Les paul studio 50's 60's neck issues

Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
50
Reaction score
3
the first 3 60's tributes I recieved were stamped 2010 (month of Dec.) and the paper work indiacated they were 60's tributes...having already played the 50's tribute for months, I noticed that the 60's tributes's necks were nearly as thick as the 50's necks...today I recieved a 60's tribute stamped 2011 (made in month of Jan), and it feels as if the neck on this particular guitar is thinner than the dec. 2010 60's tributes...over the next few days I will measure the necks with a caliper...for now, my question is: would Gibson installl necks that are just under the specs of a 50's neck, (yet not quite what 60's necks should be) on the very first 60's tributes they sent out?...then as production continues the necks they install fall more into the 60's slim taper specs?...Maybe I am over analyzing, but I must tell you that as of now, this 2011 60's guitar's neck feels thinner than the first three 60's neck...of course, we all know gibson guitars can vary but is it possible the first producion guitars weren't quite within the full 60's slim taper neck specs?...let the discussion begin...any input is greatly appreciated...

calibration measurements on the first fret fret:
-60's 2011 ebony: .805
-60's 2010 cherry: .810
-60's 2010 honey: .811
-50's 2010 honey: .829

so, far the ebony has the slimmest neck...it feels like a 60's slim taper the other two 60's don't...a little upset, to say the least...
 

Last

The Cleaner
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
4,452
Reaction score
145
Absolutely without question.

Gibson is nefarious for this type of stuff.
 

MTA61

Junior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I have two ebony 50's tributes purchased in August and September 2010. One measures .810 and the other .820 at the first fret. Certainly not a classic 50's thickness!
 

onvacation

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2010
Messages
211
Reaction score
62
My thinking after owning a 50's tribute is that if you are buying these to replicate either a fat 50's or thinner 60's neck, good luck. I've played three 50's now and none of them had what I would consider a thick neck by any means.
 

TheWelder

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
2,498
Reaction score
4,322
My thinking after owning a 50's tribute is that if you are buying these to replicate either a fat 50's or thinner 60's neck, good luck. I've played three 50's now and none of them had what I would consider a thick neck by any means.

I agree with this 100% - I have a 50s Tribute and the neck isn't nearly as chunky as what I expected. In fact, when I was in the store playing it I had to ask if it was a 60s that had been accidentally tagged as a 50s! I haven't played a 60s tribute yet but I would be willing to bet that there isn't a huge difference in neck radius from the 50s...
 

raul

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
500
Reaction score
206
Compared to Historic and Custom Shop models, Gibson USA guitars use a smaller profile for what they call a '50s neck.
 

Slash Rothstein

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
375
Reaction score
68
Just for fun I looked up some of the 1st fret measurements in BOTB.

The 58 necks were around 22.4 to 23.4mm. Which converts to .88256 inches up to .92196 inches.

The 59 necks were around 22.0mm (.8668 inches).

The slimmer 1960 necks were 20.0 to 20.9 or (.788 to .82346).

This is just from eye-balling the numbers but there are exceptions. There's a 1960 burst that had a 1st fret measurement of 23.1 (.91014 inches)!

I used a conversion factor from MM to inches of .0394.
 

VDeuce

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
946
Reaction score
556
Typical Gibson...

Just for comparisons, after playing hundreds of Custom Shop R7-R9 models, the absolute largest neck I ever put my hands on was on a 2006 R9. Yep, not the 57 or 58, but a 59 reissue had a neck so huge that it was really unplayable, IMO, but someone might like it.
 

Latest Threads



Top