Replica Etiquette (a.k.a. Replicetiquette)

El Kabong

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
5,859
Reaction score
7,806
This is aimed primarily at Les Paul replica owners/builders (no names please).

I'm talking full blown replicas... as the title implies, I am curious as to the proper way to discuss them without coloring outside the lines. I know some builders/owners like to keep things on the sly, others openly promote/discuss/showcase their builds. Is there an acknowledged code for doing so? I'm sure first and foremost would be to honor the wishes of the builder. But beyond that I haven't a clue as this is a world I've never ventured into.

For owners, do you just tell people it is a replica? Keep it 'need to know'? How is posting NGDs, pix, clips, etc. handled? No need to reveal anything... we're just talkin' here... :wave:

What say ye? :hmm:
 

rockstar232007

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
18,156
Reaction score
16,815
I don't, and could probably never afford one, let alone many, but the general rules are:

A.) Most names (builders) are on a "need to know" basis.

B.) As far as pics go - no front-of headstock shots, IF the builder/buyer decides to go "all the way" (using particular brand-names), that's a BIG no-no

C.) No discussion of prices, as they will very from builder to builder/spec-spec

Other than those few things, I don't see any other real glaring issues.

As to whether or not replica owners tell people what they have? In my personal experience, I've never met one owner who didn't disclose that information. Especially if they're selling. I'm sure there are a few that try to pass them off as the real deal, but those cases are far and few between.
 

El Kabong

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
5,859
Reaction score
7,806

Sera Sera?

I don't, and could probably never afford one, let alone many, but the general rules are:

A.) Most names (builders) are on a "need to know" basis.

B.) As far as pics go - no front-of headstock shots, IF the builder/buyer decides to go "all the way" (using particular brand-names), that's a BIG no-no

C.) No discussion of prices, as they will very from builder to builder/spec-spec

Other than those few things, I don't see any other real glaring issues.

Cool... that's the kind of thing I was looking for. Just in case I decide to take the plunge some day (nudge, nudge, wink, wink)... :naughty:
 

RAG7890

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
17,515
Reaction score
31,751
Absolutely no names..............a lot of us know the builders & we don't see the point in mentioning them by name for obvious reasons.

Absolutely no HS pics..............hard / fast / strict MLPF Rules. No ifs, no buts, no maybes.

I have always told friends / members that my Replicas are Replicas. They are not Vintage Gibsons, they are Replicas.

In some cases they may well be better than a particular Vintage Gibson but anyone who thinks they own a Vintage Gibson because they have a Replica is kidding themselves.

My 2c FWIW.

:cheers2:
 

Big John

my cat, my bitch
V.I.P. Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2007
Messages
8,266
Reaction score
9,545
The no names on a public forum thing is the big one. Still, that doesn't seem to stop some new owners from blabbing because they get so into it that they don't know when to STFU. I much prefer code names to keep Henry's hounds off the scent trail...down under, muddy field, sun tan, steel head, etc...makes it more entertaining, too.
 

Shai`tan

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
1,485
Reaction score
433
"Just in case I decide to take the plunge some day "

If you do decide to take that plunge....... you`ll be glad you did. ;p
 

Walt_T

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2014
Messages
3,628
Reaction score
3,401
A replica is a replica. I'd go with the builders name or logo on the HS, or no name like Ibanez did during the Norlin episode. I have an Ibanez LP Custom from then, and it was a great player(in re-construction now). No shame in a replica, many are better than the real deal.
 

Leddyman

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2011
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
1,245
The proper etiquette for a replica is to send it to a fellow MLP member for an evaluation. I'd be happy to help out. I'll PM you my address when you get it.
 

FKO

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2015
Messages
1,428
Reaction score
828
Cool... that's the kind of thing I was looking for. Just in case I decide to take the plunge some day (nudge, nudge, wink, wink)... :naughty:

Isn't your Crews considered a Replica? Or this is an excuse to get another one? :naughty:
 

bbaug14

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
496
Reaction score
587
I would never tell someone my Replica was the real deal. I don't get that. The point is to have something that isn't made that way anymore. To have the woods, the build quality, the finer details that made a brand what it is and a truly great instrument. It's not about convincing people its real, its about having an instrument that does something today's products can't.
 

El Kabong

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
5,859
Reaction score
7,806
Isn't your Crews considered a Replica? Or this is an excuse to get another one? :naughty:

I think that all Les Pauls made after 1961 are arguably replicas. The degree to which they are replicated being the distinguishing factor. To my mind, a 58/59/60 replica would include those guitars that are indistinguishable (to the untrained eye) from the original... up to and including having 'Gibson' on the headstock, although others definitions may vary. Those are the ones that cause the controversy... and hence, er, controversial.

I have several early MIJ "Lawsuit" guitars with 'Les Paul Model' on the headstock, but they do not say Gibson, and so I wouldn't classify them as replicas. To my mind, anything with the semi-exact proportions of a single cut Les Paul is a Les Paul, no matter how they are considered legally. I distinguish between Gibson Les Pauls, Epiphone Les Pauls, Tokai Les Pauls, Crews Maniac Sound Les Pauls, Fullertone Les Pauls, etc., to each be unique in some way (other than the name on the headstock), but I don't consider any of them to be replicas.

Actually, I don't even consider reissues to be replicas... they are just reissues... Bluesbreaker and Bassman reissues are not the real deal and some of the clones (which include a Fender or Marshall faceplate) are probably closer to the real deal than the originals. I would consider these clones to be replicas as well.

The legality/legitimacy/morality of putting Gibson on the headstock is an argument for another thread... for all intents and purposes I consider replicas to be full blown 'Libby's on the Label' replicas... no matter who makes them.

I would never tell someone my Replica was the real deal. I don't get that. The point is to have something that isn't made that way anymore. To have the woods, the build quality, the finer details that made a brand what it is and a truly great instrument. It's not about convincing people its real, its about having an instrument that does something today's products can't.

I agree 100%.

Although I'm not sure I would take the time to correct someone who knows nothing at all about guitars if they thought it was a real Gibson and I hadn't the time/desire to get into a lengthy discussion correcting them... it is kind of a long story. :hmm:
 

larryguitar

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
993
Reaction score
2,634
If it's not about convincing people it's a vintage Gibson, it will have the builder's name on the headstock. Just MHO.


Larry
 

Kamen_Kaiju

smiling politely as they dream of savage things
V.I.P. Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
85,590
Reaction score
260,063
it's funny that when it's a $300. 'copy' it's a counterfeit but when it's a $5,000 'copy' it's a replica.

If it says Gibson and wasn't built by Gibson.....
 

OldBenKenobi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
8,387
Reaction score
11,225
it's funny that when it's a $300. 'copy' it's a counterfeit but when it's a $5,000 'copy' it's a replica.

If it says Gibson and wasn't built by Gibson.....

Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.
 

Liam

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
6,265
Reaction score
3,134
it's funny that when it's a $300. 'copy' it's a counterfeit but when it's a $5,000 'copy' it's a replica.

If it says Gibson and wasn't built by Gibson.....

No. When there is an intention to deceive, it's a counterfeit. When there is no intention to deceive, it is not. I can commission anything I want to be made without me or the maker of the item committing any fraud, because at no point has the copy been represented as an original. The problem comes when I want to sell the item, as I could find myself infringing a trademark as well as potential liability for selling counterfeit goods. Fortunately nothing that has been made for me is likely to be sold in my lifetime.

When asked, I am generally much more open about declaring my guitars to be copies when they are copies than I am about telling people that the real ones are real - especially when they are 50s Gibsons.

Liam
 

alexanderja

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
520
Reaction score
599
When asked, I am generally much more open about declaring my guitars to be copies when they are copies than I am about telling people that the real ones are real - especially when they are 50s Gibsons.
Liam

Wise words mate :cool:
 

Latest Threads



Top