• 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!

Gibson LP 1959 Reissue vs Gibson LP 1960 Plain Top Reissue (G0)

Gas4LPs

Member
Joined
May 17, 2015
Messages
73
I bought a Gibson Les Paul 1960 Plain Top VOS Reissue (G0) in 2010. I got the G0 because I tried a 1958 reissue and in 2010 the necks was baseball-bat-plus-sized. The G0 is a nice guitar, sounds great and plays well. I replaced the Burstbucker 1&2 with a set of Kloppmann HB 59's.

After buying the G0, I bought a 2010 Les Paul Studio 50s Tribute (50's neck) and recently a 2016 Gibson Les Paul Standard Faded (50's neck). I now see how the neck thickness can make a difference. I also realized the Gibson Les Paul 1959 Reissue has the overall profile which makes it the holy grail of the historic series.

How much difference is there between a Gibson Les Paul 1960 Plain Top Reissue (G0) and a Gibson Les Paul 1959 Reissue?

Is it worth the hassle of an upgrading the G0 to a Gibson LP 1959 Reissue?
 

AA00475Bassman

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
3,460
A lot of what your asking is is subjective , you can only define worth of effort .

Disclaimer , Looking at post's today, this opinion trend with Historics is moving towards the vintage theme .
Such a shame . Holy Grail
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,319
As AA0075Bassman said, you really have to make the call as in reality the only big difference is neck profile. Which one will you prefer?? Hell, I don't know. I haven't seen many 59 Reissues without a flame top so there is that to consider too. Really, you need to find some and try for yourself, however I would say if you balked at the fuller 50's neck and choose the R0, then I would stick with it. It appears you don't like fat necks. Maybe look at a new 60 there have been some excellent runs of the 1960 style Burst in the last few years.
 

TM1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Messages
8,186
I have an R-8 from 2010 and when I sent it to Kim @ Historic Makeover's he cut the sucker down. I have never played an original `50's Les Paul that have a huge neck like the R-4, R-6, R-7 or R-8's have. I have a 2002 R-0 that was made for Guitar Center. It was from the very first run and the neck on it is perfect.
 

1jamman

New member
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
610
IMO , if your wanting the figured top of an R9 (and it's price) , How about taking/getting neck measurements of the G0 you have (1st fret-12 fret) ,that gives you a reference point to know an idea of size that works for you .
I've found R9 neck sizes can differ enough (~.880 - .920) that knowing what works for me allows for easy ,fast elimination of guitars , that have necks to big for me to want t play or enjoy . Neck shape +(shoulders) are an important consideration .

If you are willing to Shave a new guitars neck then it almost makes no difference , Still , A huge neck(.920+ @ 1st fret) can not be shaved down into a real "slim tapper" neck (.800). It can be made very playable and 1 you love, but it still needs some "meat" left for the TR, Nut area and joint area.

Me ,, I'd look for an R0 or do a M2M and get it spec'd as I like .....
 

D'Mule

Active member
Joined
Apr 5, 2003
Messages
4,619
Like Al said, G0 LPs are already nice guitars, so you won't get much extra bang for your R9 buck if you don't really need a flame top.

Not all R8s have huge necks. My '06 R8 does indeed have a big round neck profile, but in contrast my 2002 R8 has a much more trim neck- less depth and no shoulders.

Maybe you can trade for an R8 with a somewhat fuller neck than your G0? If in the end it still seems a bit big you can have it shaved.
 
Top