Gibson 60th Anniversary 1959 QC Issue

[LP-Lover]

Would you guys mind giving your opinion on something please? I’ve just purchased a brand new 60th Anniversary 1959. What are your thoughts on the image below? There in a slight binding ridge between neck wood and binding where neck meets the body. Think this has also caused a bleed of the dye here. So two issues, binding ridge and unsightly bleed as a result. It doesn’t really affect anything apart from the unsightly bleed and the ridge that 90% of the time I can’t feel during playing. Is this acceptable on £5,200 instrument? Should I expect more for the amount of money I’ve spent? This is meant to be my end game LP. The guitar does sound and play great. Thanks for any advice.

 

[mudface]

Binding bleed is historically accurate for Historic Les Pauls..... the use of aniline dye is the cause.... achieving historic accuracy comes with not so popular features.

As for the ridge.... I can’t see it,.. it depends on how you feel about it.

 

[LP-Lover]

Definitely a slight ridge there right along where the bleed is. Looks a bit shoddy for a £5,200 guitar even if it is handmade etc.. Surely workmanship / skills QC should be better. Also appears like the dye on the binding where body meets neck hasn’t been scrapped off neatly either.

 

[mudface]

I assume this is mail ordered.... send it back.

Your mind seems already made up.

Why bother asking for opinions?

 

[Duane_the_tub]

As @mudface said, binding bleed is totally normal on these reissues (unless you don't play them). It's caused by the dye used, not a build flaw (which I can't see in the photo either). You can send it back if the seam there bothers you, but you could go through a dozen of those guitars and they're all going to bleed (again, if you play them).

 

[danzego]

How far does the ridge extend up the neck? If it’s just right in the area of your picture, I wouldn’t sweat it as your thumb will never if only rarely even touch that area. That’s extremely common.

The bleed is common fare, too. That’s nothing. Just wait until you see what happens to the binding on the lower frets when you get some playing in.

 

[LP-Lover]

I bought it in store and thought that this was the usual binding bleed I’d read about and didn’t dwell on it. On further inspection when I got the guitar home it was apparent that it’s a bleed as a consequence of that ridge as it seemed strange it would it bleed on an unplayed / new guitar and in just that area only. Ive contacted the store but my mind isn’t made up it’s just that I’ve spent a lot of money and was interested to see what other people’s opinions and experiences were of such things.

 

[ARandall]

Just an FYI....the nature of Gibsons with the scraped binding after bursting will mean that the ridge is a likely outcome for just about any guitar with this feature. I have found it is still a thing on my 75 Custom that I got s/h.

Gibson don't wetsand between coats to make the whole thing level. They just buff out with various compounds at the end. Its a streamlining technique to reduce the labour time and production timeframe so the guitars get out of the factory sooner. But they've never done anything else, its just something people have become obssessed with recently.

The binding and the scraping will lead to some of these minor blemishes between plastic and wood, especially on the fretboard face where the nibs and fret spaces have to be scraped to be formed in the first place. Some are very visible, and do constitute a general unacceptable vote from any buyer. What you have is minor in the scheme of things. Its nothing for those who are buying an instrument to play, but in this ever increasing trend for 'photoshopped perfection', the gritty reality of real life for those tending toward OCD can get a little disappointing.
You either need to buy in person, or perhaps choose another brand of guitar. Whilst you can get the odd instrument that flukes 'geometric perfection' under the microscope (f you put in the time to search), they are much more rare than say something from PRS.

 

[LP-Lover]

Ive owned quite a few USA Gibson Les Paul’s and played many. Not seen this on any Ive personally come across. I understand the building technique however would assume that Gibson would be experts at this, particularly a Custom shop. Maybe I do just need to get over it, accept it for what it is and just play it but another part of my mind says you’ve just spent over £5k on a top shelf instrument and it should be perfect.

 

[mudface]

I bought it in store and thought that this was the usual binding bleed I’d read about and didn’t dwell on it. On further inspection when I got the guitar home it was apparent that it’s a bleed as a consequence of that ridge as it seemed strange it would it bleed on an unplayed / new guitar and in just that area only. Ive contacted the store but my mind isn’t made up it’s just that I’ve spent a lot of money and was interested to see what other people’s opinions and experiences were of such things.

When in the store this is where a detail inspection needs to be performed,... especially when shelling out that kind of cash.

I know i do...... visible stuff is one thing, nothing should escape the eye,.... but what often doesn't occur at the store is checking the neck for flex,... most times people don't find a rubber neck till they have it a while. But cosmetic stuff should be spotted at the store. There is no excuse not to.

Though having said that,... i would often ignore these kind of things myself.... minor blemishes don't bother me. It's the actual functioning and tone comes before even color in my opinion. I own several Historics.... i can't say any of them are blemish free........ but all are fantastic playing tone monsters.

 

[ARandall]

Ive owned quite a few USA Gibson Les Paul’s and played many. Not seen this on any Ive personally come across. I understand the building technique however would assume that Gibson would be experts at this, particularly a Custom shop. Maybe I do just need to get over it, accept it for what it is and just play it but another part of my mind says you’ve just spent over £5k on a top shelf instrument and it should be perfect.

Its always hard to spend a lot of $$ and get less than what you expect. But to be fair Gibson has historically never been a brand where cookie cutter perfection is the norm. The guitar yours is a reissue of was the most irregularly built guitar of all. With body shapes up to 5mm out from one another, binding being sanded to different thickness around the guitar, the neck and string line out of line with the guitar body centreline in many cases (visibly out on the tailpiece and bridge position) amongst a lot of other individual aspects that would likely mean every single one would fail the arbitrary QC of today's standards.
Some of the hardest hit in this are are those who buy the top Italian car brands and get the same 'individual' finishing that comes with those brands - at maybe 100 times what you have spent.
I don't think that there is any association between any nominated price and perfection other than a subjective one......in a lot of cases it is based wholly on what the buyer deems 'a lot of money'. And certainly below your pricerange the Asian Les Paul production has other methods to avoid scraping seemingly as the poly finishes exhibit no ridges.

I don't wish to try and diminish your expectations here, but I've had the ridge on almost every Gibson with binding I've ever owned. Its something I've only found about more recently, but then I checked ones I've been playing happily for years and its there....... There were bigger aspects that I was focused on so I never knew about it.

Its something we see a lot of here (both bleed and extent of ridge). Sometimes as mentioned a lot worse than yours, other times less. So its neither new nor uncommon from the broader experience.




But all of this is nothing if the guitar doesn't come up to your standards. Which is the bottom line after all.
The way forward is clear - make your decision and move forward on the course you wish to take. It really is not up to our opinion or experience.

 

[PauloQS]

This is binding bleed. Bleed occurs due to heat. It is associated with playing because of the warmth of people’s hands heats up the aniline dye which in turn leads to bleeding. It’s believed/conjectured the bleeding fades after many years.

Slight ridge may occur around the binding.

This is a historic reissue. They go at lengths to make it a faithful reissue of a 1959 Les Paul, including its quirks like the dye. No they don’t get everything right, like the phenol formaldehyde resin used in the original to glue the maple top to the body. Instead Gibson Custom is using hide glue. Or for instance the angle of the bridge is technically vintage incorrect, but by doing so, we get easier intonation.

The reason I bring these things up is because some of the quirks they get absolutely right and the stuff that they don’t you have to go into a immense level of scrutiny to find them. The drawbacks of the dye, the divot on top of the control knobs among other things little details spot on. Some of these things are awesome, but others are objectively inferior. For instance, I find the GraphTech nut on Gibson USA a superior material than the nylon used on R9.

However, if Gibson Custom changes a few small things to improve or modernize the R9, it means that my R9 would become the last new R9 I purchase, and I’m not the only one who is on this boat. I’m much more open to diverging from historically correct features than the average target customer for R9s. The reason I’m not open for change of the current R9s is that they are the best guitars I’ve ever played and I’m not going to get behind a recipe that’s working.

Some people might disagree with me, and some might go on that a $6,500 Guitar should be perfect. I personally want I Guitar that’s comfortable to play, sounds good, looks amazing and gives me that fizz on the pit of my stomach. An R9 with all its quirks is the guitar that does it for me.

Before the but PRS argument, I own a PRS guitar and owned more than I care to admit, including Private Stock. Yes I think they are fantastic instruments that are absolutely perfect in every single way. However, none of those perfect PRS were able to take the crown from a Les Paul for me. I find an R9 easier to play, I prefer the sound of an R9, and an R9 gives me infinitely more fizz in the pit of my stomach.

Just a heads up, this section is usually reserved for Gibson USA Les Pauls. Historic & Reissue section is where reissues are discussed. Not a big deal, it’s more for your own sake. Obviously, there are some crossover between the two sections, but I’ve encountered people who only do Gibson Custom and people who only do Gibson USA, and people like myself or others in this thread that enjoy both USA and Custom Shop.

 

[swampblues]

Play the heck out of it for a few months and you will never notice it

 

[LocoTex]

If it was a great player I wouldn't let what you have there bother me.

 

[danzego]

Ive owned quite a few USA Gibson Les Paul’s and played many. Not seen this on any Ive personally come across. I understand the building technique however would assume that Gibson would be experts at this, particularly a Custom shop. Maybe I do just need to get over it, accept it for what it is and just play it but another part of my mind says you’ve just spent over £5k on a top shelf instrument and it should be perfect.

Again, where specifically does the ridge you’re referring to extend from on the neck (as in from which fret to which fret and on which side)? If it’s on a frequently handled part of the neck, it should be out the door. Personally, I won’t stand for it in that case. I do have a Standard 50s that HAD it, but being that the finish is thicker on the Gibson USA models, most of it was easily smoothed out by the dealer using some high grit sandpaper. But up high- like the 14th fret and beyond- it’s very common on Custom and production models alike. In fact, the only one I’ve played where it didn’t have any of that at all is my 2019 Traditiional.

Anyway, if it’s only that far up, the only time you’ll notice it is if you’re specifically obsessing over it. Start enjoying your guitar.

Same goes for the red at the binding. That’s extremely common. In a few weeks, depending on how much you play, you’re going to have pink spots on your binding on spots you anchor your thumb frequently and the treble side is likely to turn nearly completely pink. The red dye stopping at exactly the edge where the binding begins will be the least of your worries.

 

[simon connor]

My 2017 R0 has the binding ridge, for about half the length of the cutaway. When I first noticed it I was horrified, much as you are. However, after a while I realized it had no impact whatsoever on playability - and that R0 plays great. They are largely hand made guitars and there will be some imperfections. It also has major binding bleed, all over the guitar and most heavily on the neck. In the end I concluded that’s just how these guitars are - as someone said, if perfection is what you are after then you should get a PRS. With Gibson you get this crazy thing that is almost alive somehow. And as long as it plays and sounds great then it’s worth it.

 

[filtersweep]

Looks normal to me.

Every Gibson I've owned with binding, I can feel the binding ridge along the neck. Every Chinese guitar I've owned, I could not feel it. Go figure.

My reissue has binding bleed--- and it literally changes over time.

 

[Paul46]

I can feel the binding ridge on all my Gibsons, and the neck binding on my R8 has gone bright pink. I couldn't care less.

 

[Injector]

All three of my Gibson LPs have perfect binding. No ridges, no tool marks. I've rejected LPs before for this kind of thing. They aren't all like that.

 

[musicmaniac]

It's obvious to me that you should return it. Not because there's anything wrong necessarily but because you think there is.