• 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!

to go natural... or not. that's the question.

asbfly

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
1
I have a 1983 Gibson Les Paul Studio that is far from mint condition. It's a great player. I love it. It has Tim Shaw pickups that sound great. Wonderful neck. But personally hate the color... Charcoal metallic (aka gun metal grey). It's a rare color. I've only see one other Studio with that color. Here's a Custom with that finish so you can see: https://www.mmguitarbar.com/listing...electric-guitar-w-tim-shaw-pafs-case/18230860

So I've always want a natural finish Les Paul. Am I making mistake if I sand it? I'm sure some people feel strongly about preserving it but don't personally like the finish. There are lot's of cracks on the finish. There's a stamp below the headstock that says "SEC" meaning that it was a "flawed". In my case, I think the flaw is with the finish, which as LOTS of cracks.

So there you have it. My question for you is.. is there a reason that I should NOT sand off the finish? I love natural finish Les Pauls.
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,657
I have a 1983 Gibson Les Paul Studio that is far from mint condition. It's a great player. I love it. It has Tim Shaw pickups that sound great. Wonderful neck. But personally hate the color... Charcoal metallic (aka gun metal grey). It's a rare color. I've only see one other Studio with that color. Here's a Custom with that finish so you can see: https://www.mmguitarbar.com/listing...electric-guitar-w-tim-shaw-pafs-case/18230860

So I've always want a natural finish Les Paul. Am I making mistake if I sand it? I'm sure some people feel strongly about preserving it but don't personally like the finish. There are lot's of cracks on the finish. There's a stamp below the headstock that says "SEC" meaning that it was a "flawed". In my case, I think the flaw is with the finish, which as LOTS of cracks.

So there you have it. My question for you is.. is there a reason that I should NOT sand off the finish? I love natural finish Les Pauls.

The easy answer why you shouldn't do it is that if you ever want to sell it without the original finish on from the factory will lower the resale value of the instrument . Also you can always buy a Les Paul with any of the colors that Gibson offers and sell/trade yours towards the new Les Paul .
 

brandtkronholm

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
2,737
It's a guitar that you intend on keeping, so go for it! I cannot imagine any major financial loss since it's a Studio - and a fine pro guitar nonetheless. I think the personal rewards far outweigh any other consideration, so go natural! :yah
 

jb_abides

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
5,280
Personally, I love that finish on the Custom so I imagine it also works well on your Studio, but different strokes... If it's your keeper, do what thou wilt.

Crazing, or full cracks? Both equal pure mojo so unless there is a risk of flaking, why worry..?

I would go 'Mick Ronson' if anything at all: just take off the top and leave the sides, back.

I would strip not sand, unless you think you can improve the carve. Then reseal with tung oil, see if it opens up the top resonance. You can always clear coat later, after you live with it. Makes going back to color easier.

As you posed the question: I vote NOT. Best of luck with your decision and post photos of the process if you succumb to the urge!

Hope this gives you something to consider,

:salude
 

vetteman

New member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
10
The big question is...what is under the current finish? Hopefully it is a really nice piece of wood, but it could have been selected for paint because it wasn't. Curious to see how it turns out.
 
Top