NGD - LP Standard HP 2016 - Are these issues normal?

BentheMighty

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
293
Reaction score
146
I literally cannot see any problems in the first few pics. The crappy fret job would turn me off completely. There's a bunch of good LPs out there and alot of em have better fretwork than that. Don't feel bad if you return this to get one of em.
 

crazytrain513

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
1,578
Reaction score
1,057
This was the best model out of 6 that I played. All the others weren't good players. This one was the best player. The worst had laquer that was chipping around the nut in store. All had the fret end binding looking burnt.

You have a bit of a choice to make then, my friend :hmm:
 

1allspub

Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2015
Messages
4,399
Reaction score
4,960
I personally feel that if you want a genuine Gibson les paul and are forced to buy a new one you need to be able to accept a certain amount of imperfections. I hear guys say their guitars are absolutely perfect and that they have no quality control issues over numerous instruments. I say they just aren't as picky as some and will excuse things I consider defective. Many of the things you show in your pictures are the reason why I went with a different brand for my LP fix. Now to be clear my guitars are far from perfect as well. In fact all three of my LP style guitars have quirks like your genuine Gibson. But my guitars were a third of the price of a gibby which made it an easier pill for me to swallow. Its entirely up to you if you can live with the issues or not. But I wouldn't worry if you cant and feel you have to return it. There will be someone who will eventually come along and that will be "perfect" to them.

I don't know... I have returned a few Gibson LPs because I am exceedingly picky... but I also have had (and do currently have) ones that are very well built... and that have no QC or aesthetic issues. The point is, Gibson guitars are pretty variable in how they get finished. Some are great, some are good, some are merely average, and some are, unfortunately, poor. Most fall within the good-to-great category... BUT, there are definitely those that hit the average-to-poor category as well. As a fan of Gibson I can admit that. That said, once you’ve owned a few Gibsons and come to understand how they are made (which BTW, they are not “handmade”—they use a lot of CNC machines and a lot of automation and technology—but there is a ton of "hand finishing" and other “hands-on” work that goes into them as well that will give each and every one of them their own signature, their own character) then you start to appreciate them for that individuality and, honestly, to me the sterile, mass produced look and feel of many other brands is bland.

Also, don’t expect perfection. Very few things in life are "perfect" and carrying around an expectation of perfection is just a recipe for a let down. (just sayin') Gibson’s building materials and their building and design philosophy for the LP just doesn’t lend itself to “perfection”. People who are spending big money for the first time on a Gibson tend to come to it with that expectation that they are buying a supremely high-end product like a Rolex and that it should be “perfect”. And that’s just NOT the reality… and here’s the kicker it NEVER has been. Gibsons have always had these same exact characteristics to them. It’s part of their charm… I’d honestly hate to see a stream of sterile cookie-cutter Les Pauls all exactly the same. Part of the fun is discovering each instrument’s character (warts and all). Gibsons are a lot like people in this regard… we are all unique even though we are all basically the same. Some of us are stellar is some areas and not-so-stellar in others… but again, how boring would life be if we were all cookie-cutter people. I guess the best way to put it is… Gibsons (in particular Les Pauls since those are the only Gibsons I’ve ever owned) are “organic” instruments. Fenders, for example, are more “clinical”… which I find less appealing, even if they are technically more consistently built.

All that said, to the OP… if you’re not happy with the guitar (and it seems you’re not) return it. But whatever one you get as a replacement, be sure to come at it with real-world expectations and just do not expect “perfection” (and/or be ready/willing to return a few before you find "the one"). If you can’t let go of that expectation (or you're not patient enough to keep returning them until you get the one you want)… then you shouldn’t get a Gibson. However, while you may find a more perfectly built brand of guitar, IMO you won’t find one with more character, more soul, or one that sounds, feels & plays like a Gibson Les Paul. There really is no substitute for that… if that’s what you’re looking for (and only you can decide that for yourself).

Good luck in whatever you decide to do.
 

Spikeyxx

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
A lot of food for thought here..

At this point I have emailed the shop to inquire about my return options. It is on a finance plan so that seems to affect my right to return. It's also a long drive, so I'd be keen to avoid that.

I probably agree with the body work finish niggles, I'm perhaps being a touch ott about that (save the next binding not being straight, that just upsets my eyes when I look at it)

However, the fret work, yup, I don't think I can accept that. I have had Japanese copies in the past that were flawless and didn't have the burnt plastic look going on.

It's a shame, it's a great player, but I guess I'm just the awkward kind of person who can't get along with little niggles when I've had guitars a third of the price that don't have them, mojo and playability none withstanding.

If I give them a free pass because of the name on not being true to myself. I bought a bass made by another manufacturer last year for 1700 and that thing is just perfect. Every time I play it., It is a wow moment. Looks feel, everything.

This guitar. I like how it plays, it's a Les Paul, it's a classic. A dream guitar. But that fretwork. It just makes me want to put it back in the case and not think about it.
 

Spikeyxx

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Thanks for your honesty, I think I thought that, but couldn't bring myself to accept it until I read your post.
 

tzd

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
6,683
Reaction score
4,890
Most points have been addressed by others.

(save the next binding not being straight, that just upsets my eyes when I look at it)

attachment.php


Regarding this, Gibson paints the neck over the binding, then hand-scrapes the paint off the binding with a razor blade. This is likely to be just uneven paint scrape at that part of the neck.
 

Spikeyxx

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I have also shared this on some local Facebook pages and a few posters have a theory about the bad fret job. They are speculating that this is could be a case of Gibson building neck blanks with the bound nibs on, then removing them in order to make guitars with fret over binding spec creating the ugly black marks underneath. Do you think that could perhaps be it. I imagine the vast majority of necks Gibson USA assemble require the nibs..
 

Cjsinla

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
5,035
Reaction score
4,570
The binding at the fret ends is a mess. Fret over binding should be much neater than that IMO. In the pics the binding looks hacked up. It should be smooth. I'd send that one back.
 

Cjsinla

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
5,035
Reaction score
4,570
I have also shared this on some local Facebook pages and a few posters have a theory about the bad fret job. They are speculating that this is could be a case of Gibson building neck blanks with the bound nibs on, then removing them in order to make guitars with fret over binding spec creating the ugly black marks underneath. Do you think that could perhaps be it. I imagine the vast majority of necks Gibson USA assemble require the nibs..

It does look like that, as if it had nibs and they were scraped off, like a re-fret on a new guitar.
 

Cjsinla

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
5,035
Reaction score
4,570
I have also shared this on some local Facebook pages and a few posters have a theory about the bad fret job. They are speculating that this is could be a case of Gibson building neck blanks with the bound nibs on, then removing them in order to make guitars with fret over binding spec creating the ugly black marks underneath. Do you think that could perhaps be it. I imagine the vast majority of necks Gibson USA assemble require the nibs..

It does look like that, as if it had nibs and they were scraped off, or like a re-fret on a new guitar.
 

MJK

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
111
Reaction score
35
It does look like that, as if it had nibs and they were scraped off, or like a re-fret on a new guitar.

Exactly what I thought at first!

To the OP. I would send it back. You don't sound happy with it. I Just went through this. I had a very nice Les Paul but it had a couple of issues that were blocking my enjoyment of the guitar. I sent it back using the simple logic many here said to me. If you don't like it now, it will probably only get worse later. That cleared up what I needed to do. Although it was a bit difficult I now have a wonderful looking, sounding and feeling Les Paul!

Les Pauls I think are like a relationships. When's its bad, you're miserable. But when its good...you're on top of the world!

You just need to find the right one! :naughty:
 

tattooant

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
102
Reaction score
143
I just took a much closer look at my new 2016 Standard HP. I have a few frets that have that black marking under the tips... however to a lesser degree than yours and only on the underside of the neck (when holding it and looking down). I had to look very close to know they were there though. Therefore I'm not at all bothered about this slight imperfection.
Also my binding is perfectly straight to my eyes, as is the placement of the dots.
I guess I was just very very lucky (particularly as I ordered it online).
Am sorry you're not happy with yours.
 

islandjimmy

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
206
Reaction score
202
$3113.00 is a lot to lay out for a guitar, I think the guitar should be a piece of perfection at that price. I went to a major guitar dealer the other day and played 3 different Les Pauls and all three had the issue of the high E string slipping off the side of the fretboard when playing an open D, in my opinion that's bad quality control. All that needs to happen is the nut cut slightly deeper to fix that problem (not widen the fretboard!), it's not that much to ask.

I watched a recent Gibson factory tour video and the person from Gibson said on a good day they can make 700 Les Pauls! How can you make that many guitars in one day and at the same time make sure they are all as they should be? I think the Gibson Les Paul is the Stradivarius of the USA. An original 1959 Les Paul is a highly sought after work of art, this is what we are looking for when we play a Les Paul guitar right? Aren't we chasing that perfect feel and tone? I love Gibson, I really do, in my opinion they are the greatest guitars in the world, I just want them to keep the quality as much as possible. I understand they have to charge more to be made in America, I get that, but keep the great quality I'll pay for that.
 

GibsonKramer

The Three G's
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
2,898
Reaction score
4,765
Yeah, looks like scraped nibs to me. I'd send it back.

I'd give my opinion on QC, but... it doesn't matter. We all have our opinions. I gave one. :D

I do know, I sure wouldn't buy a PRS. Do absolutely zero for me, and feel like lifeless hunks of wood. (oops... that was another)
 

PierM

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
6,284
Reaction score
12,510
The fact people is still saying the rubbish Gibson QC is "mojo" isn't helping anyone getting better instruments.

My 2 Cents....
 

UKPortista

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
244
Reaction score
300
$3113.00 is a lot to lay out for a guitar, I think the guitar should be a piece of perfection at that price. I went to a major guitar dealer the other day and played 3 different Les Pauls and all three had the issue of the high E string slipping off the side of the fretboard when playing an open D, in my opinion that's bad quality control. All that needs to happen is the nut cut slightly deeper to fix that problem (not widen the fretboard!), it's not that much to ask.

Arrrgh, the high E falling off the fretboard is a pet peeve of mine. I've had to return 5 Gibsons this year because of this issue. The most recent ones being a 2016 Explorer (Ltd Run '76 Re-issue) and 2016 Les Paul Trad in stunning desert burst. The Trad was particularly frustrating as it was reduced by £500 and I thought I'd scored quite a bargain. However, as beautiful as it was, the thing was utterly unplayable.

I find it amazing that these guitars not only get through Gibson's QC but also past the dealers, particularly some of the more reputable ones who claim to do their own QC checks before sending them out.
 

HOT-BRIT

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
20,977
Reaction score
16,578
Buyer beware, you should take your time when selecting and purchasing a new guitar, thoroughly examine every aspect and never rush in, or you could end up with buyers remorse. It all comes down to your expectations, if the flaws are spoiling your experience of ownership, then you can return it, personally I would keep it if it was a good player, as the blemishes are not major, but its your choice my friend.
 

Latest Threads



Top