• 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!

historic makeover review Tonequest

DoctorMO

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
597
There is a review in this months tone quest of a 2007 goldtop sent to Kim for thr RDS package. Tonequest was very familiar with the guitar before and was sent the finished product from Kim for review. Now the tone quest reviews are wordy and sometimes hard to interpret but I got this out the review. The guitar looked refinished the gold didnt look green enough although expertly done ?? there is no one better than HM for this historic makeover. The guitar felt and sounded no different after the makeover. They proceed to say nice things about Kims fine workmanship. I was really surpriced by this review and am wondering if others read the review and what their interpretation is . All of the work I have seen from HM is steller and Kim was really a nice gentleman when I bought inlays from him. Sorry I dont have a link
 

Kevin L.

Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
584
Have not seen the review, but can speak from personal experience. Kim and his crew did a makeover on my R8. The guitar was transformed from a good guitar to an amazing one. It most certainly did feel, look, play, and sound MUCH different...and way better. The guitar is more resonant, toneful, and it just sings. The finish feels much different...hard to quantify...smoother, silkier, buttery? Was it worth the money? That's for each individual to decide. It was a splurge for me and the closest I'll ever come to a Burst. I am very glad I did it and plan to keep the guitar for the rest of my life.
The compliments you have read about Kim...all true, in spades.
 

SheltonGuitar

Active member
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
1,720
Take TQ reviews with a grain of salt. They sell their opinion to whoever buys into it. What gets funny with that rag is when they do comparisons. They hear things in gear that my dog can't hear.
 

martinman

Active member
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
1,243
I was a subscriber to TQ for many years. One thing that stuck with me was their stance on high end gear. I'm paraphrasing, but in one review of a custom shop tele, they said 'we're not paying 2k+ for a bolt on anything'. So I can imagine that a $3k guitar with a $2k(ish) makeover is quite out of the box for them.

They always struck me as a best bang for your buck type of publication. They try to find gems that punch way above their weight class. It doesn't surprise me that they didn't quite see the value in the makeover.
 

Professortwang

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2009
Messages
761
Tone Quest's conclusions don't surprise me either and I appreciate the fact that they have the guts to provide an honest assessment. HM does a fantastic job aging instruments. I've never bought into the tonal improvement arguments.
 

rockabilly69

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2001
Messages
2,872
Professor Twang you are full of crap, you were going to send your LP to HM, but instead chose to spend your money on whiskey and hookers.
 

KOTR

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
1,031
Is the October issue out? The online edition hasn't been posted yet.
 

lpjunkie

Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
897
I don't think the majority of people send their guitars to HM and similar makeover companies with the thought that it will sound a million times better than when they sent it. They are sending a guitar that they really dig and they would like a less rubbery lacquer finish, perhaps a hide glue set neck, etc, that was more like an original burst that they aren't spending 5-6 figure money on. I've owned and played a ton of makeovers...they aren't promising to take a dog and turn it into a gem. A lot of it is about the old "feel" that many desire from a makeover that a new Historic might otherwise not have.
 

Born Late '58

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
212
Hmmm, I confess myself to being one of the gullible dummies who actually believed the LPF members' hype about tonal improvements after an HM treatment. Sent my already very good 50th anniversary R9 to them hoping they could make it great. Tonally....

Well, who knows? These things are so subjective. But it is my opinion that the guitar DOES sound better--that is, is more transparent, has noticeably better resonance, "harder" and cleaner note articulation, and tighter tonal focus, after the HM RDS work.

Doubters will say I'm hearing what I want to hear in order to justify the dough I dropped on the makeover. Who knows? They may in fact be right (though I honesty don't think so). I suppose, pragmatically, it doesn't matter--I'm satisfied, so it was worth it to me.

And, of course, none of this even speaks to the ergonomic and aesthetic improvements regarding the feel and appearance of the nitro finish, aging and weather-checking (at least it's an improvement to me), top carve, neck shoulders, and Brazilian fretboard.

No doubt, it's shitload of money to spend on such a thing. I still feel sheepish when people ask about the guitar explaining what I had done and how much I paid. But maybe they ask because they're also pretty impressed with the result. I hope so. I even think so. And at the end of the day maybe that's all that matters anyway--that it makes me feel excited and inspired to play!

Here's one fairly unequivocal measurement, though: before I sent the R9 off to Kim, I also owned a Murphy 50th '58, which was my #1 and with which I was more pleased, tonally, than the R9. Two weeks after the R9 came back from Florida, I sold the R8 to Norman's Rare Guitars (at a slight profit, I'm happy to say) with no reservations. Since then, I play the HM R9 daily, and have not a single solitary regret about the Murphy going bye bye.

Life is short. Be happy. :)
 
Last edited:

Wilko

All Access/Backstage Pass
Joined
Mar 11, 2002
Messages
20,854
There are plenty of players, and possibly at tonequest who just can't feel or sense the difference.

Sadly. I'm not one of those guys.
 

davidd

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
468
Most expensive makeover my R8 gets these days is a new set of strings. I went through the modding of pickups, pots, caps etc. thing years ago and came to the conclusion that it was mainly baloney. If it floats your boat and you have money to burn that's fine. I just don't buy into the hide glue, condom, nitro thing at all. Prefer to spend my money on a good amp, not fairy dust. These days I don't buy something unless it sounds and plays the way I want it to and then I leave it alone.
 

jbzoso2002

New member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
1,089
My take on the makeover treatment is this,

It takes a Historic as close as you can get to
a real late 50's LP.

If I ever had the money to have it done I wouldn't
be expecting a big or any difference in tone.

It would just be to have the peace of mind that its as
close as it can be.

Jimmy
 

Triburst

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
4,353
Kim and his crew do amazing work, and actually live up to their well deserved reputation.

I'll go ahead and accept the "cork sniffer" award now, but I'm telling you -- I would REALLY love to hear Tonequest do another review of this same guitar next February. My R9 was very good when I got it, but it actually improved with time.

That guitar will be with me until my last breath.:eek:la
 

TM1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Messages
8,349
Tonequest Report:
Having been a subscriber since 1999 and also being on his "Editorial Board" and with the things I've tried over the years that David has recommended.. I take what he says with a tiny grain of sand. Some of the things he's raved about I found not to my liking at all. Alot of stuff I find to be 180 degrees from what I feel, think & have an opinion of..
I find it interesting that since your ears and brain can only remember how something sounds for about 3 minutes, he thinks he remembers how the guitar was before it went to Kim...
I sent David an email Saturday after I read my copy of TQ and told him to re-visit the guitar in Six months.
Personally, I've had H-M do Six of my guitars since 2007. Every one was improved after I got them back, but sonically, to my ears anyway, after the guitar has had time for the Hide Glue to dry and the Lacquer to cure(about 6 months I think), they've gone from sounding good to F'in incredible. 3 out of the six I'd put up against just about any `50's guitar. The other 3 do sound considerably better than they originally did.
I've owned a real 1959 Les Paul Special for 25 years. It's killer! I've also been incredibly lucky to have co-owned a real `59 LP back in the `70's (wish I still co-owned it..). I've played around 65-70 real Bursts as well as quiet a number of GT's, Customs, Jr.'s & Specials.
My point to this madness is that every guitar is different, especially the old ones! Wood is the reason each one sounds different. Wood is the Variable in all guitars made with Wood! Believe me, I've played a number of original Bursts that were "Tone Turds". Not all of them sounded amazing. The new ones I feel are more consistent because the Wood Program @ Gibson Custom is more selective than they were at Kalamazoo in the `50's. Needless to say, some are better than others, but as a whole, they've really come along way in the last 20 years.
Another thing is that each one of the guitars built 50-62 years ago was different as there was alot more hand work that went into them. CNC's have really made some aspects very consistent. Don't get me wrong as there is still an incredible amount of hand work in building a Reissue but the CNC's have taken the Pin routers and some shaping to new heights.
All in all, I think that just about any article you read in TQ is basically only the opinion of David Wilson. I really like David as he's a super guy, but I think that those of you who are on the fence about sending Kim @ Historic Makeovers a guitar and are now hemming and hawing about sending.. Personally, and this is just my opinion based on my experiences... Do It! Send that guitar as I don't think you'll ever be sorry! It sure can not hurt the guitar and what you'll get back is something that will be very personal for You. It's also the closest thing you'll get to owning a real Les Paul from the Golden Era.
I do feel that TQR offers us a window to some of the new, cooler stuff that maybe not everyone is aware of. I have bought some stuff on the magazines' recommendation that was either returned or Ebayed very soon afterwards. But, it was something that I wasn't aware of until TQR's articles on a particular item. There are things I've read about, bought and kept too...As he's so often pround of saying.. "Your Mileage May Vary".
 

TM1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Messages
8,349
Kim and his crew do amazing work, and actually live up to their well deserved reputation.

I'll go ahead and accept the "cork sniffer" award now, but I'm telling you -- I would REALLY love to hear Tonequest do another review of this same guitar next February. My R9 was very good when I got it, but it actually improved with time.

That guitar will be with me until my last breath.:eek:la

+1 !
 

djangolad

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
583
I was pretty sceptical about purported tonal changes coming from make-overs, however I think it would be interesting to compare some 2013-14 Historics that have had the MO to non-mo's because the changes the CS has made post 2012.

The 2013 R9 I've only had for a week is worlds apart from my last historic ,(2010 R8). More resonant, you can feel the whole guitar vibrate, my R8 didn't do that.

I wonder if a MO would achieve the same ratio of change in the later models that it did with the pre 2013 models because they are sounding better straight off the factory floor now.


There are technologies for of analyzing sound are there not? I know there are members who know that stuff inside out. Surely if tonal changes were that evident it could be demonstrated.
 

TM1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Messages
8,349
I was pretty sceptical about purported tonal changes coming from make-overs, however I think it would be interesting to compare some 2013-14 Historics that have had the MO to non-mo's because the changes the CS has made post 2012.

The 2013 R9 I've only had for a week is worlds apart from my last historic ,(2010 R8). More resonant, you can feel the whole guitar vibrate, my R8 didn't do that.

I wonder if a MO would achieve the same ratio of change in the later models that it did with the pre 2013 models because they are sounding better straight off the factory floor now.

I think the Trussrod and use of Hide Glue has really improved the stock Reissues considerably, but to my ears and having been playing for the last 49 years(42 of those professionally), the Brazilian fingerboard and quality of H-M's nitro finish is worth the price of admission.
 

djangolad

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
583
I think the Trussrod and use of Hide Glue has really improved the stock Reissues considerably, but to my ears and having been playing for the last 49 years(42 of those professionally), the Brazilian fingerboard and quality of H-M's nitro finish is worth the price of admission.

I'm no longer a doubter since I've been able to experience the diff I presume the glue and truss rod has made. I'm sure the finish is extremely important to tone, BRW perhaps too. However as you say not ALL originals were great.
 
Top