Famous musicians with LP Traditional

I guess many wouldn't mind a modern version in addition, but then it should be called exactly that; Les Paul Modern. Or maybe Les Paul Contemporary, or they could just continue to use High Performance for the one model with modern features.

I’m all about new things. I’m not opposed at all. BUT, a company flagship model should be the ones they are known for, and the ones people love and dream about (58, 59 and 60). All the other models are additionals for the ones that want those features but loves the Les Paul shape.

Keefoman said:

I guess many wouldn't mind a modern version in addition, but then it should be called exactly that; Les Paul Modern. Or maybe Les Paul Contemporary, or they could just continue to use High Performance for the one model with modern features.

Click to expand...

lvidal said:

I’m all about new things. I’m not opposed at all. BUT, a company flagship model should be the ones they are known for, and the ones people love and dream about (58, 59 and 60). All the other models are additionals for the ones that want those features but loves the Les Paul shape.

Click to expand...

Totally agree with you. The Gibson USA line should be more affordable versions of the CS historic line with the «modern» one as separate model. As it’s been for many years, it’s a complete mess and a jungle of different features on the same models.

I'd love if Gibson went with 58, 59 and 60 spec standard models. But honestly, I don't see it ever happening (hopefully I'm proven wrong) as I think they intentionally keep things different in order to get some people leaning toward spending more and getting a CS model.

Think of all of the people that buy a standard then tweak it to make it look more like a reissue. There will be many that get a standard and over years slowly convince themselves to upgrade to a CS model, as it's never quite the "real deal" for them. If Gibson started to make their standard model look too close to the reissues they would sell far less reissues.

I'm just glad they've went back to nickel and ABR-1 on a bunch of models. Though they did put the oversized headstock on some of those same models (probably to make it look "not quite the real deal" yes I'm quoting myself)

But they don’t have to go more like reissues, that’s not what I’m suggesting. Although personally I think the USA should be just like they were (like the Historic line) I think the USA models are top of the line instruments (when they are done well).

What I mean with my comment is that they should simpllfy things in the model namings and bring them more clear and transparent for the people and stop making a mess with all the non-sense we have seen over the years. I mean, what’s the problem with making a USA Standard ‘58 inspired? What makes a ‘58 different than a ‘59? Well, specially that chunky neck and plain tops, but it doesn’t have to have ONLY plain tops, give people options. They also don’t have to be only Cherryburst, Honeyburst, Gold and Lemonburst. Give them Blueburst, Wine Red, Greenburst, etc. The important things are the ‘58 specs, don’t be shy with the colors. Same with ‘59 and ‘60. I’ll go even farther and each one of them should also have a P90 option too. Those things don’t mean investing more money for them, they just need ORDER inside them.

They have to clean the table and just get rid of all the crazy names, make three standards 58, 59, and 60, offer them with a lot of colors, offer them with P90’s too. Convert the current Standard to High Performance and offer it too, why not. Make the same Standards as Studios 58, 59, 60 with P90 options too, less colors, more solid colors, maple cap and flame veneers, no binding so they are affordable and you can use your less expensive wood. Man... this is not rocket science.