it robs young guitarists of a valuable ear training lesson.

That's a fair point. I would argue though that electronic tuning is just that much faster, which is why so many players use it including professionals. They offer convenience at the price of a potentially less trained ear.
 
Last edited:
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

That's a fair point. I would argue though that electronic tuning is just that much faster which is why so many players use it including professionals. They offer convenience at the price of a potentially less trained ear.

I am right with you. I have tons of tuners - rack, pedal, clip ons you name it. They are godsends in a loud venue I would be lost without one. When at home by myself I always tune by ear.
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

So umm, to the op, what are you hoping to accomplish with a junior?
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

There is nothing like a good one. It'll do anything you can make it do with your playing and your understanding of e.q. Two of my most played, and IMO greatest, guitars I own (and have owned since new in 2001 and 2004) are Gibson Juniors. At times these have been my number one and backup, and at any other time, they are my number two and backup (with the number one being my Esquire). A lot of crappy ones have been churned out over the past 10 to 12 years, though, so make sure you try it before you buy it. IME, the older the better, but at least try to get one from before they took the word "Honduran" out from before the word "mahogany" on their spec sheets. That is when they REALLY started cheaping out.
 
Last edited:
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

^ Its still the same species of mahogany. Just grown in plantation.
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

^ Its still the same species of mahogany. Just grown in plantation.

Not that farmed vs. natural lumber isn't an important issue, but the tonal qualities of the wood itself are completely outside of my point made above. I didn't say, "Such and such ones will sound worse because they aren't made of Honduran mahogany." The point was that the change in Gibson's fundamental raw materials seems to coincide with the point at which the company's cost cutting started to become very apparent. The dropping of the word "Honduran" is to me kind of an indicator of a general trend toward crappiness, not a concrete cause of bad guitars. I'd noticed some quality control issues with Gibsons before then, but they really picked up at some point around 10 years ago IME. All I was saying was that this major downturn occurred at about the time "Honduran" was dropped, not that there was a direct link between the wood and the guitars' build quality.
 
Last edited:
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

As much as I don't like to, I think I have to agree with you on the QC dropping at Gibson.

I see it as more of a cosmetic thing more than a tonal change though (looking at the threads on MLP where returned guitars are the issue), although personally I haven't played enough to judge that for myself. The 2012/2013 year and specs are seen as a 'return to the good old days', at least where the factory lines are concerned. And the Historics got a change too with a few key structural changes.
 
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

It's really all about attention to detail. The time consuming (thus costly) fine detail work that turns an okay guitar into a great guitar just isn't done right (or at all) there. Things I notice a lot are: Boxy, barely crowned frets. Boxy fret ends. Out-of-level frets. Poorly polished frets. Sharply cut nuts with rough, ill-sized slots, and the wrong slot angles. Rough bridge saddles, often incorrectly slotted so the strings aren't spaced right. Extremely sharp fretboard edges. Sanding marks on the fretboard. Router flash in the cavities. Orange peel or otherwise not smooth finishes. Thick finishes. Finish scraping mistakes which should have been rejected and redone (these mistakes are easy to make, but letting them continue on down the production line is another issue). Bottom line for me, they reek of being total rush jobs, especially in the areas of final assembly and setup. It's some combination of cutting labor costs by rushing the builders, and perhaps poor builder skill, as many of the good, experienced builder have moved on due to the harsh working environment.

As for tone...I never make the argument that they sound better than they did back in the "good old days." They sound the same to me. My gripe is with the low amount of final build quality you get for the high price you pay. When you buy a Gibson these days, you are basically buying an unfinished guitar. You have to have the frets dressed, the nut reshaped/slotted or replaced, the bridge saddles correctly slotted and deburred (if not totally replaced due to bad string spacing), and often the fretboard edges rounded over, all before you have a guitar that I consider "complete." With what the guitars cost, the customer should not have to finish building the guitar properly for Gibson. But people keep shelling out and thinking they are great, because they are blinded by the name on the headstock, and likely ignorant of what a truly well built guitar is supposed to be like.

At any rate, they can be very good guitars with some work, such as that I mentioned above. And some actually come out better than others in these regards. Not every one has all of these problems...but IME, most of them have most of these problems. Points being, just try before you buy to make sure you are getting a good one, and when deciding what to pay, factor in the cost of the improvements it will likely need. In general, I would say don't pay over $550 for one that happens to be pretty well built. One that needs a lot of fret work and the like, I might pay $400-$450 for.
 
Last edited:
Re: Interested in a Gibson Les Paul Junior :)

I'd rock a Jr. - the dirty P90 tone through t00bs is to die for.

But it'd have to be in a color besides "Open Sore Pus Yellow" - something with metalflake in it.

And a chrome-covered dog ear P90.

The shinier, the better.
 
Back
Top