• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

R7, R8, R9 & R0????? difference?

Classic

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,624
R7, R8, R9 & R0????? difference?

What's the difference between the four? The R0 I assume has a 60's neck as opposed to the R9 et al.

Prey Tell.
________
SHIP SALE
 
Last edited:

jb_abides

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,275
Usually applied to Les Pauls R7 = 1957, etc. Historically "Accurate" Reissue from Gibson Custom, Art & Historic - by year of original manufacture, 1954-1960, and although I haven't seen 'R1' for 1961 in common usage there are Historic SGs from '61.
 

Classic

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,624
Re: R7, R8, R9 & R0????? difference?

I'll rephrase the question. What's the difference between a 1957, 58, 59 and 1960's Les Paul?
________
Vaporizer review
 
Last edited:

LookerBob

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
2,258
As I understand it, the 56, 57, 58 and 59 are practically the same guitar - but the 56 has P90s and a goldtop, the 57 has a goldtop, the 58 a plaintop, and the 59 a hideously ugly flamed top. The 60 would have the different neck.
 

usc2k1

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
36
The 57 has a fatter neck than the 58. I think the 59 neck is even slimmer.
 

OscrDGrch

New member
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
27
LookerBob is correct. In addition to the differences mentioned, the R9 has a neck that has been shaped to be the same depth but less clubby than the R8. Also, the R0 has reflector style knobs.
 

LookerBob

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
2,258
Is the 58 neck in fact thinner than the 57? Did not know that... was wondering on some of these models, e.g. the blacktops, how they decided what was a 57 and what was a 58...

Score one more point for the 58, maybe... I want a fat neck, but maybe not *that* fat. :)
 
O

only3for5

Guest
Neck sizes can vary widely within RX models.

The neck on my new R6 is almost the exact same size as the neck on my R8.
 

LookerBob

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
2,258
Here's the part where I admit that while I'm planning on buying one, I've not yet *played* a Historic...

How does the neck size (generally) compare to say, a current production SG standard?
 

Lennon24

Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2003
Messages
473
only3for5 said:
Neck sizes can vary widely within RX models.

The neck on my new R6 is almost the exact same size as the neck on my R8.

I have an R6, R7 BB 3 Pick-up, R8 R9 and an R0...the neck on the '56 is HUGE, as is the one on the '57 Custom (I cannot get used to the middle pick-up being there on the custom, I suppose that it makes me pick more lightly and therefore more quickly and more cleanly, but I just can't really dig into and grab ahold of a note, hit it had with the pick and then bend it a step and a half ( ala SRV)...the Neck on the '58 is much smaller than the R6 but stil noticably bigger than the R9...the R0 is very similar to my '96 Page Signature (VERY thin), for me the '59 is the most comfortable (Very similar to my '71 Goldtop Deluxe, which was my number 1 playing out guitar for over 20 years), but I believe that I can play faster on the R0 (the neck is very similar to my '60 Junior)...my '58 is an '02 and has a great Flame top, equal to both the '59 and the '60...the only difference to me is the neck, except that the '03 R9 has a brazillian Board, which IMO makes little difference in playability, but looks cool as shit...both the R8 & R9 are "washed Cherry Sunburst" but on the R9 the red is much darker and authentic looking...the R0 is faded tobacco, and is the best looking of the lot. In terms of neck sizes, it is all about personal preference...as for the look, to me there is something very cool about a goldtop with P-90s...I love the sound especially playing the blues in the middle position with the bridge volume rolled back just a tiny bit, but the pickups are a little noisy...
 
Last edited:

bluesbishop

New member
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
392
LookerBob said:
Here's the part where I admit that while I'm planning on buying one, I've not yet *played* a Historic...

How does the neck size (generally) compare to say, a current production SG standard?

IMHO the Historic necks (except for the R0) are much larger than a production neck. I had a Les Paul Standard with a 50's neck, and I think the SG has a smaller taper 60's neck profile....my R7's neck is way larger!! Now don't let that scare you...they are not uncomfortable to play, just large chunky necks.
:biggrin:
 

LookerBob

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
2,258
Gibson's site says the SG neck is 'rounded'. I know the 61 RI one has a 60s slim taper, but... the SG neck never seemed too big... and lately my special's neck seems far too thin.
 

Classic

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,624
Re: R7, R8, R9 & R0????? difference?

I like the neck on my 1999 Gibson Les Paul Classic - is the R0 neck the same as or similar to the Classics?
________
NICE TITS LIVE
 
Last edited:

xjustice09x

New member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
351
Classic said:
I like the neck on my 1999 Gibson Les Paul Classic - is the R0 neck the same as or similar to the Classics?


The same no. Similar maybe.

The reissue necks are shaped by hand so they all vary a little. If you want a thinner neck and you want a Historic Les Paul your best bet is to look for an R0.
 

bluesjuke

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
7,007
usc2k1 said:
The 57 has a fatter neck than the 58. I think the 59 neck is even slimmer.


Only sometimes.
Most R8's I have played are larger than the 'R7's
My R8 in particular is bigger than my R7 but it is also larger than most R8's.
 
Last edited:

Bluedawg

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
894
Supposedly,

R9s and R0s get the best wood that Gibson has on hand at the time, with the other historics getting the next best wood. The good wood is allegedly the more toneful and lighter wood.

The wood that doesn't make the historic cut goes to the production section to make weight relieved LPs and other guitars.

I can't say if this is actually true, but it has come up in many posts on this subject.

:jim
 

Rumbling_Groover

Les Paul Forum Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2002
Messages
1,089
The neck on my R0 is pencil thin compared to the other custom shop '60s tapers I have, however it has slightly more shoulder to it than my old '95 Classic.
 

Crunchyriff

Active member
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
2,530
gee, I've found every R7 to be as large, or slightly larger than the R8's I've played.

The bottom line is they all vary.
 

KOTR

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
1,031
I like the neck on my 1999 Gibson Les Paul Classic - is the R0 neck the same as or similar to the Classics?

I have a Historic Special DC which is supposed to have the same neck profile as an R0. The Special's neck feels slightly wider and thicker than the '96 Classic I had but much thinner than my R9. If you want a flamed top Historic with a similar neck to your Classic, the R0 is probably as close as you'll get.

Isn't there supposed to be some difference in fret wire size between the R7, R8, R9, and R0? My R9 definately has wider frets than my Special.
 
Top