difference in the structure of the body Gibson vs Epiphone?

[FENDERL]

what the difference in the structure of the body Gibson vs Epiphone?

 

[Benniator]

Well, one is made from the best quality materials available and constructed by master luthiers, and the other is a Gibson.

Actually, Gibson uses nice quality Honduran mahogany and good quality maple, and Epiphone uses a mahogany-like wood and/or alder. Non-Custom Shop Gibson bodies tend to be 2 piece backs with one piece necks and a book matched maple cap, while Epiphone uses multiple pieces of their mahogany (possibly with pieces of alder) for their bodies (veneered so you can't see the seams), with a 3 piece neck, and what is most likely an alder cap with thin maple veneer over it. Both have set necks.

Hope that helps.

 

[rideski]

Well, one is made from the best quality materials available and constructed by master luthiers, and the other is a Gibson.

LOL...nice! Hey wait....I'm a Gibson fan...I can't laugh at that!?

Also an Epi fan too.....so I guess I can...

 

[Scooter2112]

LOL...nice! Hey wait....I'm a Gibson fan...I can't laugh at that!?

Also an Epi fan too.....so I guess I can...

Great reply!!

 

[hbucker]

With all due respect, if you do a search for "gibson vs. epiphone" you'll probably come up with hours of reading on the subject. Benniator summed it up well though.

 

[Chimera]

It's funny, I happened to turn on the Nat Geo channel yesterday at my in-laws house and they were showing how Gibson LP Standards were made....quite informative, especially how the cap was added to the body while it was just a big block of wood, then the whole thing was cut and shaped as one piece.

 

[diceman]

Chimera - was that the "some assembly required" documentary? I've been meaning to watch that...

+1 to Ben - will add that Gibson USA chambers or weight relieves (swiss cheese) their body blanks - many are 1 piece backs (Standards I believe) and lower end models are 2, Epi doesn't but I believe they compensate w/ Alder to reduce weight, Gibson Custom uses solid 1 piece backs (some are chambered - special runs only), Elitists are 2 piece backs and solid.

 

[GrouchyDog]

Chimera - was that the "some assembly required" documentary? I've been meaning to watch that...

+1 to Ben - will add that Gibson USA chambers or weight relieves (swiss cheese) their body blanks - many are 1 piece backs (Standards I believe) and lower end models are 2, Epi doesn't but I believe they compensate w/ Alder to reduce weight, Gibson Custom uses solid 1 piece backs (some are chambered - special runs only), Elitists are 2 piece backs and solid.

The more I find out about the construction of various Les Pauls, the more I think that if you can't swing the bills for a Custom Shop model an Epi Elitist is the "truest" option you have as far as vintage construction goes...

 

[diceman]

Not quite as true as a Historic, but other than finish it is closer than the rest. (in construction method - not spec - 2 piece back aside...)

 

[dcmey]

what the difference in the structure of the body Gibson vs Epiphone?

Ask this in the Gibson section.

 

[diceman]

Ask this in the Gibson section.

And then ask it in the Historic section.

 

[dcmey]

Chimera - was that the "some assembly required" documentary? I've been meaning to watch that...

+1 to Ben - will add that Gibson USA chambers or weight relieves (swiss cheese) their body blanks - many are 1 piece backs (Standards I believe) and lower end models are 2, Epi doesn't but I believe they compensate w/ Alder to reduce weight, Gibson Custom uses solid 1 piece backs (some are chambered - special runs only), Elitists are 2 piece backs and solid.

Dice, if chambered guitars sound good, and weight relief holes only lower the weight, then what's the problem? There is half of people on the Gibson forum that share your opinion on chambering. However I disagree, if the guitar sounds good when you play it, it doesn't matter if it's chambered or not. The same thing with the long neck tenon.

 

[diceman]

You're right - R8/9/0 owners are all irrational.

I agree to an extent - if it plays good, it plays good, if it sounds good, it sounds good - but to say that construction methods and materials are irrelevant is sort of an (ignorant?) idea.

My main point is that , if weight reduction methods are REQUIRED to make a slab of wood usable, it is reflective of the quality of wood being used.

If lighter wood isn't better, they wouldn't reserve it for the Historic line.

Chambered guitars don't sound bad, and I didn't say they did - but it is generally a method along with weight relief to remedy the lack of light mahogany available. There are some chambered models - like the Historic Cloud 9 - which uses chambering AND nice light mahogany. There is nothing inherently wrong with chambering in and of itself (example = Cloud 9), but myself and many take notice when it is necessarily used to make a heavy piece of wood seem lighter, rather than just using more desirable wood in the first place.

Being able to find a method which makes less desirable wood able to be used is how you're able to score your VM for $700 as opposed to $3,500+ for a non chambered or weight relieved Historic. Those who aren't willing to sacrifice the higher grade wood and construction methods such as long tenons spend exponentially more money to get the best of the best. Its not worth arguing over - there IS a hierarchy when it comes to quality of materials and construction methods. These higher grade materials and construction methods DO equate to better tone and sustain. This doesn't make guitars that use cheaper build methods and materials "crap" by any stretch of the imagination, but you've got to be delusional to try and argue that they are equals - they are not.

I find this argument most common among people who own and like their short tenon or weight relieved models, and that is fine. I'm not at all intending to sound like I'm better than anyone or that my tastes are superior - and as you know, I felt that the solid light body w/ no cutouts and the long tenon were important enough that when I couldn't afford an R series Gibson, I got an Epi Elitist with most of the features common to the Historics. This is a priorities issue, not a money issue.

Also, notice that in my post which you quoted that I didn't make any kind of judgment on any of the specs that I mentioned - they are true and unbiased statements.

The bottom line is that if there were truly no difference in performance between USA's and Historics, not many people would be buying Historics. I personally couldn't give a crap less about "historical accuracy" and shapes/colors of plastics and all that junk - what I do care about is the superior playability and feel of my R8 as compared to any other model in Gibson's current lineup. I don't dislike the VM AT ALL - but the playing experience between it and a Historic or even an Elitist is hardly comparable in my experience. (Edit: I will also point out that at the same price as a Chinese Epi Custom - the VM is a hell of a bargain, particularly considering the $200 hard case and the BB Pros.)

I hope this thread doesn't continue on this tangent, though.

The bottom line regarding the OP's question is that the price of the guitar is pretty indicative of the quality of materials used. Epis use the cheapest woods, then come the lower end Gibsons and Elitists in the middle (argue all you want in that area about which is better), and the Gibson Historics use the best and lightest woods available. The cheaper guitars use more pieces of wood as well.

Aaaaaand, I'm out. I didn't intend for this post to be so long!

 

[dcmey]

I will leave the Historics for the "collectors". The "players" would gladly take a VM or Elitist for how they play.

 

[Muck Fe]

Well, one is made from the best quality materials available and constructed by master luthiers, and the other is a Gibson.

Your answer Benniator gets my vote for post of the year in the Epi forum, you can add a thanks to your total, made me laugh pretty hard, well done.

As to construction, Gibby vs Epi, I think we are all pretty much agreed that the Gibson Custom Shop guitars get the choice timbers then quality diminishes down through the lines.

I would like to have access to some Gibson Historics to do a shootout so I can hear with my own lugholes the actual difference in the depth of tone compared to my Epis. That is not going to happen anytime soon so for now I will just revel in the joy of making noise with the guitars I have.

Rick.

 

[diceman]

I will leave the Historics for the "collectors". The "players" would gladly take a VM or Elitist for how they play.

You've got to be kidding me with that comment... You think that Historic owners are just collectors, and not players - and you base that on the fact that Historics are expensive?

I'd say that you should leave the Historics to the players who can appreciate the subtle improvements that a Les Paul made of superior materials and construction provides, and we'll leave the more cheaply made guitars to those who can't appreciate the difference. (that sure isn't a nice way to say it - but I can't think of any other way to articulate the point) (Edit - and I only half-heartedly even mean that - the player is much more important than the instrument - but if someone truly can't appreciate the difference, then there is no point in having one. It'd be like me buying a $4,000 set of sheets for my bed - I wouldn't know the difference nor care as compared to my regular old bed sheets). No point in wasting your money if you can't tell the difference between the two - and if that makes you a "player" and Historic owners "conniseuers" then so be it. A wino will drink Mad Dog 20/20 and someone who appreciates wine will have a Napa Valley Merlot - I guess they both get drunk, but the process is different.

I'm playing the frets off of my R8, and beating the hell out of it through hard use at practices, gigs, and at home. If I'm any less of a player now that I've got a Historic than I was when I was playing a $300 Epiphone or a $1,000 Elitist (which I still play all the time), then I guess you've effectively pigeon holed me.

Post that sentiment of yours in the Historic section and see what kind of response you get - I'm sure the results would interest you. Heck, make a poll - "are your Historics players or collectors" - I'll bet you get 75%+ players - and the ones that are collectors pieces are the rare pieces like Stingers and Brazilians.

I'm sure that most Historic owners would be offended by your implying that they aren't players just because they have nice gear. I'm not even wealthy - not even well off - but I make sacrifices in the new car and nice clothes department to be able to have some high end instruments.

Back to you, brother. (And when you eventually do pick up a Historic, and dust off the old VM one day and say "Man, I love this old VM - but there is something magic about these Historics" - then you'll know exactly what I'm talking about).

 

[BCRGreg]

I will leave the Historics for the "collectors". The "players" would gladly take a VM or Elitist for how they play.

I'm a "player", and I would not choose either.

 

[Alligatorbling]

epiphone = V6 mustang, gibson = V8 mustang

lol.... but dont forget , its a lot of after market parts to make those v6 stangs scoot lol

 

[needlespauls]

I'm a "player", and I would not choose either.

There you have it!

There are actually other great guitars out there that experienced players prefer and depend on other than just Gibson. I'd love a Hamer, Robin, McNaught ETC., definately better than Gibson in a bunch of ways (wish I had the dough)
And most of those singlecuts are actually weight relieved Honduras mahogany for its superior tonal qualities, and ease of build.

True about everything thats been said about standard Epi line.
As far as USA Gibson is concerned, weight relieving or chambering is not a result of using lousy wood, its just that its plain heavy. To get a completely solid 1 -piece HONDURAS body, its gonna cost ya. Simply for the solid pureness of that body. Simply for the attention to original detail of the long neck tennon. Short tennon still contacts the body perfectly fine, just less of a cost in materials.
Weight relieving and chambering is almost a necessity today with using desirable Honduras Mahogany. Weight relieving just relieves weight, does not effect tone. Chambering decreases weight even more, and depending on how and where its chambered, can effect the overall tone differently (in subjective ways). Obviously, Gibson is going to chamber a Les Paul in a way that it still sounds like a Les Paul, and they do.
The standard Epi line does use a mix of species of mahogany (mainly Luan), alder, and in some found cases Agathis.
Elitist as we know does use African Magogany, solid 2 piece back. A pretty good alternative to Honduras. Less expensive and produces good results. The Elitists MIJ Craftsmenship to dollar ratio is excellent. I've found that they sound like a top notch guitar should, and right up in the realm of a Gibson USA LP. But opinions are opinions. I personally didn't buy the Elitist because I had the money at the time for the Gibson, and the Gibson just had the all around better package in feel, quality, sound, and looks, to me. Would I have been fine and happy enough with the Elitist? Of course I would! But not enough where I had the extra money at the time to buy what I personally felt played best. I'm sure thats how Reissue Gibson owners feel when they can afford to go from the USA line to the Reissue. I cant and probably wont be able to afford a Reissue, and I'm ok with that. I spent much less on my regular Standard and it actually suits my PLAYING style better! Playing thrash metal on a Reissue just didn't feel right to me personally. Playability for that style feels great to me on my guitar, as well as going to mellow cleans and back to regular rock. What more could I wan't? Besides an arrangement of different stlye guitars of course.

I'm at the point in my playing now where certain certain guitars in the $200-$600 are knocking the socks off of me. If you are practicing a lot, playing a lot, and going to be recording and gigging a lot, guitars really take the role of being a tool to work with. If its set up great, the quality is good and strong and it sounds great, it is great!! Of course, you have to be able to connect with that guitar, but as long as you can, tone is in the mind, and fingers. Truly. I would have to argue that at least half of Reissue buyers are collectors, which is absolutely fine. That doesn't mean that the guitar is un-superior to others and not sutable for playing. It's quite the opposite.
I've just found that guitars from $300 or so to $1000 are great, and guitars from $2000 and up are great. From now on, as just a broke player, I'd rather stay in the $300-$1000 from now on. I can make those guitars sound plenty good enough for what I need. A used Elitist would be something I'd definately consider in the future.

 

[diceman]

FINALLY, an UNBIASED and well thought out response! (I hope that no one thought that MY posts were entirely objective! They were close, though!)

My point about weight relief or chambering being a necessity is the same as your point, only I worded it a little more antagonistically. If those methods weren't used, the wood would be by definition lousy as in unusable! Its a good thing that there are methods as such that can be used to make this otherwise too heavy wood usable, though - and the results are good. The blank still started out as a 12lb monster, though!



I'm just a pot stirrer. I love Gibson guitars as much as the next guy - and really want to pick up a faded Special - but there is a hierarchy regarding materials and construction - this is a hard fact to attack.