Don't tell me it ain't "Vintage".

[FrankiePRS]

Move the thread if you must, but I don't see how this isn't "vintage". It's 36 years old. I know purists don't like the Norlin era, but c'mon... how many more years are we gonna deny the vintage label to guitars that were built while Nixon was president just because they have pancake bodies?

Presented as exhibit 1: My 1971 LP Custom Black Beauty, "Rat Fink". AKA as "The Ace of Spades". Original T-tops and electronics. Started out life as a "Fretless Wonder", which I hate. Now has nicely worn-in medium frets and a very rolled neck. Mods include the Kahler, knobs and Grovers. Look down your nose at it if you must, but this is rock and roll.

[FrankiePRS]

.....

[Big Mike]

Where's the drool smiley.....

[ptate]

F**KIN A++++++++++++++

Almost as shagged as my 70 GT.........

[Nugget]

Who decided upon 1969? I like it anyway. I had a Yamamha SG 2000 with a factory fitted Khaler trem once. I didn't think it would work on a proper Les Paul but here's the proof that it does. The Maltese Cross looks very right too.

[FrankiePRS]

Originally Posted by Caretaker

In the guitar selling/trading area, "vintage" is 1969 or older. It has nothing to do with the Norlin era or anything else. It`s just a cutoff year.

Not in other types of guitar, i.e. PRS, Fender, Gretsch, etc. I've seen "Vintage" refer to both 20 and 25 years old. I've never heard of 1969 being some magical cutoff. Not trying to start a fuss, really - My post was intended to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek... but I do think it's ridiculous to have a static point in time to define a term like 'vintage'. It's not done in any other collectible market, AFAIK.

[FLICKOFLASH]

Originally Posted by max luthier

i am strictly in it for the tone .. old growth honduras has the tone i want .. i buy anything pre-1974 as it's a safe bet it's made from good quality honduras .. you may still have to dial in the pickups (preferably genuine PAFs) and you've got tone .. just my two-cents ..

thanks for the support for my film ..

It is good enough for Max

[HeeBGB]

I have that exact Kahler trem! It was installed on my junior when I got it! Yours looks professionally installed though! Mine looked like it was routed with a hot butter knife!

[johnreardon]

Originally Posted by Caretaker

In the guitar selling/trading area, "vintage" is 1969 or older. It has nothing to do with the Norlin era or anything else. It`s just a cutoff year.

This chap reckons 1970, so Frankie's is close

Vintage Guitars Info - what is a vintage guitar?

[mapleflame]

Not vintage. It would be like saying that a 75 Camaro is a Muscle car. Although the guitar is cool, and has that roadworn vibe, not Vintage. Gots to be a one piece body.

[FrankiePRS]

Originally Posted by mapleflame

Not vintage. It would be like saying that a 75 Camaro is a Muscle car. Although the guitar is cool, and has that roadworn vibe, not Vintage. Gots to be a one piece body.

Hmmm.. there are purists that would claim that no Camaro is a "Muscle Car", because a true muscle car was a mid-sized body with the big-block from the maker's full-size line stuffed into it. That definition has generally been relaxed, since it's exclusionary nature drove more people away from the hobby than into it. By now, most magazines and enthusiasts would bo okay applying the term to even the 1979 Z-28.

[ptate]

Vintage. Noun. Referring to something from the past of high quality. Collins Oxford English Dictionary 2001.

Based on that definition, anything from the 70's has as good a chance as the early LP's of being considered a "vintage" instrument.

Would anyone; without seeing it, or playing it; want to cast dispersion on the quality of someone elses guitar? Only foolish people would do that.....Wouldn't they?

Everyone has their own idea of "vintage". You can't piss on someone else's chips without hard fact.

Who made Deluxe's prior to '69/70? They were the first of that model, how can they NOT be considered vintage? Thats the 1969 rule broken then..........

[Psigh4]

There is a possible solution. I realize it won't make the purist happy. Just drop the word vintage and cover the LPs by decade. Each with a separate forum category.

50 LPs
60 LPs
70 LPs
80 LPs

You can stop anywhere you want but at least then you get people who enjoy LPs from a certain decade talking up their guitars and not talking down others. If you don't like a certain decade of LPs then don't post in that forum category.

I'm not a collector .... and if the truth be told not really a player but I love my guitars. When I want to get away from it all ...... I just pick one of them up and I get transported away from my problems for awhile.

Some may call what I play nothing but noise and thats ok because it's my noise!

Just a suggestion and certainly not binding on anybody.

[mapleflame]

I didn't make the rules. It's the pre Norlin year principle. Just like the pre War Martin accoustics.

Hell yeah! I was born in 1/69. I am considered vintage.

By the way Frankie, I like that guitar a lot!

[Todd Louis]

Vintage Refers to a certen Era

NOT How old something is .

So just becaus its old don't mean its Vintage

Ther's a Big difference between a Norlin and a Mc Carthy !!!

And a Pre CBS and A CBS

[ptate]

I actually think we have to split the guitars by model, rather than era.

Gibson intended to produce A Les Paul, not THE "50's" Les Paul throughout the 70's/ 80's.

All the models at that time were not intentionally mean to "mimic" the originals; marketing led the company to re-introduce the basic SHAPE, not the exact construction (I am not going to get embroiled in the pancake this; pancake that etc. argument!).

As such, ORIGINAL batch models (i.e. "distinctive" first units, never produced before) should really be defined as vintage. An attempt to re-produce an "exact" copy does not result in the creation of a vintage instrument; simply licenced clone.

Based on the "period" argument, nothing is vintage.......Just era-specific.

[LoKi]

Vintage in a lot of other markets is 25 years or older. Personally I consider anything older than I am to be vintage...

I consider guitars to be the same deal. I have a 79 LPC and it smokes. The wood has aged wonderfully, and it plays and sounds like a dream come true. It is also 1 year older than I am, so I would consider that vintage.

Love that Paul my friend. Pancakes are unique in their own way, and although mine isn't a pancake, it is still Norlin era, with 3 peice neck with volute and its the perfect guitar for me. Keep that guitar until it turns to dust.

[BCRGreg]

It was "vintage" until the Kahler. Now it's "buggered".

[FrankiePRS]

Originally Posted by BCRGreg

It was "vintage" until the Kahler. Now it's "buggered".

Naaahhh... now it rocks even harder. How else am I gonna get LP tone with a trem?

[FrankiePRS]

From Saturday night:

[FLICKOFLASH]

Originally Posted by Psigh4

There is a possible solution. I realize it won't make the purist happy. Just drop the word vintage and cover the LPs by decade. Each with a separate forum category.

50 LPs
60 LPs
70 LPs
80 LPs

You can stop anywhere you want but at least then you get people who enjoy LPs from a certain decade talking up their guitars and not talking down others. If you don't like a certain decade of LPs then don't post in that forum category.

I'm not a collector .... and if the truth be told not really a player but I love my guitars. When I want to get away from it all ...... I just pick one of them up and I get transported away from my problems for awhile.

Some may call what I play nothing but noise and thats ok because it's my noise!

Just a suggestion and certainly not binding on anybody.

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/back...ggestions.html

[Todd Louis]

The Original LP's where from 52' to 60' Then the 61' to 63' LP/SG

Everything else is a Reissue.

That's not being a "Purist" That's Fact

[FrankiePRS]

Originally Posted by Todd Louis

The Original LP's where from 52' to 60' Then the 61' to 63' LP/SG

Everything else is a Reissue.

That's not being a "Purist" That's Fact

When did they stop actually putting "Les Paul" on the SG-type bodied guitars?

[johnreardon]

Originally Posted by FrankiePRS

When did they stop actually putting "Les Paul" on the SG-type bodied guitars?

Think it was 1963 Frankie

From 64-67, there were no Gibsons bearing the Les Paul name

[Todd Louis]

Originally Posted by FrankiePRS

When did they stop actually putting "Les Paul" on the SG-type bodied guitars?

Early to mid 63' then the LP was no more ..

Then the first reissue's came out in 68'

[ptate]

Originally Posted by Todd Louis

The Original LP's where from 52' to 60' Then the 61' to 63' LP/SG

Everything else is a Reissue.

That's not being a "Purist" That's Fact

Sorry Todd. Wrong.

The Deluxe was never made before 69/70 and was a new model in it's own right.

[Todd Louis]

Originally Posted by ptate

Sorry Todd. Wrong.

The Deluxe was never made before 69/70 and was a new model in it's own right.

that dose not count... Where talking about reg. LP's

And the Deluxe is a Reissue its the same design
So I am NOT WRONG

[ptate]

It is quite incorrect............

Regular Les Pauls? So anything that has p90s? Or full size humbuckers? Which humbuckers? Cream or black? What about anything without a trap tailpiece/bridge? Without a stop tailpiece? With changed electrics? With a factory Bigsby? With different neck angles? With Gold paint all over? With different serial number stamps? Different routes? With a factory colour? With a burst? Specials counted? Can you just clarify which one is a regular Les Paul for me?

Looks like the Deluxe has as much a claim to being "regular" as the 52-60s to me?!?