Originally Posted by TattooedCarrot
My argument against baked maple is purely traditionalist. Functionally, its a great wood and the torification process makes it stronger than shit. Its a very stable wood. In other applications, I think it would be accepted without issue. But Gibson caters to a very traditionalist niche, mostly.
I hear you. And I agree with two points:
1) if the website (be it manufacturer or retail outlet) stipulates that it is a certain wood, then it should be that wood, and nothing else; and
2) if the model name has the words "classic", "historic", "reissue", or other terms appealing to vintage-correct values, then it should be made of the same materials, to the same design, as the model it purports to replicate.
I don't have a beef with those who approach it openly from your perspective; you're upfront about wanting your guitars to be built the same, and that's fair.
I just roll my eyes, though, when people who haven't touched the stuff pontificate on its inferiority.