Why are the 70's Gibson Les Paul custom logo inlays so bad?

[thacZERO]

I just find it hilarious that some of them have the dotted Is and some don't!! Was this just being lazy or being cheap!?

 

[Der_Kaiser]

My 2001 sg has some separation around the Gibson logo, not a norlin thing it’s just the nature of nitro.

The diamond custom logo just has more edges, that’s why you see it more on customs.

 

[DBDM]

Whats interesting though is that it doenst show up quite the same on les paul standards. The logo still seems "sharp" even with checking all around it. These customs (as Mitchey75 showed also) just seem to look worse than the standards...

Given enough time, they will. Just wait.

I just find it hilarious that some of them have the dotted Is and some don't!! Was this just being lazy or being cheap!?

Gibson has changed logos many times since the 1920s. I have a photo of the changes with them all side by side somewhere, if I can find it I will post it. Funny thing about being a Gibson "fanboy"--half the people will say "never change for any reason" and the other half will say, "that looks old and out of style--why did you change". The newest owners of Gibson have actually handled this very well by making (USA shop) models that are "modern collection" and Traditional. That way they get to try new things and not piss everyone off. When they try something new and some do not like it they get to say, "don't buy that line of guitars". If Henry J had done that, instead of dictating (in 2015) what we all should want, he would likely still be the CEO. Don't look now but there is absolutely nothing wrong with the construction of the 2015 guitars. Wider fretboards (I like that) and robotuners (which can be easily swapped for about $75). Otherwise they are are actually great guitars. 2016s are even better!


Edit--I am 6'6" with HUGE hands and I love the 2016s. Funny to me that often times when Gibson makes special artist runs--they very frequently come with wider fretboars. But with the regular runs people complain. Pay more for it but complain when it comes on the less expensive, regular models--you must be talking about Gibson. Complain that they changed something then mention the whole line is old and stodgy? Must be on a Gibson chat site!

 

[nadzab]

Whats interesting though is that it doenst show up quite the same on les paul standards. The logo still seems "sharp" even with checking all around it. These customs (as Mitchey75 showed also) just seem to look worse than the standards...

Here’s my ‘95 Standard that I mentioned above. A lot newer than those ‘70s Customs - and as others have noted, the much larger inlays on the Customs are going to increase/emphasize the checking.

 

[fpasello]

No issues since 1972.

 

[KS 5150]

My older Customs are fine...1974:

1987:

 

[Der_Kaiser]

No issues since 1972.

View attachment 640990

That is some clean hardware!

 

[DBDM]

Here are headstock and logo changes through the years. Not sure where I found this photo or why I saved it but I did.
Edit--obviously they are not all LPs

 

[moreles]

I've seen plenty of Norlin-era (and post-Norlin) headstock inlays with lacquer separation at virtually every inlay edge. This can be present on guitars that have clearly not been abused and where there is not checking and finish cracking generally present throughout. In my own experience, I would say that this is more common in Gibsons than other brands with similar inlaying, and from the same time. However, I never looked at it as a significant defect or construction "fail," since I assumed -- with no basis in actual knowledge! -- that this finish cracking was simply the result of two very different materials -- the inlay, the surround -- expanding and contracting with the temperature and humidity, over time, with the finish necessarily releasing at the edges to accommodate this movement. When present, it shows a lot, I think, simply because that was a heavy-finish era for most companies. IMO, there are a few areas where Norlin does seem to have had Gibson reduce/maintain costs, but I think most makers look at cost control, reduction in warranty claims (and customer dissatisfaction), and general product improvements as fundamental. It's easy now for people to look back and excoriate Gibson, under Norlin, for betraying past practices and traditions, but those were hardly sacred standards at the time. Everyone was rolling out new models and spec changes. It was a rare buyer in 1975 who asked, "Hey...I want a baseball-bat necked old school burst!"

 

[digitaljackson]

I have a 2019 50s Standard I bought new that does not have the issue, but my 2021 Custom Shop Axcess Standard I bought used has a pronounced outline around the Gibson logo and the Les Paul logo has what looks like a decal edge around it.

So, it's due to temperature changes that the Axcess model was exposed to or something different about the finishes between 50s Standard and Custom Shop version? Pic shows the issue on the Axcess model which is a guitar that's only 1 year old.

 

[jk60LPTH]

I noticed some time ago that many older guitars had somewhat sketchy looking Gibson inlays on the headstocks, which looked like an amateurish job. The outline of the inlay looked irregular. After a lot of snooping around, I was told that this was because the holly laminated on the headstock contains some moisture and shrinks as it dries and the MOP inlay does not, and the nitro delaminates as the holly dries, causing the border around the inlay to look kind of fuzzy or indistinct. Maybe since then, Gibson has become more diligent about drying the holly they use on the headstock. ( As I remember, the 'holly' used is English holly, which is different from the species of holly found in the US).

 

[Jamil Ecrire]

Given enough time, they will. Just wait.

Gibson has changed logos many times since the 1920s. I have a photo of the changes with them all side by side somewhere, if I can find it I will post it. Funny thing about being a Gibson "fanboy"--half the people will say "never change for any reason" and the other half will say, "that looks old and out of style--why did you change". The newest owners of Gibson have actually handled this very well by making (USA shop) models that are "modern collection" and Traditional. That way they get to try new things and not piss everyone off. When they try something new and some do not like it they get to say, "don't buy that line of guitars". If Henry J had done that, instead of dictating (in 2015) what we all should want, he would likely still be the CEO. Don't look now but there is absolutely nothing wrong with the construction of the 2015 guitars. Wider fretboards (I like that) and robotuners (which can be easily swapped for about $75). Otherwise they are are actually great guitars. 2016s are even better!


Edit--I am 6'6" with HUGE hands and I love the 2016s. Funny to me that often times when Gibson makes special artist runs--they very frequently come with wider fretboars. But with the regular runs people complain. Pay more for it but complain when it comes on the less expensive, regular models--you must be talking about Gibson. Complain that they changed something then mention the whole line is old and stodgy? Must be on a Gibson chat site!

I'm 5'10" with baby hands. The 2015s with their crazy wide necks are my favorites. I've got a few HP models after them too. I am an Ibanez fanboy from the 80s onward though so when I first started debating getting a Gibson, the wide necks were awesome for me

 

[1981 LPC]

 

[darkvoice]

Environment in which a guitar was kept plays big role in developing checking around logo and diamond. You can have perfect 1970s guitar with no checking, you can also find a guitar just few years old where checking started to develop.

 

[fpasello]

No issues since 1972.

That is some clean hardware!

Honestly I never could stand those embossed pickup covers, then I replaced them. Besides, the bridge is now a gold plated Callaham one.

 

[DBDM]

I texted the question to Jim DeCola--head Luthier at Gibson (why do customs check and sink more on the headstock). This was his answer
"The Custom head veneers are made of vulcanized fiber because they’re thicker and more porous than the phenolic (bake light) that USA uses. Custom also uses holly wood on Standards which isn’t as porous."

 

[kingsxman]

Environment in which a guitar was kept plays big role in developing checking around logo and diamond. You can have perfect 1970s guitar with no checking, you can also find a guitar just few years old where checking started to develop.

I would think very very few newer Gibsons would check. The plasticizers they use in the nitro would make sure that doesn't happen.

 

[ARandall]

They've used plasticisers for many years now. Certainly in the 70's too. Its not all been the same formulation as better products are developed or side effects emerge over time.
You seem to put a lot of stock into thinking somehow people mixing these materials are omniscient, and/or they simply cannot get anything wrong ever and know what will happen in the future. However one would have thought that you would have realised even just looking at more modern Gibsons with logo cracking that this is not the case at all.
Additionally additives do not and can not ever make nitro impervious to the physics of the universe and somehow resilient to any aging ever. This sort of thing only exists in the Star Trek type universe.

 

[Audrix]

1979 LP DELUXE & 1969 ES335 ( cleaner lines but the i has no dot)
Mistake on potiknobs (3 tone &1vol)

 

[InTheEvening]

Mine look fine to me.


1978
View attachment 640765

1977
View attachment 640766


Though some have just aged poorly.....or have been abused.

Same here, I don’t have any good close up shots but this is a zoomed in screenshot of my 76. Looks fine to me.