90-93 Classic specifications?

27sauce said:

Its not a Classic

Click to expand...

As 27sauce said, it's not a Classic. It's a "Historic Collection" (pre-"Historic Division", still made in the same building as the USAs) Les Paul 1960 Reissue, which at the time were codenamed 'R6' or 'LPR6'.

As the R6s were made in the same building as the Classics, hence they share the same serialization scheme as latter.

The cavies of these guitars clearly state this, as opposed to 'Classic', 'Classic Plus or LPCP' and later the 'Classic Premium Plus or LPPP'.

The main difference between the Classic and the Reissue is the wood selection; typically nicer tops (later usually matched by Classic Premium Pluses) and lighter, non-weight relieved bodies were used for the 1959 and 1960 "pre-historic" reissues.

Because of the confusion (still to this day), in 1993 Gibson changed the headstock to read 'Les Paul CLASSIC' as opposed to 'Les Paul MODEL' as some dealers were swapping pickups (from 496R/500Ts to Classic '57s) and the trussrod covers (from Classic engraved to blank) on Classics and selling them off as Reissues (the MSRP difference was around $2K I believe at the time between the Classic and the Reissue).

The successor of this guitar is the 'R0' which came about after the opening of the Custom, Art and Historic Division in late 1993. The R0 was officially announced in the 1994 (printed in 1993) catalog in 1994 (only one was made that year I believe), then a dozen in 1995, after which the model went into steady production.

If it says Model on the headstock and has thin binding in the cutaway, grab it.

I didn't do my research and got stuck with a 96 Premium Plus. What a mistake LOL!

Guy at the Gibson was specific that those "Model" on the headstock guitars have nothing to do with custom shop in any way, like, it's just a good Classic LP guitar..

prolik said:

Guy at the Gibson was specific that those "Model" on the headstock guitars have nothing to do with custom shop in any way, like, it's just a good Classic LP guitar..

Click to expand...

The early 93's had "Model" on the headstock. I used to have one.

RobertD said:

The early 93's had "Model" on the headstock. I used to have one.

Click to expand...

Me too!
This one!

[/URL][/IMG]

The control cavity on those early Classics were carved using the more box-like cavity to accommodate the pre-assembled ground plate/control pots hardware.

R9. said:

I emailed Gibson about this a while ago and asked. '90s Classics & Customs are weight-relieved.
They started swiss cheesing (if you will) everything Gibson USA in the early '80s.
If it's a Custom Shop guitar, then who knows - could be weight-relieved, could be solid.


This doesn't mean squat. They state that because they don't know.
People pick up a 10 lb Lester and think there's no way it isn't solid.
Look at Customs - prime example of how swiss cheese bodies can weigh well over 10 lbs.

Click to expand...

Back in 1990 -'93 there was confusion over the 60 reissue and classic. It may have been at the factory or at the distributors but the models were being mixed. There's a chance LP classics had the body of a '60 reissue and vice versa. The main visible differences between the models is the pickups.

Taking the generic 1990 - 1993 classic, it had thin binding, model decal, normal inlays and a weight relieved body.

Part way through '93 the specs were changed so the Classic had green inlays, Classic decal and thicker binding.

Here is my '91 Classic Plus that l installed Seth Lovers in. It is a superb LP.

[URL=http://s503.photobucket.com/user/snshan2525/media/Gibson%20LP%20Classic%201991/20140915_130644_zpstnhgtdl2.jpg.html][/URL]

They had swiss cheese weight relief, short tenon, no booger green inlays, and "Model' instead of "Classic" on headstock. They were a step above the Standard for the first few years.

les strat said:

They had swiss cheese weight relief, short tenon, no booger green inlays, and "Model' instead of "Classic" on headstock. They were a step above the Standard for the first few years.

Click to expand...

And small bushing vintage nickel tuners and ABR. The Standards were using the Nashville bridge and large bushing tuners. From memory my '91 Classic was around 9.5 pounds. Par for the course for both models in this time frame. eace2

Hi , Brand new to the forum. I just purchased a 2001 Classic. I had previously owned one in 1990. As far as the change in specs, do you feel they purely cosmetic? Model/Classic logo, wider binding, etc.. Structurally the guitar seems identical, plays the same, neck shape is the same.

I sold the older one years ago due to the fact that the neck flexed a bit when bending notes. ( Hitting an open string while bending a high note would cause the open string's pitch to lower. ) This one seems more stable.

Noticing a lot of love here for Classics... that makes me happy. I'm selling off a PRS to fund this purchase and I'm getting some unfavorable blowback...But in my world nothing beats a nice Les Paul.

dmerl said:

Hi , Brand new to the forum. I just purchased a 2001 Classic. I had previously owned one in 1990. As far as the change in specs, do you feel they purely cosmetic? Model/Classic logo, wider binding, etc.. Structurally the guitar seems identical, plays the same, neck shape is the same.

I sold the older one years ago due to the fact that the neck flexed a bit when bending notes. ( Hitting an open string while bending a high note would cause the open string's pitch to lower. ) This one seems more stable.

Noticing a lot of love here for Classics... that makes me happy. I'm selling off a PRS to fund this purchase and I'm getting some unfavorable blowback...But in my world nothing beats a nice Les Paul.

Click to expand...

Hi dmerl, the changes between 1990 and 2001 were purely cosmetic, unlike the more recent changes which see different appointments to the guitars now called 'Classic'. If memory serves, Gibson changed the bridge from and ABR1 to Nashville in 2003. Todays' Classics have Classic 57 pickups as well as other changes.