Gibson Logo On Homemade Replicas

Discussion in 'The Custom Shop' started by cdscarter, May 21, 2014.

  1. Greco

    Greco Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,243
    Likes Received:
    7,474
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Let's not forget that Slash saved the whole damn company with his G logo replica :laugh2:

    It seems they have a very selective memory over there at Gibson. :slash::slash::slash:
     
    5 people like this.
  2. SuperDuty62

    SuperDuty62 Banned

    Messages:
    539
    Likes Received:
    396
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2014
    OK, I have a question and looking for some people chiming in on this subject because it falls into this catagory as well.

    Now building a "replica" or close to it. What about those selling guitar plans and templates to make copies, etc?

    As per se, I have a few plans and a couple of templates of supposed to be name pro models BUT, the shape, headstock, pick up and control cavities, frets, bridge and pick up lay outs are all wrong and certainly off.

    Prime example, I compared guitar 2 plans and templates to the real deals and all the fret spacing was wrong to the actual 24 3/4 spacing on the frets, pick up and bridge placements all wrong, pick up spacing cavities all wrong.

    So with this being said, how can someone make a guitar off of someones incorrect plans and templates to make an sounding guitar with proper notations coming out of a finish incorrect plan/template guitar?

    As for instance, someone wants to build their guitar 100% fretboard and all. They used the plans and/or templates that someone drew up on CAD and is selling them. The builder makes the guitar, frets and all.

    So in reality lets say 1/4 of the frets on the fretboard are the correct spacing, but the others are like anywhere from a 32nd to almost 1/8th off. So what note will they be ACTUALLY PLAYING on incorrect fret spacing on a finished guitar from these plans/templates?

    What are the opinions on these guys that make the templates and plans? Is it the reason they are making plans that are out of wack so the name brands can't go after them for correct duplicate drawing of name brand guitars?

    I appreciate some input
     
  3. Mr Teeny

    Mr Teeny Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,543
    Likes Received:
    2,402
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2010

    I'd guess they're out of wack because of laziness rather than trying to avoid a lawsuit. Pretty much the same as plenty of Chibsons sell so will cheap plans just garbled together from other borrowed plans. I thought the Les Paul shape was now considered to be in the public domain and the only things Gibson have left to enforce is their trademarks like the Logos and Les Paul name.

    Must admit I do find it funny that people completely copy every intricate detail about someone else's guitar design but putting their own name on the logo suddenly makes them morally superior than others who go for a completely correct replica.

    At the end of the day these guitars may well be sold on but you can't hold people responsible for what may happen to their work years down the line by someone else. Lets face it if someone is intent on to deceiving it's hardly the hardest thing in the world to switch a logo to Gibson from a well made replica with the makers logo on it.
     
    2 people like this.
  4. houston

    houston Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    712
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2013
    The incorrectly spaced frets would simply be sharp or flat of their respective note. I believe by whatever percentage they're misplaced by (if a fret is placed 10% too low, the note will be flat by 10 cents).
     
  5. StuC

    StuC Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    116
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Which "real deals" are you comparing with? Every one of those things is different between '50s Gibsons and current production.
     
  6. Greco

    Greco Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,243
    Likes Received:
    7,474
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    You choose your scale and place your bridge to work. Most plans are based off of a tried and tested scale unless I'm mistaken. Are you saying a Fender or PRS won't play in tune? You still need to build an instrument to some degree, not just copy plans. If you know what's off with the plans in terms of routes and things you account for that as you go.
     
  7. cybermgk

    cybermgk Singin' the body lectric Premium Member V.I.P. Member

    Messages:
    12,623
    Likes Received:
    15,921
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    1 person likes this.
  8. SuperDuty62

    SuperDuty62 Banned

    Messages:
    539
    Likes Received:
    396
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2014
    Actually 3 of them, Les Paul, Explorer, and Firebird. And was told the templates are of current production models and they are a little off, like 1/2 on body overall, frets are not to scale, headstock is off about 1/4 each side, The neck profile template neck to heal is way too long and the heal goes in about 4 inches more than it should into the body if you matched it with the ACTUAL Gibson Les Paul Classic, which is the same type body style Gibson has used since making the Les Paul, rest of it isn't bad but not much. Same heal issue with the Explorer and Firebird neck templates has it too far into the body. But prior to these templates I had purchased some plans and other templates.

    I compared these templates on 1991 Les Paul Classic, 2010 Explorer, and a 2000 Firebird. ALL Gibsons. All of which the templates as I mentioned previously above posting where off to some degree.

    I have the plans with the templates for the Les Paul and Firebird. One set of plans with template I got for a Firebird came from of a flute maker, (I later found out), another one out west in AZ that had it on amazon. I won't say who, but it wasn't from the same guy that I got all three templates listed above, but the Firebird template was 3/16th cheap plywood and it looked like a 6 year old cut out he cavities profile and drilled the holes off center in the bridge and saddle postions. Of course the guy said they were lazered cut. His drawing plan of the Firebird was no where near an actual Firebird.

    I can relate that everything has to be measured. But someone who is new to building a guitar for themselves buy a set of plans, then imagine someone cutting out a hunk of wood that is not cheap in some cases, then find out the neck isn't the way it should be, and the Frets are not set to original notations and one followed the plans to the design on paper.

    I know from my perspective in being a beginner builder, (I wouldn't even say that in a sense because I am not really one), being I only built 1 guitar many years ago and I had help with someone assisting me in all the measurements, etc, (that worked in a guitar shop), that even though I myself would be using a plan as a guide and comparing to guitars I already have for proper fret, bridge, and saddle spacing as well as pickups.

    But my question is why are the plans incorrect of the most important measurements on a guitar when example they say it is 24.75, when in fact it is not?

    I know it is all about someone wanting to make some money. So pretty much means the person(s), doesn't care about accuracy.
     
  9. pinefd

    pinefd V.I.P. Member Premium Member V.I.P. Member

    Messages:
    9,065
    Likes Received:
    13,093
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    There's your "problem" right there. Most of the better detailed plans in circulation right now are attempting to capture vintage '50s specs...which are quite a bit different from that of a more modern Les Paul. While I'm not too familiar with '91 era LP Classics, I suspect that their specs are quite a bit "off" from vintage specs.


    Frank
     
    4 people like this.
  10. rockstar232007

    rockstar232007 Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,013
    Likes Received:
    10,619
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Yep.

    USA-model LPs are totally different in almost all aspects from both vintage and RI LPs. Even the body shapes are different.
     
  11. SuperDuty62

    SuperDuty62 Banned

    Messages:
    539
    Likes Received:
    396
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2014
    I can get what you are saying, there may be some plans out there that people are trying to make as close to vintage itself, and some are doing current plans design, but then regardless of body design being off shape, then find that the fret spacing, pickup, bridge and saddle postions are out to a 1/4 inch degree then that makes the positionings incorrect. Other wise, you would be playing correct notes on part of the freet board and either sharp or flat notes on the other part of the fretboard.

    And when the plans say 24.75 when in fact they are not, I am assuming no matter what guitar you build or what specs manufaturers are using, something has to be correct for the length of the fret board to bridge either way for correct notations.

    I am not a professional luther by eny means or a novice at that. I am a beginner trying to learn but I pay attention to detail in every aspect.

    I know you can take any guitar body, chop it down to just outside of the bridge and pickups and if the fret board is done correctly you would have proper notation either way.

    The body is what I don't really have the issues on as being correct, but I was just mking the discussions on what was off, my issues stem from fret board to bridge distance.

    When I get time in the next day or so I will post pictures of the templates to show my point.
     
  12. pinefd

    pinefd V.I.P. Member Premium Member V.I.P. Member

    Messages:
    9,065
    Likes Received:
    13,093
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    So I'm not exactly sure what you're asking or saying, but I'll throw in a few more things to consider anyway. Vintage Les Pauls used a "Rule of 18" for the fretboard layout, and it's possible that the Historics may still use that fret spacing...but I don't know. It's a bit of an odd layout, which doesn't really follow the traditional fret layout scheme.

    Add to that, the fact that over time, many people have adopted the 24.625" as the "standard" Les Paul fret scale, although it's a bit different from that of the traditional layout. Some people just use a 24.75" scale length because it's easy to find pre-slotted fingerboards in that length.

    Whatever scale length you go with, when building a guitar, it's best to drill for, and install the bridge as a last step, so you can ensure that it's correctly positioned for optimum intonation on your given scale length. It's what I do for my short scale (approximately 14.7" scale length) octave guitars, shown below.

    Following is a link to another thread (and there are several) which discusses scale length and the Rule of 18. In the first post, click on the thumbnail and download the pdf file in order to see the comparison full size (although that comparison doesn't include the 24.75" scale length): http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/luthiers-corner/131930-fret-slotting-templates.html

    And here's a pic of one of my small scale octave guitars:

    [​IMG]

    I hope that helps!


    Frank
     
    7 people like this.
  13. SuperDuty62

    SuperDuty62 Banned

    Messages:
    539
    Likes Received:
    396
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2014
    Thanks Frank! That puppy looks sweet! OK, being I am new at this what exactly does Rule of 18 mean?
     
  14. StuC

    StuC Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    116
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
  15. houston

    houston Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    712
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2013
    Of course it is. The point is that you're already infringing on another company's IP before you even get to logos. (Granted, building a replica of a new car might be a better example than one not released for 50 years.)

    Copy the G cutaway? Illegal.
    Copy the G headstock? Illegal.
    Copy the G logo? Illegal.

    My question is with why people seem to think violating the first two of the above should be ok, but not the third. Yes, the cutaway and headstock shapes are intrinsic parts of the "Les Paul" look. But so is the G logo. So why cherry pick which violations they have a problem with?
     
    2 people like this.
  16. ADangerToMyself

    ADangerToMyself Banned

    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    159
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    I'd say it's less about legality and more about "it's not a Gibson". If you're making a one off of something my company made then I'm okay with that but if you put my company's logo on it then that's where it, for me, can become misrepresentation. It can be a great guitar or it can be a piece of shit. Gibson didn't make it so it shouldn't have the Gibson logo on it.
    It's really as simple as that.

    As far as the cutaway goes, as long as you aren't mass producing it then who cares.
     
    1 person likes this.
  17. radiomatts

    radiomatts Senior Member

    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    166
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    There is a legal difference with a home build for personal use and counterfeiting. Personal use is exempt because there is no intent to traffic.

    Some people on MLP are very vocal against the logo issue. I say who cares. Go buy an overlay and do it. Just know that I'll think you're a scumbag if you sell it as a Gibson..... And so will their lawyers.
     
  18. monsterwalley

    monsterwalley Premium Member

    Messages:
    2,421
    Likes Received:
    1,322
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Not to get political or be a doom and gloomer, but with the state of affairs in this world, in 20 years do you think any of this trivial stuff will matter anyway. :hmm:
     
    3 people like this.
  19. Open_Book

    Open_Book Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    638
    Joined:
    May 26, 2014
    It depends if Henry seeks to be President. Black Helicopters circling replica builders will be on PS5 on blue-ray and dvd from monday.
     
    2 people like this.
  20. dsmcl77

    dsmcl77 Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,563
    Likes Received:
    7,514
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    Wait a minute! that's a counterfeit "Minime"! I will sue you, not for a trillion but for billions
    Dr Evil G :mad2:

     

Share This Page