Replica Les Pauls show em!!

jacco

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
1,588
I think some distinction between the various terminology describing a 'replica' should be established to avoid confusion. Here's how I see it...

LP Replica: An expertly crafted, luthier built re-creation of an original 1950's Les Paul model. Accurate specs, measurements, construction methods and selection of authentic looking, era-correct woods and materials. Meticulous recreation of parts and/or hardware in some cases, sophisticated aging techniques, correct vintage carves and routings. An affordable solution for those who may own (or had once owned) or who aspired to own an original Les Paul, but want one to enjoy, without the worry of being the custodian of a 'burst. For those who love vintage Golden-era 1950's Gibsons, it is as good as it gets, and sometimes so good you can at least convince yourself that you have a vintage original. In some respects a replica invariably could be a much better guitar than a vintage one.

LP Build: A custom made luthier built (or self built) rendition or emulation of a Les Paul 'concept'. May not be 100% anally accurate compared to a Replica, but certainly on a par with the build quality, attention to detail and build methods. Could be considered a 'custom ordered' guitar, with particular criteria laid down from the outset by the player to the builder - ie: specific neck profile, frets and so on. A player might prefer Mother Of Pearl inlays over Celluloid, or maybe a Limba body/neck with a Sycamore top. Gold hardware on a Standard. Whatever - fill your boots. The sky is the limit.

LP Copy: A MIJ, (or other) mass-produced, more affordable version of a Les Paul concept. Think Tokai, Orville, Burny, etc. Thanks to RyanC for pointing out below that there is a huge gap between well built MIJ (Tokai?) and 'other' Les Paul copies. Anyone remember CLS and Columbus copies? Bolt on necks! We players (young and forever young), are SOooo lucky today to have many more choices for obtaining a decent guitar - copies, custom builds and replicas alike.

A Fake: In most cases, a 'Replica' which has (either intentionally or unknowingly) been SOLD as an 'original' vintage instrument in the marketplace. Rarely will a replica be sold as an original by the primary owner. It usually degrades to this after 2 or more owners decide they need to make a fast buck and feel they can try to fool the world along the way. Not financially viable for the original builder, but probably the biggest ego and kudos-boost for them I would think!

I'll probably get shit loads of stick for this, but in reference to the OP - this is how I would distinguish the term 'replica' from being confused with a plethora of copies and imitations. I'm bound to have missed something from the above so feel free to add...

Cheers, fb.
Interesting and well said. Where would you scale my 1980 Burny FLG240? Custom order, 240k yen in 1980 equals 2400 USD in 1980. There's only 2 of these accounted for, both outside of Japan. That's a solid top btw.

 

JamesT

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
2,200
Reaction score
1,530
Interesting and well said. Where would you scale my 1980 Burny FLG240? Custom order, 240k yen in 1980 equals 2400 USD in 1980. There's only 2 of these accounted for, both outside of Japan. That's a solid top btw.
Based on that line of reasoning, your guitar spec wise would best belong with the LP Build segment but is really a high end, custom order LP Copy.
 

jacco

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
1,588
I think so too James. The point is: not all MIJ are copies.
 

alexanderja

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
520
Reaction score
597
I think some distinction between the various terminology describing a 'replica' should be established to avoid confusion. Here's how I see it...

LP Replica: An expertly crafted, luthier built re-creation of an original 1950's Les Paul model. Accurate specs, measurements, construction methods and selection of authentic looking, era-correct woods and materials. Meticulous recreation of parts and/or hardware in some cases, sophisticated aging techniques, correct vintage carves and routings. An affordable solution for those who may own (or had once owned) or who aspired to own an original Les Paul, but want one to enjoy, without the worry of being the custodian of a 'burst. For those who love vintage Golden-era 1950's Gibsons, it is as good as it gets, and sometimes so good you can at least convince yourself that you have a vintage original. In some respects a replica invariably could be a much better guitar than a vintage one.

LP Build: A custom made luthier built (or self built) rendition or emulation of a Les Paul 'concept'. May not be 100% anally accurate compared to a Replica, but certainly on a par with the build quality, attention to detail and build methods. Could be considered a 'custom ordered' guitar, with particular criteria laid down from the outset by the player to the builder - ie: specific neck profile, frets and so on. A player might prefer Mother Of Pearl inlays over Celluloid, or maybe a Limba body/neck with a Sycamore top. Gold hardware on a Standard. Whatever - fill your boots. The sky is the limit.

LP Copy: A MIJ, (or other) mass-produced, more affordable version of a Les Paul concept. Think Tokai, Orville, Burny, etc. Thanks to RyanC for pointing out below that there is a huge gap between well built MIJ (Tokai?) and 'other' Les Paul copies. Anyone remember CLS and Columbus copies? Bolt on necks! We players (young and forever young), are SOooo lucky today to have many more choices for obtaining a decent guitar - copies, custom builds and replicas alike.

A Fake: In most cases, a 'Replica' which has (either intentionally or unknowingly) been SOLD as an 'original' vintage instrument in the marketplace. Rarely will a replica be sold as an original by the primary owner. It usually degrades to this after 2 or more owners decide they need to make a fast buck and feel they can try to fool the world along the way. Not financially viable for the original builder, but probably the biggest ego and kudos-boost for them I would think!

I'll probably get shit loads of stick for this, but in reference to the OP - this is how I would distinguish the term 'replica' from being confused with a plethora of copies and imitations. I'm bound to have missed something from the above so feel free to add...

Cheers, fb.
SPOT ON ...... all too often I see people confuse these definitions
 

SingeMonkey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
1,464
Reaction score
659
These may be common definitions used here, but people aren't "confused" about them.

All replicas are copies - by definition.

Any production model that even attempts to make their guitars like the originals from the '50s and '60s is making a replica - by definition.

If a luthier-made LP bears a certain G-logo on its headstock, it's a fake - by definition.

Before you get upset with me, all I'm saying is that these words have an English meaning. They may have other meanings here, but you can't expect people to smell that. We've developed our own way of talking about these things.

What you guys are really talking about is luthier-made, or hand-made, custom replicas. Right? Or hand-made or luthier-made, custom copies - it doesn't matter which.

The distinction is that they are made by hand, by experts, sparing no expense, to get as close to the originals as possible. So that even the ones that are technically "fakes" are not as bad as the usual fakes, because the only time someone would actually be disappointed by buying it thinking it was made by someone else, and then discovering that it wasn't, would be if they thought it was a '50s original - which is unlikely due to the intense vetting of originals. (I'd be thrilled to buy an R9 only to discover it was an expert-made replica)

So these distinctions may be important here, but don't expect the general guitar-playing public to use them. Slash's Les Paul is, according to the English definitions, a fake Gibson. Or a copy of a '50s Les Paul. It's also a replica of a '50s Les Paul. But the only way to describe to people what actually makes it different, is to say it's a hand-made replica (or copy) of a '50s Les Paul, made by a highly skilled luthier.
 

BrianGT

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
2,706
Reaction score
362
Good post! :thumb:

By definition if it has G on the headstock it IS a fake Gibson.......it's not real.....it's a copy or a replica whatever you want to call it but it is a fake!

I own a fake and a copy then!!:D:dude:
 

alexanderja

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
520
Reaction score
597
On a guitar forum, the requirement is to understand recognised guitar terminology ..... not necessarily the actual dictionary meanings.
 

BrianGT

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
2,706
Reaction score
362
On a guitar forum, the requirement is to understand recognised guitar terminology ..... not necessarily the actual dictionary meanings.
I agree........

I ordered a replica/fake/copy whatever this board wants to define it as because I knew I would receive a great instrument with a huge neck that I would want to pick up and play.....and make music.......and make music........and make music!:)
 

jacco

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
1,588
Good post! :thumb:

By definition if it has G on the headstock it IS a fake Gibson.......it's not real.....it's a copy or a replica whatever you want to call it but it is a fake!

I own a fake and a copy then!!:D:dude:
Man it's even worse; you own a fake copy! :D
 

jacco

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
1,588
On a guitar forum, the requirement is to understand recognised guitar terminology ..... not necessarily the actual dictionary meanings.
True, so tell me where this all is defined?
 

dazzypig

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
1,832
Reaction score
493
These may be common definitions used here, but people aren't "confused" about them.

All replicas are copies - by definition.

Any production model that even attempts to make their guitars like the originals from the '50s and '60s is making a replica - by definition.

If a luthier-made LP bears a certain G-logo on its headstock, it's a fake - by definition.

Before you get upset with me, all I'm saying is that these words have an English meaning. They may have other meanings here, but you can't expect people to smell that. We've developed our own way of talking about these things.

What you guys are really talking about is luthier-made, or hand-made, custom replicas. Right? Or hand-made or luthier-made, custom copies - it doesn't matter which.

The distinction is that they are made by hand, by experts, sparing no expense, to get as close to the originals as possible. So that even the ones that are technically "fakes" are not as bad as the usual fakes, because the only time someone would actually be disappointed by buying it thinking it was made by someone else, and then discovering that it wasn't, would be if they thought it was a '50s original - which is unlikely due to the intense vetting of originals. (I'd be thrilled to buy an R9 only to discover it was an expert-made replica)

So these distinctions may be important here, but don't expect the general guitar-playing public to use them. Slash's Les Paul is, according to the English definitions, a fake Gibson. Or a copy of a '50s Les Paul. It's also a replica of a '50s Les Paul. But the only way to describe to people what actually makes it different, is to say it's a hand-made replica (or copy) of a '50s Les Paul, made by a highly skilled luthier.
Can't wait to get my hands on my fake LP. It's gonna be sweeeeeet!
 

alexanderja

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
520
Reaction score
597
True, so tell me where this all is defined?
Well Flameburst did a pretty good job of describing what I, and many others recognise as being the definitions..... I'd say that's pretty much on the mark.
 

claudel

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
24
Reaction score
7
Here's mine...



It's been around for awhile ( Hi Rob )



I always wanted a red one...

It's tough to catch the tint and the chatoyance with my limited camera skillz



Great wood, amazing pickups ( thnks Wade ) good hardware (Callaham, Faver, Grover, etc... ), Electrosocket, frou-frou caps & pots.



It goes to "11". That's one more than "10". :laugh2:
 

Udonitron

Psychedelic Stoner Rock
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
15,491
Reaction score
10,262
Interesting and well said. Where would you scale my 1980 Burny FLG240? Custom order, 240k yen in 1980 equals 2400 USD in 1980. There's only 2 of these accounted for, both outside of Japan. That's a solid top btw.
Actually, that conversion is a little off.
The Yen was worth around ¥220 - ¥240 to 1 US dollar back in the early to mid 80's.
The price conversion would be around $1085USD, which was still a pretty penny back in 1980
 

jacco

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
1,588
Ah I see it was in between 200 and 250 indeed. Another reason to do my own research next in time instead taking something for granted!
 

jacco

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
1,588
Well Flameburst did a pretty good job of describing what I, and many others recognise as being the definitions..... I'd say that's pretty much on the mark.
Yes, but you were referring to something we all should know and he just formulated it yesterday..
 

SingeMonkey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
1,464
Reaction score
659
On a guitar forum, the requirement is to understand recognised guitar terminology ..... not necessarily the actual dictionary meanings.
This is my point. Using existing words with new definitions is always going to be a source of confusion. You can't blame people for not knowing them, or get irritated. (does anyone else get annoyed when a really popular group is called a "super-group" when that word was invented for groups made up of people who were already stars? Just me? Ah well)

In fact those dictionary definitions can be damn helpful when some f%$^tard is claiming that a Greco or something is a "fake." Since it's not representing itself as anything other than what it is, it isn't. Argument over. On the flip-side it's pretty hard to argue that a Greco LP isn't a "copy" for the same reason. We have to acknowledge the dictionary meanings.

The popular approach to this problem is to use acronyms :D 'orrible, really. But they can help to get right to what you're saying while still being concise. Like an HMR - a hand-made Replica ;)

Then your thread would clearly be limited to attempts to reproduce vintage LPs, but only those that were hand-made.

Ok. Nit-picking over on my part. Back to your awesome guitars. :D
 


Latest Threads



Top