What's up with the bass upper horn being fused to the neck?

[Rex_Rocker]

ESP also has their popular EC models which is their Les Paul variant. Why hasn't Gibson sued them for it?

They did. They used to have a version with a 4 knob layout and a rounder horn.

I like the newer version better, TBH. With 3 knobs and a sharper horn. But many people don't.

Other than that, if you place an EC on top of a LP, it's noticeably different. It's smaller, for starters, and the opposite side of the cutaway is a bit different.

 

[Inflames626]

They did. They used to have a version with a 4 knob layout and a rounder horn.

I like the newer version better, TBH. With 3 knobs and a sharper horn. But many people don't.

Other than that, if you place an EC on top of a LP, it's noticeably different. It's smaller, for starters, and the opposite side of the cutaway is a bit different.

Also, flag inlays.

I'm wondering what the legal criteria are for "similarity" in these lawsuits. Is it the headstock design? Inlays? Size? Overall shape? Knob layout?

A lot of these things seem subjective.

Besides, Gibson and Fender designs have been around for so long now and have been copied by so many manufacturers the designs might as well be public domain.

It would be like Toyota and GM suing each other for both making sedans.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

This is the "lawsuit" Eclipse.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

Also, flag inlays.

I'm wondering what the legal criteria are for "similarity" in these lawsuits. Is it the headstock design? Inlays? Size? Overall shape? Knob layout?

A lot of these things seem subjective.

Besides, Gibson and Fender designs have been around for so long now and have been copied by so many manufacturers the designs might as well be public domain.

It would be like Toyota and GM suing each other for both making sedans.

Yep, and the flag headstock.

Honestly, for me, the FT EC is a MUCH better guitar if it weren't for the fact that everyone who makes a LP copy places the bridge pickup further away from the bridge than Gibson does. I like that from a Gibson, personally.

 

[Mincer]

I actually dig some of the new Ibanez bass designs. I don't particularly like the spalted spotty woods, though...looks like a disease under a microscope.

 

[Inflames626]

I actually dig some of the new Ibanez bass designs. I don't particularly like the spalted spotty woods, though...looks like a disease under a microscope.

Dutch Elm model.

 

[ICTGoober]

Les Paul VARIANT. Why hasn't Gibson sued them for it?

You answered your own question.

 

[Inflames626]

Yep, and the flag headstock.

Honestly, for me, the FT EC is a MUCH better guitar if it weren't for the fact that everyone who makes a LP copy places the bridge pickup further away from the bridge than Gibson does. I like that from a Gibson, personally.

To me the EC is to the Les Paul what the Dinky is to a Strat. An updated model of a similar design. That said, that EC in the picture is pretty damned close to trademark infringement I'd say. But if it's smaller, sleeker, and the pickups are in different places, it kind of becomes its own thing.

I would think chambering and weight would add into it as well.

I can see why ESP would change the pickup spacing. Seems a simpler way to avoid being sued than trying to reinvent the wheel.

That said, why no lawsuits for Tokai, Burny, and other Japanese domestic brands that generally aren't sold here? They're much more like traditional Gibsons to me than ECs. Is it lack of jurisdiction? Are Gibsons not sold as much in Japan?

 

[Inflames626]

Yep, and the flag headstock.

Honestly, for me, the FT EC is a MUCH better guitar if it weren't for the fact that everyone who makes a LP copy places the bridge pickup further away from the bridge than Gibson does. I like that from a Gibson, personally.

Also, if the pickups are closer together, isn't that just a Les Paul with SG pickup spacing?

 

[Rex_Rocker]

To me the EC is to the Les Paul what the Dinky is to a Strat. An updated model of a similar design. That said, that EC in the picture is pretty damned close to trademark infringement I'd say. But if it's smaller, sleeker, and the pickups are in different places, it kind of becomes its own thing.

I would think chambering and weight would add into it as well.

I can see why ESP would change the pickup spacing. Seems a simpler way to avoid being sued than trying to reinvent the wheel.

That said, why no lawsuits for Tokai, Burny, and other Japanese domestic brands that generally aren't sold here? They're much more like traditional Gibsons to me than ECs. Is it lack of jurisdiction? Are Gibsons not sold as much in Japan?

I'm not sure if all of them are like that, but even the "nicer" LP knockoffs don't get the placement of the bridge pickup right. I'm thinking Edwards and Tokai, at least.

 

[Inflames626]

I'm not sure if all of them are like that, but even the "nicer" LP knockoffs don't get the placement of the bridge pickup right. I'm thinking Edwards and Tokai, at least.

I'm wondering if that difference is intentional on their part. I doubt most players will notice things like pickup spacing. I didn't know there was a difference in EC and Gibson pickup spacing until you mentioned it. I thought that was only a case when a 24 fret neck necessitated moving the neck pickup back and possibly the bridge as well.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

I'm wondering if that difference is intentional on their part. I doubt most players will notice things like pickup spacing. I didn't know there was a difference in EC and Gibson pickup spacing until you mentioned it. I thought that was only a case when a 24 fret neck necessitated moving the neck pickup back and possibly the bridge as well.

Supposedly, the 1959's had it even closer to the bridge than the modern ones. Or so I've read.

Honestly, for me, playing metal and liking the tones that I like, I really like, I love the bite that you get from having the pickup super close to the bridge.

SG's have it even closer than LP's. I'm trying to find a good deal on an SG to try it.

Exactly the reason why I stay away from Jacksons. Most of them have the bridge pickup like a mile off from the bridge itself.

 

[Inflames626]

Supposedly, the 1959's had it even closer to the bridge than the modern ones. Or so I've read.

Honestly, for me, playing metal and liking the tones that I like, I really like, I love the bite that you get from having the pickup super close to the bridge.

SG's have it even closer than LP's. I'm trying to find a good deal on an SG to try it.

Exactly the reason why I stay away from Jacksons. Most of them have the bridge pickup like a mile off from the bridge itself.

I always considered them rather close on Jacksons, or just never really paid attention. But I mostly play Floyds and I'm not sure that's fair to compare to a tune-o-matic. I just haven't paid that close attention but you bring up a lot of interesting things I'll have to look at closely next time I'm able.

A lot of pickup placement for me is optical illusion of the body shape as well. Newer Ibanez Destroyers made in the 00s have the bridge way back nearly at the back of the body. They look almost like children's 3/4 size guitars or so. Jackson Minions are like this as well I think.

I would think you could easily alter the scale length of a Les Paul just by moving the tune-o-matic posts and pickups back while keeping the neck the same length. There seems to be enough real estate back there. Real estate that the ESP ECs seemed to shave off in an attempt to reduce size.

I never realized how much more efficient a Dinky was in terms of ergonomics until I got my Jackson Adrian Smith SDX and started upgrading it. Strats are much larger than they appear to be.

I mainly play Explorer shaped guitars since I have to play sitting down due to a medical issue. Explorers just balance well on the thigh. Most of my guitars are Jackson Kellys.

V's look cool but are hard to play sitting down. Rhoads Vs are a good compromise if the strap is tightened up high.

The main playing difference I notice with Les Paul style guitars besides scale length is how much closer the bridge pickup is to the strings on an arch top guitar vs. a flat guitar.

Meanwhile, on a Dinky, I feel like my picking hand is further forward.

For me, a Kelly just feels right, although they could be a bit smaller. Hence my appreciation for Destroyers.

Tbh, my Kellys feel more like my Mockingbird in terms of balance than an Explorer.

 

[Inflames626]

Tune-o-matics also have that string pitched angle that descends down over the pickups whereas my Floyds appear to be flush.

Looking at it side on, I can see how the Les Paul design was probably inspired by violins, violas, and cellos.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

I don't really have a problem adapting to most guitars, personally. I do play 99.9% of the time sitting down, so like you, I'm wouldn't get a V no matter how cool I think they look.

I do prefer the feel of a flatter fretboard radius, a thinner neck, and jumbo frets, but I can get along just fine in my Les Paul. The only thing that I have a problem with it playability wise is upper fret acces, but I rarely ever play there, so meh. Whatever.

I do prefer the feel of a raised Tune-O and an angled-back neck, but at the same time, I've had many Super Strats that mop the floor with any Les Paul as far as playability. I used to have an Ibanez RGA121 that needed a fretjob, but had a neck profile to-die-for. That's the thing for me, I much prefer Ibanez to Jackson because of the thinner neck and the fact that I actually prefer bolt-on necks over neck-thrus. However, I prefer fixed bridges and mahogany bodies, and that's kind of a rarity with Ibanez.

However, as much as that RGA121 sounded fantastic, it did not sound like a Les Paul. And the tone in my head has always been a Les Paul, and when I finally got a Les Paul, low-end as it may be (it's a Tribute), it just sounded like I always wanted my guitar to sound. Maybe I'm romanticizing, but this LP is truly the best-sounding guitar I've ever owned.

However, LTD's are in general, a good middle ground of the tone that I like (Gibson-ish) with the playability that I like (Ibanez-ish). But they're really neither, TBH.

However, the antithesis of the tone and feel that I want is probably a vintage spec'd Strat. A thick V neck with an ultra round fretboard, tiny frets, and low-output single coils is the last thing I'd ever want, LOL.

 

[Inflames626]

I used to think I preferred really flat fretboards, but I like a little bit of relief, especially between 5th and 12th where most of your bending and vibrato are going to be. My vibrato is ****, so I always feel like I'm digging in too deeply and my fingers slip off the string. A little relief helps that.

I'd say I prefer a C or D shaped neck, but not ultra thin. When they are super thin there is too much air between my hand and the back of the neck. I feel like I have to arch my hand way over not because the neck is thick but because it's so thin and there's nothing there. Thumb joint and muscle take all the strain. With some more wood to fill up my palm I feel a little more secure.

I've started to see instrument construction, tone wood, etc., as maybe like recording drums. You could alter the physical environment to record drums (a big, treated room), or you could do things in post.

How much tone wood, neck thru construction, and a fixed bridge = a nudge on the lows on the amp from 5 to 6 to compensate on a shred stick?

Likewise, with guitars, I'm sure my set neck tune-o-matic bridge guitars sound marginally better unplugged than my Floyded bolt ons. I tend to use those fixed bridge guitars for tracking rhythms. But it isn't really a day and night difference for me if I can put different pickups in or tweak the amp to compensate.

I think tastes largely reflect what one started out playing on. I started playing in the mid 90s on mid priced MIJ bolt on Jacksons whose only real drawback was the Jackson licensed Floyd JT580/590LP bridges that didn't stay in tune. The Duncan Designed pickups patterned after Invaders were way too dark for those bright sounding guitars and were replaced decades ago by EMGs. Moving to 24 volts really improved the tone, and I swapped out the hardware with Schaller bridges which are an exact fit for the Jackson routes of that area.

They don't look as nice as guitars tend to now (dot inlays, unpainted satin neck), but when all I need is a master volume knob EMG'ed guitar, it's fine.

Something I'm paying more attention to as they age is fret material/size, because when they need a refret I need to know what to use. I'll probably just get a new neck by then because I will be like, "Whatever came on 90s MIJ Jackson guitars." Not a lot of people here know what they are doing with more precise luthiery tasks like refretting and nut slotting around here.

I prefer bolt on too for metal--faster attack and brighter, especially on basses. And if the neck breaks you just replace it. I really only like thrus on Soloists for upper fret access.

A set neck is a good compromise tonally but replacing a set neck would be a lot of trouble I think. If thrus and sets of equal price were available for a fixed bridge I'd probably go thru just because a set isn't going to be that much easier for the average person to fix than a thru and the set already lends its tone more to the thru anyway than a bolt on.

Easier maintenance and a tone more accommodating of my genre makes me favor bolt ons, though. In fact, I specifically buy cheaper import Kellys because they are bolt on, whereas the nicer ones tend to be thrus.

The Smith is my only vintage faithful Strat, and I got that more to put A2PS pickups in so the look would match the tone. I do like a rounder radius for barre chording down low. Seems like my interior strings are always muting on low barre chords on my Jacksons, which I think are 12-16" compound. Too flat of a neck feels too convex for me.

 

[Inflames626]

Also, on my EC 256 (which I got over the 1000 because the 256 is passive), there seems to be a slight belly cut or tilt back on it. Looking at pics of LP Standards and Customs the body looks straight. Just thought I'd confirm this. Maybe the belly cut prevented more lawsuits.

I've only played a Les Paul Custom for a few minutes I think. A good friend bought a slightly beat up one used for about $1200 maybe 5-10 years ago. I remember it being nice but I didn't think it was worth it when other competitors were offering something similar for a cheaper price.

That said, I'd probably take a genuine Studio if I wanted to buy one. Their stripped down look suits metal a bit more, IMO.

 

[Clint 55]

I imagine this is done for sustain purposes and perhaps also to prevent neck dive, but to me it looks kind of dorky.

I say it's 100% dork factor.

 

[Inflames626]

I say it's 100% dork factor.

Depending on which (Canadian) YouTuber you ask, pretty much all bass players are dorks.

 

[Mincer]

I am up for any ideas that make a better playing and sounding instrument. I am more of a function before everything else person, though.