'58, '59, '60 Bursts and R9 Comparison

[sws1]

As I've said before, based on experience, the difference in the room I'm sure was far more pronounced that what the recording shows. Even great microphones in pro studios produce results different than what the ear does.

Human ears are pretty spectacular instruments. Can you imagine what the difference would sound like to a dog in the room?

 

[bentfinger]

"In this video Simon Karlsson and I compare a 2008 Gibson Les Paul 1959 Reissue R9 to three original Bursts from 1958, 1959 and 1960 which all are pretty different but all mind blowing instruments. The 1960 (early 1960 so 59 specs) being the greatest instrument I have ever played."

I personally like the warmer 1959 and 1960 BUT this is a perfect example of how the player influences the sound. As they say about the greats 'its all in the fingers' Thank you for this work.

 

[Mickey_C]

As I've said before, based on experience, the difference in the room I'm sure was far more pronounced that what the recording shows. Even great microphones in pro studios produce results different than what the ear does.

Human ears are pretty spectacular instruments. Can you imagine what the difference would sound like to a dog in the room?

If the dog was playing drums, nobody, dog included, could tell the difference.

FWIW - the real deal Gibsons are NOT worth $200K more for their sound - their price reflects their rarity and history. There are luthier made copies with real deal PAFs that nobody could tell the difference in sound. Obviously they are not worth the same as the real deal guitar.

Call me captain obvious I guess.

 

[landguitar]

About that......

the Jedi Master of guitar. Nice, thanks for the reminder! Interesting to see that Jimmy didn't worry too much about playing "cleanly" here either. More about the sound, feel and emotion...
I hate to disagree with Jon, but I enjoy Greg Koch's guitar demos partly for that reason - you get to hear the "unaffected" clean tone of the guitar, as well as the "beefed up" tone. Do I play clean much? Not very, but I do play clean and add effects on many songs, whether for worship or Rock, and the clean tone is where it all starts!
P.S. I wouldn't call that tone heavily overdriven though. Very light dirt, IMO. Close enough to clean for me!

 

[dro]

Gotta go with the '59 but all the originals over the RI. Played a 60 RI that I liked a lot, but then again, I didn't have a real one to compare it too.

 

[1969 weatherman]

I think the whole comparison deal via youtube is over rated. seriously johan can make a gorilla sound like a plexi via his recording style and the way he dilivers the clips to your PC. the clips are compressed in such a way that you can make anything sound similar. Feel the guitars through the amp live in that same room live I guarantee you will pick a winner the moment you hit a first chord! but you got to give the guy credit for the effort he is putting in!!

 

[dro]

There are soooo many out there today who rely on modeling or digital DI because of ease of transport quiet stage volume
Have seen many a pro band lately that have gone to this as well. Makes me not want to buy a ticket anymore. You could take that 1959 Les Paul and run it through a Fractal, or a Line 6, or the like and you'll be able to make that 6 figure guitar sound like a piece of $200.00 crap. Have seen a lot of this in studio use as well. Engineers playing producers who don't want to take the time to find mic placement on a nice valve amp because they can't hear the difference anyway.
Well damnit, " I can hear the difference ". Sorry guess I got off topic. From what I heard coming through my computer though a pair of Sony 7506s I like the '59. I am sure though. If I were playing them, through one of my amps. I would likely go for the '60 , Just because I would be more comfortable playing the '60s neck. If I were to do the comparison though. It would be through a jumped JTM 45 4X12bx greenbacks both channels up around 3 and all three pickup positions.

 

[lpfan1980]

"In this video Simon Karlsson and I compare a 2008 Gibson Les Paul 1959 Reissue R9 to three original Bursts from 1958, 1959 and 1960 which all are pretty different but all mind blowing instruments. The 1960 (early 1960 so 59 specs) being the greatest instrument I have ever played."

Can I have one even the 08?lucky fella.

 

[Hatefulsob]

As it was intended.....

 

[lpfan1980]

About that......

so lovely guitar and player. JP and his LP

 

[lpfan1980]

"In this video Simon Karlsson and I compare a 2008 Gibson Les Paul 1959 Reissue R9 to three original Bursts from 1958, 1959 and 1960 which all are pretty different but all mind blowing instruments. The 1960 (early 1960 so 59 specs) being the greatest instrument I have ever played."

1959 FOR ME but they sre all outstandingg the 2008 is very special sounding.

 

[zamdrang]

Cool video. I don't put a lot of stock in youtube sound quality but do I agree with the comments about the highs being more pleasing on the 59 and 60. Overall all 3 of the vintage guitars have more mojo, but it certainly begs the question of the pups and hardware in the R9, and whether it could "warmed up" for lack of a better term, I've found most older historic LPs to be harsh and icy, which i've never liked. but i've always attributed that to the BB pups, junk imo. Im off topic... I particularly liked the '59 lead tones... just so musical and nuanced, bright/clear but warm.. .beautiful really... what a bummer as i'll never own one.

 

[Luckynumber3]

The 08 sounded so close, if you recorded a track in the studio with a real burst and played the 08 on stage nobody would ever know its a different guitar than the recording. Through a cranked marshall and maybe a tiny bit of EQ'ing, adjusting pickup height, rolling off the tone knobs, adjusting pole pieces, rolling back the volume knobs, etc. on the 08 then it would even be harder to hear a difference between the original guitars and the reissue even with perfect studio recordings.

Burstbuckers were always kind of bright too, throw in a different set of pickups and even the minor differences we hear here will probably disappear (source: I swapped the burstbucker on my LP for a more vintage-sounding pickup and the tone become smoother and more similar to the vintage les pauls).

First time I've logged in to post anywhere on these forums in years! I became happy with the equipment I had so I had no other need to post. But I logged in because I was impressed with how similar the 08 sounded to the vintage bursts without the brazilian rosewood, 50's wiring and caps, and all the other complaints about inaccuracies between the reissues and the vintage LPs that people used to have. I don't know about the state of current gibsons but its a reminder to be happy, enjoy your les paul, and rock on!

 

[jktxs]

Are these the same bursts used in that other Segeborn video with a lot more vintage LPs?
I liked the '58 the most in both. '58 > R9 > '60 > '59
This particular '59 sounds muddy. Very farty on harder hitting chords.
I'd suggest the Marsden videos with the Beast or the Geartorial burst vs. historics comparison featuring the Danger Burst for better sounding '59s.

I was impressed with how similar the 08 sounded to the vintage bursts without the brazilian rosewood

There are enough videos now to prove that fretboard material matters little in electric guitar tone.

 

[Bluesrider]

This is a very good comparison in general, and they all sound nice. The old ones sound best, with the 59 being most superb. The modern one sounds a little colder, stiffer, more abrupt, if you will. However, we need to consider that three vintage guitars are being used and only one modern replica. There are likely some modern guitars that would sound really close to the originals, especially if fitted with pickups like ThroBaks, for example, that are made to eaxct PAF specs. All guitars are different, even the old vintage ones. There is a complex set of variables and physical characteristics that come together to provide tone and sound propogation through the wooden guitar body. Sometimes it becomes magic, and sometimes it is just good.

 

[mdubya]

I find it interesting that some can call the '59 muddy and others hear it as sweet and warm, yet clear.

Makes me wonder what each person uses to listen to these.

And it most definitely shows that not everyone has the same ears.

*Also, thusly judged, P-90 Les Pauls should be the most valuable LP's on the planet.

 

[goldtop0]

I find it interesting that some can call the '59 muddy and others hear it as sweet and warm, yet clear.

Makes me wonder what each person uses to listen to these.

And it most definitely shows that not everyone has the same ears.

*Also, thusly judged, P-90 Les Pauls should be the most valuable LP's on the planet.

Yes P90s are a good beast to run with........the neck pup sound I find clearer with more presence than its humbucker counterpart in my LPs.
Liked the tone of the R9 in this lineup..........it was comparable to the vintage ones.......the Customshop do a very good job with these Historics I think.

 

[jenton70]

The 60 has such a nice soft attack and warm sound. Mellower sounding pickups than the other 3. I enjoyed them all but the 60 was my favorite. Followed by the 58 and the R9/59 I liked about the same.

 

[Gridlock]

Lucky guy, great talent, and dream amps and guitars.

All guitars sounded great, to my ears the vintage ‘59 just sang a little better and a little mellower which I love. The original ‘59 for the win.

I’ve owned a R8, and now a R7, guess that a R9 is in my future.

 

[BDW60]

Ironically, IMO the reissue has more of the bright “tele on steroids” thing going on and all of the bursts have a more mellowed, complex sound. Maybe they’re like good wine. Time adds the nuance, and we are judging the reissues a bit too soon. Maybe they will mature in 50 years.