Les Paul Forums - View Single Post - how do the historics compare to the real thing ?

agustin barrios · 07-26-2008, 01:57 PM

had my 2007 '57 bb two weeks today...what a great instrument. 10/10 !

in terms of overall build quality and tonal and playing quality, how do the historics compare to the real thing ? i'm aware of a few anomolies (b b capacitors, no longer using horse hair glue, historic bb dont have the fretlless wonder frets, historics have plekked necks)

anyone here owned both, wot are your thoughts ?

if you were blinfolded, and asked to play one from the other, do you honestly feel you could tell the difference ? and if you could, are the differences a bad thing ?

sorry if this post has already been asked...

paul

07-26-2008, 01:57 PM	#1 (permalink)
agustin barrios Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 132 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	how do the historics compare to the real thing ? had my 2007 '57 bb two weeks today...what a great instrument. 10/10 ! in terms of overall build quality and tonal and playing quality, how do the historics compare to the real thing ? i'm aware of a few anomolies (b b capacitors, no longer using horse hair glue, historic bb dont have the fretlless wonder frets, historics have plekked necks) anyone here owned both, wot are your thoughts ? if you were blinfolded, and asked to play one from the other, do you honestly feel you could tell the difference ? and if you could, are the differences a bad thing ? sorry if this post has already been asked... paul