Really Wanting To Pull The Trigger On A Bourbon Burst 60's

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
That's ridiculously light. I've seen a handful online around 8.5 lbs, but I've never seen one listed less than 8. Good find! Out of curiosity, what does the top look like? Heavily flamed or closer to a plaintop? There's been some talk about the more figured tops being paired with the heavier mahogany blanks.
The seller doesn't have very good pictures, but I took the gamble because of the weight. I think it was poor choice of lighting on the seller's. However, when I zoom into the pictures it looks like a decent flamed top. I'll know for sure in about a week.
 

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
That's ridiculously light. I've seen a handful online around 8.5 lbs, but I've never seen one listed less than 8. Good find! Out of curiosity, what does the top look like? Heavily flamed or closer to a plaintop? There's been some talk about the more figured tops being paired with the heavier mahogany blanks.
Hey, the guitar arrived yesterday. I think it was a data entry error by the seller. The guitar actually weighs 9 lbs 14 oz, not 7 lbs 14 oz. I’ll contact the seller today.

The top is lightly figured. The guitar itself is absolutely impeccable. The fit and finish is amazing. The fretboard is very dark and well conditioned. Great attention to detail in every inch of this guitar. Neck feels very comfortable and not as pencil thin like I remember my 2017 R0(G0). The neck depth measured 0.833” at the first fret.
 

Leumas

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
13,810
Reaction score
15,894
Yeah, who would want some of the best guitars Gibson has made since the golden era.
I guess you are a 70's Norlin man. Took a guy who ran a denim jeans company to get your attention.
Say what you will about "Hank" but he rebuilt Gibson when they were making junk. Hank's guitars speak for them selves.
I like that you’re picking a fight while having absolutely no fucking clue what you’re talking about. I could explain my stance to you civilly, or I could choose your approach and just sling insults. I’m good either way.
 

danzego

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
671
Hey, the guitar arrived yesterday. I think it was a data entry error by the seller. The guitar actually weighs 9 lbs 14 oz, not 7 lbs 14 oz. I’ll contact the seller today.

The top is lightly figured. The guitar itself is absolutely impeccable. The fit and finish is amazing. The fretboard is very dark and well conditioned. Great attention to detail in every inch of this guitar. Neck feels very comfortable and not as pencil thin like I remember my 2017 R0(G0). The neck depth measured 0.833” at the first fret.

Yeahhhh....that’s a faulty substantial discrepancy in weight when it comes to guitars. I don’t mind a weighty LP, but even that’s beyond my threshold. What are you thinking you’re going to do about that?
 

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
Yeahhhh....that’s a faulty substantial discrepancy in weight when it comes to guitars. I don’t mind a weighty LP, but even that’s beyond my threshold. What are you thinking you’re going to do about that?
I'm thinking about returning it and try to have the seller pay for the return shipping cost, because of their data entry error. I confess I was tempted to keep it because of how beautiful and perfect the guitar is finished. However, because I'm in no particular rush, given what I already have, I'm leaning towards returning it and maybe pull the trigger on a sub 9 lbs when one comes up.
 

danzego

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
671
I'm thinking about returning it and try to have the seller pay for the return shipping cost, because of their data entry error. I confess I was tempted to keep it because of how beautiful and perfect the guitar is finished. However, because I'm in no particular rush, given what I already have, I'm leaning towards returning it and maybe pull the trigger on a sub 9 lbs when one comes up.
I would, especially since (I assume) the weight was a huge factor in why you chose to buy that one.

How is the binding work on the neck? Turns out, the Standard 50’s I bought has a ridge where the binding meets the neck for most of the neck’s length on both sides. Is that one smooth as glass or do you have anything like a ridge going on?
 

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
I would, especially since (I assume) the weight was a huge factor in why you chose to buy that one.

How is the binding work on the neck? Turns out, the Standard 50’s I bought has a ridge where the binding meets the neck for most of the neck’s length on both sides. Is that one smooth as glass or do you have anything like a ridge going on?


The fretwork was absolutely perfect and no ridges on the binding. It feels super smooth and you can’t tell by feel alone where the binding on the neck begins. Unlike my Standard 50s, which has a one piece mahogany body, the Standard 60s has a two extremely well matched body.

Edit: I contacted the seller, they were absolutely phenomenal in accommodating the return. A+ experience. It understandably an understandable mistake, a typo. Customer support was just phenomenal.
 

Benniator

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
543
Hey, the guitar arrived yesterday. I think it was a data entry error by the seller. The guitar actually weighs 9 lbs 14 oz, not 7 lbs 14 oz. I’ll contact the seller today.

The top is lightly figured. The guitar itself is absolutely impeccable. The fit and finish is amazing. The fretboard is very dark and well conditioned. Great attention to detail in every inch of this guitar. Neck feels very comfortable and not as pencil thin like I remember my 2017 R0(G0). The neck depth measured 0.833” at the first fret.
Sucks about the weight error. I concur on the neck. My ‘60s Standard’s neck is the most comfortable neck I’ve played.



Edit: I contacted the seller, they were absolutely phenomenal in accommodating the return. A+ experience. It understandably an understandable mistake, a typo. Customer support was just phenomenal.
Good to hear! Hope the next one works out.
 

mfranzdorf

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
149
Reaction score
180
Man, I’m stuck between the 60’s Standard and the Classic. Then there is the Traditional, which I’ve seen on the GC site. Is it exclusive to there?
 
Last edited:

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
Man, I’m stuck between the 60’s Standard and the Classic. Then there is the Traditional, which I’ve seen on the GC site. Is it exclusive to there?
The Traditional was a model from the previous lineup. Gibson was in the habit of releasing new models every summer. So, for instance the 2019 models were released in the summer of 2018. However, after the 2019 models were released, which included the Traditional, Gibson changed their CEO. Than around January of 2019 Gibson announced a new lineup that were going to be part of their core line and wouldn’t change every year like they did before.

The Traditional is a very similar guitar to the Standard 50s. There are some minor differences, like the thinner bindings and the slimmer headstock on the Standard 50s. I’ve also heard people say the neck carve is not entirely the same.

The Classic is a great option. Year in year out it is a great model. Minus a few minor differences, the Classic is a Standard 60s with a plain top. The Classic has push/pull controls for coil tapping and phase inversion, while Standard 60s has none of that. Standard 60s, like the Standard 50s has the thinner bindings and thinner headstock. The Standard 50s and 60s are hand wired, while Classic has a PCB board in the control cavity.
 

Gtarzan81

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
8,383
Reaction score
24,372
I'm always astounded at the "weight junkies" in here. So you had a fantastic guitar and sending it back because it's a bit heavy?

OH... I forgot...light guitars are full of magic and fairy dust. Got it.
 

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
I'm always astounded at the "weight junkies" in here. So you had a fantastic guitar and sending it back because it's a bit heavy?

OH... I forgot...light guitars are full of magic and fairy dust. Got it.
1) The guitar was off by 2lbs of what was advertised.
2) I never said that light guitars sounded better and had any fairy dust on them. For me the only reason I want a lighter guitar is that I play with others. When I practice with my band, we play for at least two hours straight. Lighter guitars are just more comfortable in a 2 hours or more session. Not that my 8 lbs 11 oz R9 and my 9 lbs 3 oz Standard 50s are light guitars. However, if I feel the difference after 2 hours between my R9 and my Standard 50s, I conjecture I’d also feel the extra 11 oz of the Standard 60s relative to the Standard 50s.
3) WTF, that escalated pretty quickly. I can only assume that you’ve been in heated discussions regarding guitar weight and tone. I assure you, my preference has nothing to do with tone. I’m just not 20 anymore and although I can currently deal with playing a 10 lbs guitar, I want to continue playing till my death bed and there is nothing that gets me more excited to play than a Les Paul. Thus, I try to not go crazy on the weight of my guitars.
 

Benniator

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
543
The Classic is a great option. Year in year out it is a great model. Minus a few minor differences, the Classic is a Standard 60s with a plain top. The Classic has push/pull controls for coil tapping and phase inversion, while Standard 60s has none of that. Standard 60s, like the Standard 50s has the thinner bindings and thinner headstock. The Standard 50s and 60s are hand wired, while Classic has a PCB board in the control cavity.
In addition, the Classics are weight relieved and the new Standards are not..
 

danzego

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
671
I'm always astounded at the "weight junkies" in here. So you had a fantastic guitar and sending it back because it's a bit heavy?

OH... I forgot...light guitars are full of magic and fairy dust. Got it.
Two pounds is a fairly substantial difference in the weight of a guitar. If he bought it because he wants a light Les Paul and instead ends up with something that’s actually on the heavier side of the new line, you’re seriously going to give the guy a hard time? Come on, now.
 

danzego

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
671
The Traditional was a model from the previous lineup. Gibson was in the habit of releasing new models every summer. So, for instance the 2019 models were released in the summer of 2018. However, after the 2019 models were released, which included the Traditional, Gibson changed their CEO. Than around January of 2019 Gibson announced a new lineup that were going to be part of their core line and wouldn’t change every year like they did before.

The Traditional is a very similar guitar to the Standard 50s. There are some minor differences, like the thinner bindings and the slimmer headstock on the Standard 50s. I’ve also heard people say the neck carve is not entirely the same.

The Classic is a great option. Year in year out it is a great model. Minus a few minor differences, the Classic is a Standard 60s with a plain top. The Classic has push/pull controls for coil tapping and phase inversion, while Standard 60s has none of that. Standard 60s, like the Standard 50s has the thinner bindings and thinner headstock. The Standard 50s and 60s are hand wired, while Classic has a PCB board in the control cavity.

That’s true about the Traditional neck carve, at least for the 2018 and 2019 line. I’m not entirely familiar with what they were like from 2017 back, but I played ‘18’s and own a ‘19. They have a tapered neck that starts out at the first fret in the range of a 60’s and ends up at the 12th fret around what a 50’s is.

I’ll say, the slimmer binding on the ‘50’s and ‘60’s is one of my favorite improvements. It may not seem like a big deal, but on the neck, it allows just a bit more fret real estate; just enough to help rid them of the old high E too close to the edge of the fretboard issue that drove me insane when I first got it (and mine isn’t quite as bad as others I tried while on the hunt to get a Traditional).
 
Last edited:

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
In addition, the Classics are weight relieved and the new Standards are not..
That’s very true. However, I feel that the lighter body blanks are being used in the non-weight relieved Standards. I know the evidence is not enough for a definitive conclusion, but checking weights on Sweetwater, American Musical. zZSounds, Wildwood, among others that post guitar weights, the Standard and Classic apear to be in the same ballpark average. So either the body blanks on Standard are lighter, or 9-hole weight relief has an insignificant or very marginal contribution to weight or both.
 

Benniator

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
543
That’s very true. However, I feel that the lighter body blanks are being used in the non-weight relieved Standards. I know the evidence is not enough for a definitive conclusion, but checking weights on Sweetwater, American Musical. zZSounds, Wildwood, among others that post guitar weights, the Standard and Classic apear to be in the same ballpark average. So either the body blanks on Standard are lighter, or 9-hole weight relief has an insignificant or very marginal contribution to weight or both.
I think it's safe to assume that the Standard blanks are lighter. Not sure how the heavier blanks used for the Classics speak to the general sonic quality of the wood, but I assume that if there is a difference, it's probably negligible.
 

PauloQS

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
485
Reaction score
827
I think it's safe to assume that the Standard blanks are lighter. Not sure how the heavier blanks used for the Classics speak to the general sonic quality of the wood, but I assume that if there is a difference, it's probably negligible.
I totally agree. All I know is that every LP Classic I ever played sounded and played amazingly.
 


Latest Threads



Top