Current Historic Specs Getting Less Accurate?

[jimmi]

I recon you own/have owned a Les Paul w/ CB's ?
May I ask why on earth you bought it, if they sound so terrible to you?

You can hear the voice of the guitar unplugged. The pickups can enhance that it or get in the way. The CB really got in the way.

 

[jimmi]

I agree with you? There’s literally ALWAYS changes to the guitar. But the guitar remains the same. The carve top. No 2 58s-60 bursts had same exact carve top. So how can one say it’s NOT accurate? They’ve never held every burst in their life to say it’s not right. It’s not right to the ONE they held. So they observe that.

They changed the bridge in 2023. Looks vintage to a degree? Yet someone mentioned it wasn’t right. That’s why I asked the question who gives a fuck? It’s never 100% right. And right to what exactly? I highly doubt Gibson is going backwards. Every move is closer. But someone observes that it’s not. It’s a corporation. They don’t give a fuck how accurate the guitar is? They care about money it’s bringing in. And if you paid it? Then you can’t say it’s not exact? But Gibson doesn’t care, the guitar shop that sold it doesn’t care. All they cared about? Was the sale…

There were variances but it falls within a range and certain features are consistent. That goes with top carve, pickups, color, neck shape and top grain etc. so it isn’t like they can spit just anything out and it be “right”.

 

[S. Weiger]

You can hear the voice of the guitar unplugged. The pickups can enhance that it or get in the way. The CB really got in the way.

I Know. But I don't think that CB's are terrible. A really good amp is more important IMO. Maybe I've just been lucky with my CB's..

 

[jimmi]

I Know. But I don't think that CB's are terrible. A really good amp is more important IMO. Maybe I've just been lucky with my CB's..

It is all important. I have some pretty good 80s shredder guitars with HBs. They don’t sound like a LP unless everything is dimed and totally saturated at which point it doesn’t matter.

 

[djcmusician]

It’s funny. 90% of the people posting in this thread either didn’t read my original post or just don’t give a crap.

Nothing about this thread relates to how these guitars sound. I was SPECIFICALLY referring to reissue guitars from 2019 until late ‘23 - current ‘24 models.

It seems like some of the small details of the guitars that have changed and getting away from what they were 2019 and forward. I’m not comparing them to original “bursts”.

I was looking for input from other with ACTUAL HANDS ON EXPERIENCE with R models from the years mentioned. That’s it.

But man you guys got sticks up your @$$E$.

If you don’t have first hand experience with R4,6,7,8,9,0s from 2019-current. Your opinion is irrelevant.

 

[Wizard1183]

I don't buy guitars that sound like shit, I always go and play them first. Often I don't find what I want. I tried a few of the Brazilian Murphy Labs and didn't like any of them. But why not do the job correctly in the first place? I don't NEED another Les Paul, so if they want to slack off, then fuck 'em.

No such thing as most accurate as no 2 bursts were exact due to had built. Thr closest Gibson will get is be using old wood mahogany. That’s it.

 

[Wizard1183]

There were variances but it falls within a range and certain features are consistent. That goes with top carve, pickups, color, neck shape and top grain etc. so it isn’t like they can spit just anything out and it be “right”.

The top carves were not all the same.

 

[jb_abides]

Nothing about this thread relates to how these guitars sound. I was SPECIFICALLY referring to reissue guitars from 2019 until late ‘23 - current ‘24 models.

It seems like some of the small details of the guitars that have changed and getting away from what they were 2019 and forward. I’m not comparing them to original “bursts”.

Hey Sirloin, just to clarify... you opined the perceived nuanced changes commenced from mid-2023 onward, correct?

My latest is a 2020 R0, which I haven't really scrutinized against my 2013 to pre-2019 "True Historic spec" guitars, as such I haven't weighed-in.

[Do you contend there are differences earlier than mid-2023 because I haven't really noticed offhand. Yet haven't really been looking too hard either.]

Are there specific measurements you have in mind?

Perhaps people with the proper 2019-mid2023 articles and a digital caliper might contribute if you produced a list of impacted metrics, and example photos of where to actually measure.

Otherwise, it presents as vague notions, subjectively perceptible i.e. the TRC border thickness. Hard to speak to these without data.

I would say this was a question to be put in front of @matkoehler; unfortunately he's been rather scarce since a lack of decorum encroached the thread he hosted ... so, is what it is.

 

[jimmi]

The top carves were not all the same.

Not completely thesame but there are aspects that are common with 50s LPs.

 

[jimmi]

It’s funny. 90% of the people posting in this thread either didn’t read my original post or just don’t give a crap.

Nothing about this thread relates to how these guitars sound. I was SPECIFICALLY referring to reissue guitars from 2019 until late ‘23 - current ‘24 models.

It seems like some of the small details of the guitars that have changed and getting away from what they were 2019 and forward. I’m not comparing them to original “bursts”.

I was looking for input from other with ACTUAL HANDS ON EXPERIENCE with R models from the years mentioned. That’s it.

But man you guys got sticks up your @$$E$.

If you don’t have first hand experience with R4,6,7,8,9,0s from 2019-current. Your opinion is irrelevant.

Sorry I am confused. Seems like if you say they are less accurate you have to be talking about vintage LPs as a standard otherwise less accurate to what?

 

[Dave P]

No such thing as most accurate as no 2 bursts were exact due to had built. Thr closest Gibson will get is be using old wood mahogany. That’s it.

The tailpiece was always in the same place on bursts. I have yet to see an original burst with the tailpiece in the same location as a historic, unless it was converted from a Bigsby and the tailpiece bushing holes had to be drilled. Plus it's easy to fix, just go into the CNC program and make a few adjustments. Of course the guitars were not all the same then, even now they aren't all exactly the same. They used a machine to carve the tops in the old days, now they use a CNC, but they still all get sanded by hand even now, so there will always be variables. If it doesn't matter to you, fine. Some of us do care, though.

 

[djcmusician]

Sorry I am confused. Seems like if you say they are less accurate you have to be talking about vintage LPs as a standard otherwise less accurate to what?

Okay. I’m talking about 2019-mid 2023 “R” guitars as the standard. I am seeing some changes that seem off to me that appear to have happened since mid 2023. That’s it. TRC, Guard, Logo.

I’m not comparing anything to original 50s guitars.

 

[60thR0]

That’s it. TRC, Guard, Logo.

OP I think you will get a better response to this specific question if you post or reference some photos. I know you said TRC might be difficult to photograph but the others should be possible.

I mentioned above that I compared the headstock (logo) on my 2020 R0 and a high resolution photo on reverb for a 2024 R9 and I can’t find any difference, but I have no idea what you are looking at.

 

[S. Weiger]

It’s funny. 90% of the people posting in this thread either didn’t read my original post or just don’t give a crap.

Nothing about this thread relates to how these guitars sound. I was SPECIFICALLY referring to reissue guitars from 2019 until late ‘23 - current ‘24 models.

It seems like some of the small details of the guitars that have changed and getting away from what they were 2019 and forward. I’m not comparing them to original “bursts”.

I was looking for input from other with ACTUAL HANDS ON EXPERIENCE with R models from the years mentioned. That’s it.

But man you guys got sticks up your @$$E$.

If you don’t have first hand experience with R4,6,7,8,9,0s from 2019-current. Your opinion is irrelevant.

Jeez...
There, there. Feel better now?
"If you don’t have first hand experience with R4,6,7,8,9,0s from 2019-current. Your opinion is irrelevant."
Maybe you should clarify this in the TITLE of YOUR personal thread, dude!

 

[MarcB]

Let’s not descend into the abyss of slanging matches again..please.

everyone has the right to air their opinion.. no matter how far off topic is goes.. the opinions still have a place.. as it opens up other areas to discuss.. and this is not aimed at anyone either.. it’s aimed at all of us.. me included.. but since joining this forum last year.. it seems every thread slowly descends into chaos..

We need to have common/neutral ground on all threads.. for this to work.

I’m here to learn.. and I’m sure many others are too.. our shared knowledge and experience aids the learning.. and I appreciate all the knowledge given freely but detest the negativity.

Here’s a puppy so everyone clams down and remains amenable.



Bonjour.

 

[Wizard1183]

Not completely thesame but there are aspects that are common with 50s LPs.

You mean just like now with the new ones?

 

[Wizard1183]

The tailpiece was always in the same place on bursts. I have yet to see an original burst with the tailpiece in the same location as a historic, unless it was converted from a Bigsby and the tailpiece bushing holes had to be drilled. Plus it's easy to fix, just go into the CNC program and make a few adjustments. Of course the guitars were not all the same then, even now they aren't all exactly the same. They used a machine to carve the tops in the old days, now they use a CNC, but they still all get sanded by hand even now, so there will always be variables. If it doesn't matter to you, fine. Some of us do care, though.

My tailpiece analogy was an exaggeration. Top carves; some said TH models the carve wasn’t accurate. Yet they laser scanned originals. In the old days they used a machine correct. They held the guitar to the sanding machine. So a person can’t consistently have the exact same pressure on each one. Now a CNC is 100% consistent. So how can you say it’s not correct when there are bursts out there that match the carves of today? I think far too many are grasping straws…

 

[deytookerjaabs]

My tailpiece analogy was an exaggeration. Top carves; some said TH models the carve wasn’t accurate. Yet they laser scanned originals. In the old days they used a machine correct. They held the guitar to the sanding machine. So a person can’t consistently have the exact same pressure on each one. Now a CNC is 100% consistent. So how can you say it’s not correct when there are bursts out there that match the carves of today? I think far too many are grasping straws…

Here's a word for you, Tolerance: the degree of accuracy required in a measurement or the acceptable range of values in which the measurement will be acceptable.
Like the other users have stated repeatedly....there is some variation but it's a small amount due to the process, unlike, say, the variation in neck shape. The tops were cut from a machine (you could call it primitive CNC) and then the roughness was sanded down. It's not a huge variation, it's subtle. They didn't say the tops were wrong though, you kind of put that there by stating "some people said the tops were...".

The tailpiece was always in the same place on bursts. I have yet to see an original burst with the tailpiece in the same location as a historic, unless it was converted from a Bigsby and the tailpiece bushing holes had to be drilled. Plus it's easy to fix, just go into the CNC program and make a few adjustments. Of course the guitars were not all the same then, even now they aren't all exactly the same. They used a machine to carve the tops in the old days, now they use a CNC, but they still all get sanded by hand even now, so there will always be variables. If it doesn't matter to you, fine. Some of us do care, though.

Is it the lean of the tailpiece you're referring to?

 

[MarcB]

*You have to take into account perspective distortion when using different photos for measurements

 

[Wizard1183]

Here's a word for you, Tolerance: the degree of accuracy required in a measurement or the acceptable range of values in which the measurement will be acceptable.
Like the other users have stated repeatedly....there is some variation but it's a small amount due to the process, unlike, say, the variation in neck shape. The tops were cut from a machine (you could call it primitive CNC) and then the roughness was sanded down. It's not a huge variation, it's subtle. They didn't say the tops were wrong though, you kind of put that there by stating "some people said the tops were...".

Is it the lean of the tailpiece you're referring to?

Yes, are all 1700 bursts tail pieces in the exact same position? Same lean? Or are some straight? As I stated, (and I agree with you on Tolerances) ppl are just grasping at straws. At the end of the day? If that logo says Gibson? They hold value. Let’s look at the 2012 non accurate condom truss rod that everyone bitched about? On reverb most are asking between $5-8k for what was the step child to Historics. You think they’ll lower the price? Probably not. Because as long as Gibson keeps increasing pricing on new guitars? Used guitars increase in value…

Gibson could reproduce a burst using as much accuracy as possible and you’d still have someone “observe” it’s not correct ?