Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
- Thread starter Barron1
- Start date
Zerberus
Baron Von Shred
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
I know Keef clocked a storming fan onstage with a tele ages ago, not sure ´bout Pete....
I know Keef clocked a storming fan onstage with a tele ages ago, not sure ´bout Pete....
Coma
Well-known member
JordanM82
New member
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
Okay, at the risk of taking a beating for this comment. 2 of my former band-mates have both had cracks in their headstock, one in a LP and one in a 335. I have never owned a Gibson so I can't say personally (though I wouldn't hesitate even for a second if I had the cash) and my only LP style guitar is a Carvin CS4.
All that being said, I am not a hater at all... Love the feel and tone of Gibson guitars...
Okay, at the risk of taking a beating for this comment. 2 of my former band-mates have both had cracks in their headstock, one in a LP and one in a 335. I have never owned a Gibson so I can't say personally (though I wouldn't hesitate even for a second if I had the cash) and my only LP style guitar is a Carvin CS4.
All that being said, I am not a hater at all... Love the feel and tone of Gibson guitars...
jimo
New member
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPMd_yQkyOk
Here is Robin Zander fixing his mythical break in his 58 les paul Jr.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPMd_yQkyOk
Here is Robin Zander fixing his mythical break in his 58 les paul Jr.
wahwah
GumbyLoveologist
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
I've worked with a lot of guitar techs over the years, both road techs and in-house luthiers, and every one of them to a man had stories of Gibsons losing their heads. The most common culprit was accidental faceplants from a guitar stand. When I got my last refret done, my current tech had a headless Gibson in for repair and we had a two word conversation about it. "Faceplant?" "Yep."
It seems to be common knowledge amongst them. I'm kinda surprised to hear anyone referring to it as a myth. It's not like it's going to fall off from regular use, but there certainly seems to be a susceptibility there.
Cheers......................................... wahwah
I've worked with a lot of guitar techs over the years, both road techs and in-house luthiers, and every one of them to a man had stories of Gibsons losing their heads. The most common culprit was accidental faceplants from a guitar stand. When I got my last refret done, my current tech had a headless Gibson in for repair and we had a two word conversation about it. "Faceplant?" "Yep."
It seems to be common knowledge amongst them. I'm kinda surprised to hear anyone referring to it as a myth. It's not like it's going to fall off from regular use, but there certainly seems to be a susceptibility there.
Cheers......................................... wahwah
Zerberus
Baron Von Shred
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
^^ Yes. But accidental faceplants can break off ANY tilted headstock, which is my general point. It´s not that I´ve never repaired a Gibson headstock, but for example classical guitars LOOOVE to break along the headstock face when knocked over. I´ve repaired heads on Jacksons, ESPs, Martins, ....
The myth is that they are in some way especially weak. But in reality I think that there are just more Gibsons in the hands of careless players than there are other brands
^^ Yes. But accidental faceplants can break off ANY tilted headstock, which is my general point. It´s not that I´ve never repaired a Gibson headstock, but for example classical guitars LOOOVE to break along the headstock face when knocked over. I´ve repaired heads on Jacksons, ESPs, Martins, ....
The myth is that they are in some way especially weak. But in reality I think that there are just more Gibsons in the hands of careless players than there are other brands
Last edited:
wahwah
GumbyLoveologist
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
Your point about the tilted headstock in general makes perfect sense. And to be fair to careless Gibson players, a careless amateur roadie is probably quite often the real culprit. Whilst I would fully endorse that the decapitation of said clumsy roadie would be a fitting punishment, the moral implications unfortunately dictate otherwise.
Cheers............................................ wahwah
^^ Yes. But accidental faceplants can break off ANY tilted headstock, which is my general point. It´s not that I´ve never repaired a Gibson headstock, but for example classical guitars LOOOVE to break along the headstock face when knocked over. I´ve repaired heads on Jacksons, ESPs, Martins, ....
The myth is that they are in some way especially weak. But in reality I think that there are just more Gibsons in the hands of careless players than there are other brands
Your point about the tilted headstock in general makes perfect sense. And to be fair to careless Gibson players, a careless amateur roadie is probably quite often the real culprit. Whilst I would fully endorse that the decapitation of said clumsy roadie would be a fitting punishment, the moral implications unfortunately dictate otherwise.
Cheers............................................ wahwah
Coma
Well-known member
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
And yet, at local gigs you still see so many guys put their guitars on stands, on small stages so crowded with gear and personnel that a mountain goat would have trouble navigating thru it...
And yet, at local gigs you still see so many guys put their guitars on stands, on small stages so crowded with gear and personnel that a mountain goat would have trouble navigating thru it...
voggin
Well-known member
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
Acoustic guitars are more susceptible to damage than electrics, but that doesn't stop me from owning one. Tube amps are less reliable than solid state, but you don't hear many people say "I'd never buy a tube amp" because of it.
The relatively rare headstock issue is no reason to avoid owning a Gibson or other angled-neck guitar. The fact that you hear so much about it is because it is a way to bash a product or company a lot of people don't like. I've been playing a strat for over twenty years, so I'm not a "Gibson guy", but I'll never understand the hate they arouse. Many Gibsons are beautiful instruments.
Acoustic guitars are more susceptible to damage than electrics, but that doesn't stop me from owning one. Tube amps are less reliable than solid state, but you don't hear many people say "I'd never buy a tube amp" because of it.
The relatively rare headstock issue is no reason to avoid owning a Gibson or other angled-neck guitar. The fact that you hear so much about it is because it is a way to bash a product or company a lot of people don't like. I've been playing a strat for over twenty years, so I'm not a "Gibson guy", but I'll never understand the hate they arouse. Many Gibsons are beautiful instruments.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
Actually I've read the opposite, from Marshall themselves. They say tube amps have far fewer problems. They're built more ruggedly to handle much more current, and aren't damaged by spikes like solid states are. Maybe that 'tubes are unreliable' perception gets confused with having to take care of your tubes (warm up and cool down) and periodically replacing them. When it comes to just plain old 'crapping out' for no apparent reason, I think solid state amps are probably the most common culprits.
Actually I've read the opposite, from Marshall themselves. They say tube amps have far fewer problems. They're built more ruggedly to handle much more current, and aren't damaged by spikes like solid states are. Maybe that 'tubes are unreliable' perception gets confused with having to take care of your tubes (warm up and cool down) and periodically replacing them. When it comes to just plain old 'crapping out' for no apparent reason, I think solid state amps are probably the most common culprits.
voggin
Well-known member
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
Ok, I stand corrected.
But I think you get my point.
Ok, I stand corrected.
But I think you get my point.
Agileguy_101
Master of his Domain
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
If you were the burglar, I think you'd run in fear of even being in a 10ft proximity with anything vaguely resembling a Telecaster.
If you were the burglar, I think you'd run in fear of even being in a 10ft proximity with anything vaguely resembling a Telecaster.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
True. A Strat pointed at me would be even more terrifying, especially if the guy threated to play surf music or country. I'd turn myself in to the police ("Don't do anything crazy, like plug that guitar in. I'll cooperate, man. Let's just walk down to the police station and they can book me.")
True. A Strat pointed at me would be even more terrifying, especially if the guy threated to play surf music or country. I'd turn myself in to the police ("Don't do anything crazy, like plug that guitar in. I'll cooperate, man. Let's just walk down to the police station and they can book me.")
Walter's Beard
New member
ImmortalSix
John Mayer's Mankini
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
I think it's something Gibson haters focus on because there's not much else to make fun of.
I think it's something Gibson haters focus on because there's not much else to make fun of.
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
they are at the end of your wood :scratchch
they are at the end of your wood :scratchch
Coma
Well-known member
LesStrat
Reining PunLowered
Re: Is the myth of the Les Paul headstock true?
Myth? No.
Break from normal use? No.
Headstock falls off on its own? No.
More prone due to the angle? Yes.
Should that prevent you from owning one? No.
It is logical that the design IS somewhat more susceptible to significant damage from an impact than straighter designs. Yet an increase in probability does not mean that it is likely that YOURS will break. That probability is NOT 2-3x average, though. More likely it is 10% or so (but who knows?).
But this issue is not mythical. It certainly is rooted in reality. The difference should not prevent a decision to own a Gibby, though.
Protect your instrument and problems are unlikely. Period.
I learned to play on my Dad's ES-175. The head had been broken and un-professionally repaired. It still played well and stayed in tune, but the new joint was ugly.
Pop never left his equipment out or on stage. However, (ONCE) they finished a late-night gig and the band convinced him to come back in the morning to load-out. No one was left in the club, so they figured everything would be okay.
He returned the next morning and the headstock was broken. He still does not know what happened.
He never left another guitar out after that. Me neither.
Myth? No.
Break from normal use? No.
Headstock falls off on its own? No.
More prone due to the angle? Yes.
Should that prevent you from owning one? No.
It is logical that the design IS somewhat more susceptible to significant damage from an impact than straighter designs. Yet an increase in probability does not mean that it is likely that YOURS will break. That probability is NOT 2-3x average, though. More likely it is 10% or so (but who knows?).
But this issue is not mythical. It certainly is rooted in reality. The difference should not prevent a decision to own a Gibby, though.
Protect your instrument and problems are unlikely. Period.
I learned to play on my Dad's ES-175. The head had been broken and un-professionally repaired. It still played well and stayed in tune, but the new joint was ugly.
Pop never left his equipment out or on stage. However, (ONCE) they finished a late-night gig and the band convinced him to come back in the morning to load-out. No one was left in the club, so they figured everything would be okay.
He returned the next morning and the headstock was broken. He still does not know what happened.
He never left another guitar out after that. Me neither.
