how come new standards never caught on

[shtdaprdtr]

I noticed a lot of people buying new les pauls are usually leaning towards the traditionals rather than the standards...now I know the specs and all. Most are easily reversed with the exception of the ugly ass neutrix jack, and I noticed some early examples still kept the one piece backs...but how come the long tenon didnt spark any interest...noone talks about it...and if you look at it, its a more stable design than even the 50's long tenon..if anyone has 08 tenon pics please show the others what I mean. I find them to be the next logical step under an R9.

 

[shtdaprdtr]

now I know standard owners will start to say I have one blah blah...yes..they are selling but I feel the Trads are selling much more

 

[Benjammin]

i thought Trads were outselling Standards, until i started this poll http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/gibson-les-pauls/64058-les-paul-s-have-you-bought-last-year.html

 

[axepilot]

Who said the new Standards never caught on?

 

[Deus Vult]

the tenon issue is only an issue to so-called purist. and they arent going to be buying many USA LPs anyways.

i think the std is selling, but a lot of players dont sign up on les paul forums. they just play their guitars.

 

[shtdaprdtr]

anyway heres that tenon

that bitch aint going nowhere

 

[shtdaprdtr]

I dont hear much talk about these tenons or even comparisons with a late 50's?

 

[diceman]

Much larger than the 50's tenon.

But, the "purists" don't like the chambered body.

I could care less. I bought my R8 because it had the best construction available at the time - nothing to do with historical accuracy. And, I fell in love with the guitar.

The new Standard is almost as expensive as the R8/G0 as well.

I think that the new Standard is a real winner, though. Great neck, nice stock upgrades save the PCB.

I do find it interesting that we have so many "Late Norlin Spec Purists" around here all of a sudden who go for the "Traditional" (err.... 3 years ago Standard spec guitar). "Purists" thumbed their noses at Traditional specs when it was just called the Standard. Then the new Standard comes out - really, an improvement in design over the previous model, and people piss and moan until they bring back the short tenon swiss cheese holed "Traditional." Then guys talk about "the good old days" when a Standard was built like the "Traditional."

People just resist change - that is all.

Gibson can't win for trying. Improved sustain and resonance with the chambering, and a monster neck tenon (which was always the "complaint" about the NOW "Traditional" when it was a Standard...) - and the masses say "NOOOOO!!!!! Bring back the short tenon and weight relief!" even though they only changed the damned guitar in the first place because people were complaining about these very specs.

 

[axepilot]

The purists can seek older LP's or the new RI's. I don't have a problem with the chambering.

I also agree that the new Standards are very nice guitars - minus the PCB with those BS pots. I'm also not a big fan of the Neutrik jack - who the hell needs a locking jack when looping the cable over the back peg works just as well.....................and you don't need gymnastics to unplug the guitar.

 

[Atomic]

+1 for the chambering.

i for one dont mind the PCB. many many great guitars over the years have had PCBs and they sounded/performed great. dont let the corksniffing get to you.

 

[axepilot]

+1 for the chambering.

i for one dont mind the PCB. many many great guitars over the years have had PCBs and they sounded/performed great. dont let the corksniffing get to you.

I'm not against the PCB for corksniffing purposes..........................I don't like it for the bullshit pots (rolloff sucks) that are on it, and the hoops you have to jump through for any aftermarket mods. Gibson did not put the PCB in the guitars to improve anything but the bottom line in cutting their production cost.

 

[Thundergod]

In my opinion (flame-proof suit on) the "new" standard is a great guitar, I played a couple at a store, I wasn't shoping for another les paul so I played them out of curiosity, and I have to say, if I was to buy another les paul I would buy one of them.

Consistent finish and overall quality.

Features, don't care if they are good or bad, they are features, and as you said, easily reversible. I like some of them: a bridge and stop tail that won't fall off, straplocks (of the wrong kind but straplocks anyway), and other stuff like everything just loeaded into a board (which is easily exchangeable) and the neutrik jack... that jack might not apeal to some of us but it's useful for lots of people that just keep unpluging their guitar while playing, something that I must admit happened to me once, 17 years ago, when I was 14 and "upgrading" from acoustic to electric

The long tenon is another feature that should bring more atention to that model. If I decide to buy another lester (or another guitar for that matter) it will probably be a les paul standard (ok first a firebird and a red special, then a standard, but right now I don't see the point of owning more guitars).

 

[Atomic]

I'm not against the PCB for corksniffing purposes..........................I don't like it for the bullshit pots (rolloff sucks) that are on it, and the hoops you have to jump through for any aftermarket mods. Gibson did not put the PCB in the guitars to improve anything but the bottom line in cutting their production cost.

i think the pots were more of a production cost savings than the PCB. given the nature of how the pots are installed you still have to solder them by hand which adds a production step. even if you are getting the PCBs printed, parted, and soldered (w/o pots) on a production line somewhere other than in house, i would imagine that it is still cheaper to stamp out a plate of steel with 4 simple holes in it.

i can see some advantages to the PCB honestly.. for one, it makes pickup installation idiot proof.. you just plug em in and go. second, no more free wires. anyone thats had a wire compromised from vibrations on the road, its a bitch.. because it always breaks on stage in the middle of the most nut-busting solo of your life, in front of the hottest chick youve ever seen. you can also route the connections for the best possible noise cancellation. my VM (PCB) is a much quieter guitar than my non PCB standard.. and they were made within a month of each other.

all of this really makes for a more consistent product at the EOL.

and its still dead easy to change a component.

the PCBs are a win for me.. but i do agree that i wish they used pots with a better tolerance.

 

[TyrackT71]

+1 for the chambering.........

 

[LPV]

If gibson's original pots and caps fit the bill no one here would know what RS is, and we all do.

Show me those real world (not just here) stats that say the new standards "never caught on".

Although gibson did have another guitar that "never caught on"... what year was that... some time around '59 ?

 

[-=[Shifty]=-]

Gibson can't win for trying. Improved sustain and resonance with the chambering, and a monster neck tenon (which was always the "complaint" about the NOW "Traditional" when it was a Standard...) - and the masses say "NOOOOO!!!!! Bring back the short tenon and weight relief!" even though they only changed the damned guitar in the first place because people were complaining about these very specs.

TBH, I don't consider answering peoples complaints about weight relief by hollowing out the whole guitar as a smart move.
If people didn't like their Les Pauls having nine holes in the body, what made Gibson think that they'd want one big chamber in it?

 

[LPV]

TBH, I don't consider answering peoples complaints about weight relief by hollowing out the whole guitar as a smart move.
If people didn't like their Les Pauls having nine holes in the body, what made Gibson think that they'd want one big chamber in it?

And there lies the great chasm between those who like and those who dislike. There are those such as myself that feel that chambering not only offers weight relief but also an improvement in the tone of he guitar. Some people just cannot seem to accept that there are players who feel that way.

 

[-=[Shifty]=-]

And there lies the great chasm between those who like and those who dislike. There are those such as myself that feel that chambering not only offers weight relief but also an improvement in the tone of he guitar. Some people just cannot seem to accept that there are players who feel that way.

I don't have a problem with people who like chambered LPs. To each their own.
I just don't understand Gibson's motivation.

"Hey, people are complaing about the 9 weight relief holes in our Les Pauls...why don't we just put one big hole in there?"
"Yeah, that's a good idea...and if people still don't like that, they can put a few more thousand dollars on the counter and buy a Historic!" <smirking greedy>

They could've just made it an option, but now you have to choose between long tenon and chambered - short tenon and weight relieved. If you don't like those combos you have to go the whole 9 yards and shell out major bucks for a historic.

 

[Tim Plains]

i thought Trads were outselling Standards, until i started this poll http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/gibson-les-pauls/64058-les-paul-s-have-you-bought-last-year.html

Just because more people bought Standards this year, doesn't mean they bought the new chambered Standards.

 

[SlyStrat]

I like the weight of the chambered LP.
But I've tryed a few and there was a weird ugly tone with sustained bent notes. Friends and I jam together and we all heard it.