# 60s Tribute Gold Top arrived, but...



## AlcolmX (Oct 12, 2009)

I got a call on Friday telling me that the 60s Tribute GT I ordered had arrived (in just over a week!!). I dropped by the store to let them know that I wanted to keep the guitar on hold as I didn't have time to sit down and play it right then. The guy at the store asked if I at least wanted to take a look... sure, why not increase my GAS!?! Unfortunately, the first thing that I noticed was the multi-piece body. I know that the Tributes often have 3, 4, or possibly more pieces, but they're usually inconspicuous... not this one. When looking at the bottom side of the guitar you could clearly see the different colours of the 2 pieces. It's made worse by the fact that the bottom side of the horn and the body are separated by the body contour (in effect creating extra pieces to an already multi-pieced body). Here's an example of what I'm talking about (this is not the actual guitar in question, just a Photoshop facsimile):








I'm still planning to try the guitar, but I've pretty much decided that I'm not going to buy it. Am I overreacting? Would this cosmetic inconsistency prevent any of you from buying an otherwise great guitar? Seems like this might be yet another example of Gibson's poor QC that I've read so much about.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Depending on how much the color difference stood out, yes. I would not accept that particular guitar. You are paying a lot of money and should be satisfied. It's not advertised as a multi shaded guitar is it? Tell them to send it back and get you another one. They are hoping you take it and save them the trouble.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

I actually saw a photo of one (exact same tirbute goldtop model) on TDPRI that was matched WAY worse than that. I have seen some that look perfect.

They are a budget Gibson, but they are still a pricey guitar. I don't care if it's considered cosmetic, I would personally expect more. If my $350 Squier Classic Vibe Custom can be matched so well you can't even tell there is a seam, why can't a guitar that costs about 3 times as much?


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

ive seen a few that were much worse than that. personally, it wouldn't bother me.


----------



## starjag (Jan 30, 2008)

We are talking about the back of the guitar, right?


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

that's one of the main complaints/reports of the 50's and 60's tribute studio les pauls...that the bodies are made up of multiple pieces...and wings on the headstocks...

[video=youtube;p3ourfJ3eBY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3ourfJ3eBY[/video]


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

My 1997 Les Paul Standard had "wings" on the headstock. Didn't bother me one bit.


----------



## AlcolmX (Oct 12, 2009)

It was just like the guitar in the video, but more noticeable on the bottom side (where the pickguard attaches) than on the back. The back wouldn't bother me so much, but the side of the guitar is plainly visible.


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

If you're not happy with it then return it and order another. There's no reason to keep it if it bothers you.
That's what I would do anyway.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

AlcolmX said:


> It was just like the guitar in the video, but more noticeable on the bottom side (where the pickguard attaches) than on the back. *The back wouldn't bother me so much*, but the side of the guitar is plainly visible.


It would bother me. It might also bother a few buyers if you were to try and sell it in a few years. I'd order another one or wait until they get some in the stores. Just because their a good deal doesn't mean they shouldn't be top quality. I'm sure Gibson wants happy customers. Edit: The guitar in the Jimihendrix video was a great looking guitar and I would have no problem owning that guitar. The guitar in the pic that you added, no way. Good luck.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

I don't think the one in the video is THAT bad. Some of the ones I have seen photos of were horrible matching though. I can't find the photo of one I saw on TDPRI, but it looked like completely different coloured and grained chunks of wood it was so bad. If yours was liek in the video, and you find it acceptable for what you paid though, that is really all that matters. If you aren't happy with it, I'd return it. It will likely always bug you in that case.

I just find if funny because my Schecter Solo Vintage I got was stamped as a 2nd (blem) because of a couple of small dark spots under the finish on the back that you would literally have to point out to someone (and over $250 cheaper because of that). Most guitars in that $600-1000 price range would be built to the same standard nowadays. But when it's Gibson, it seems to be acceptable just because they are 'cutting corners' to make it 'only' $900 (not sure of the exact price in Canadian $'s). A $900 guitar from the majority of other manufacturers today would not have those issues. Am I the only one that finds that kind of crazy?


----------



## AlcolmX (Oct 12, 2009)

The back of the guitar was probably similar to the one in the video, it didn't jump out at me as being bad at all. The problem was the side, where the colour differences were glaring, and plain as day. Maybe when I go back to the shop I'll snap a quick photo of it.

Is this the one you saw on TDPRI?








It's f&#king horrible!!!!


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

Wow! That one is ridiculously bad!
I plan on ordering a lefty gold top on Tuesday and I hope I dint get one anywhere near that bad. It would go right back for a replacement if it does.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

AlcolmX said:


> The back of the guitar was probably similar to the one in the video, it didn't jump out at me as being bad at all. The problem was the side, where the colour differences were glaring, and plain as day. Maybe when I go back to the shop I'll snap a quick photo of it.
> 
> Is this the one you saw on TDPRI?
> 
> ...


Ya that's the one. I know it's cosmetic, but would you expect that in a $900 guitar from any other brand? Would any other brand even sell a $900 guitar that looked like that as a non-blem?

The crazy part in that thread was people were telling him he should keep it (at full price). I was a little surprised at the time.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

No way I would accept that at any price as new


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

jimihendrix said:


> ...and wings on the headstocks...


Pretty much all Gibsons have wings on the headstocks. It saves them from having to use an extra wide piece of mahogany, only to wind up shaving most of it off.


----------



## zurn (Oct 21, 2009)

2manyGuitars said:


> Pretty much all Gibsons have wings on the headstocks. It saves them from having to use an extra wide piece of mahogany, only to wind up shaving most of it off.


Indeed, look at this '59 LP Standard


----------



## vasthorizon (Aug 10, 2008)

All Gibsons with the open-book headstock have wings.


----------



## bcmatt (Aug 25, 2007)

I think the whole woodscraps overstock guitars are the main idea behind these series and making them a more "budget" Gibson.
I sort of like the honeyburst one and the more stripped-down less bling look of these series. I love P90s too. So, if it wasn't for the wood-scrap bodies, I think I would be quite tempted be one of these.
For me, I want to believe I am getting the best tone possible, and a thinner finish would help me appreciate this series. However, having too many different pieces of wood makes me wonder if it hinders the vibrations that 1 solid piece would get. I think I might be delusional if I think I will hear a difference, but I can't help but wonder and I want to give the guitar ever chance I can. Maybe I should just concentrate on getting a semi-hollow instead.


----------



## Tim Plains (Apr 14, 2009)

jimihendrix said:


> that's one of the main complaints/reports of the 50's and 60's tribute studio les pauls...that the bodies are made up of multiple pieces...and wings on the headstocks...


Every Gibson Les Paul has those wings.

Oops, did it again - I replied without reading page 2.

Oh well, I don't see anything wrong with the guitar in the original post. 
If you don't like the fact that Gibson is using multi-piece bodies, cough up the extra $$ and buy a historic.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

I wouldn't get to hung up about the bodies made of two or three pieces of the same wood. When the pieces are glued together, the wood grains are reversed and some say the glued piece is stronger than one piece.
They should be visually attractive though. A few of the pics showing some guitars with different colours and/or grains where glued together by someone that didn't care about the final result. They belong in the bargain bin.
As for tone. I wouldn't know if the glued bodies would change the tone.


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

Multi piece bodies shouldn't really affect tone in general. I remember playing this 70's Les Paul Deluxe that clearly had a 3 piece body. Sounded Awesome! Great sustain and a highly resonant and lively tone. 
I'm likely ordering a 60's tribute gold top tomorrow and while I hope the body wood looks decent I'm not worried about it affecting tone.


----------



## AlcolmX (Oct 12, 2009)

Are Nine said:


> If you don't like the fact that Gibson is using multi-piece bodies, cough up the extra $$ and buy a historic.


I don't have a problem with the Tributes having multi-piece bodies, I do however have a problem when multiple pieces result in an unattractive, unappealing, and sometimes downright ugly guitar. I agree with Guitar101, they should be seriously discounted, or better yet, never leave the factory.


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

AlcolmX said:


> I don't have a problem with the Tributes having multi-piece bodies, I do however have a problem when multiple pieces result in an unattractive, unappealing, and sometimes downright ugly guitar. I agree with Guitar101, they should be seriously discounted, or better yet, never leave the factory.


Yeah some of the ones I've seen have been horrible and yet some look great!

Discount the seriously ugly ones I say.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

Spent alot of time in a woodworking plant, I can see why Gibson production guitars, look like this.. it would not be in there best interest, to stand there are match grain..so it looks pretty.. they do that in the custom shop and u pay for it.

on these 60s tribute guitars the stain is so light you notice it more then you would a guitar with a darker back.
The wings as u call it on the headstock, is called blocking.. they need to beef up that area in order to get the width to make the headstock,so there will be joints there..

The one eg, here is terrible , it looks like a different kind of wood got mixed in, like African mahogany..

I ordered one of these , still waiting after 2 weeks.. i dont mind the joints, but would not except the bad eg, shown..


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Ya I don't have problems with a multi-piece body or the wings. But on a guitar in that price range it's not unreasonable to expect them to put SOME effort into matching them lol. While that one in the photo is the worst I have seen, I have seen some other pretty rough looking ones. And some great looking ones. There just shouldn't be that level of inconsistency though.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

For the people that dont like joints in wood u probably wont like this...lol


----------



## dcole (Oct 8, 2008)

Lol, thats awesome!


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

I think I've located Gibson's wood source for the new Les Paul Studio Tributes...


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

I emailed long and mcquade too see if they heard anything about my Goldtop. I was just reading, the weight on these guitars is 5.13 lbs.. thats very light..my chambered Gretsch is 7.6


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

Rick31797 said:


> I emailed long and mcquade too see if they heard anything about my Goldtop. I was just reading, the weight on these guitars is 5.13 lbs.. thats very light..my chambered Gretsch is 7.6


I would take that number with a large grain of salt. My 50's tribute is my lightest les paul by a good margin, but it's not 5 lbs. More like 7 and change.

As for the back, I'm fine with the multi-piece back as long as it sounds right, but I wouldn't really want that muti-piece _and_ colour back. It would just kill resale.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

..... have also been contracted to do all the Quality Control



jimihendrix said:


> I think I've located Gibson's wood source for the new Les Paul Studio Tributes...


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

Is that u in the window with the pink shirt, hard at work.....


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

greco said:


> ..... have also been contracted to do all the Quality Control


Final inspection area appears to be OK


----------



## notjoeaverage (Oct 6, 2008)

Now for all the guys talking about these Tribute models being pieced together guitars. Go to YouTube and search for How do they make Gibson Les Paul. You will see at least two different TV shows that do a how is it made for the Gibson Les Paul Standard. The body of all Les Pauls made at Gison USA in Tennessee are a 3 piece body and a 3 piece head stock. I cant speak for Gibson Custom it is a different operation seperate from Gibson USA, but all you guys who spent $2250 - $2500 for a LP Std, you own a 3 piece guitar body. It only makes common sense that those that show the biggest difference in grain pattern are used for the solid colour guitars and those that show the grain of the wood through the finish are the ones that match as close as possible.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

notjoeaverage said:


> Now for all the guys talking about these Tribute models being pieced together guitars. Go to YouTube and search for How do they make Gibson Les Paul. You will see at least two different TV shows that do a how is it made for the Gibson Les Paul Standard. The body of all Les Pauls made at Gison USA in Tennessee are a 3 piece body and a 3 piece head stock. I cant speak for Gibson Custom it is a different operation seperate from Gibson USA, but all you guys who spent $2250 - $2500 for a LP Std, you own a 3 piece guitar body. It only makes common sense that those that show the biggest difference in grain pattern are used for the solid colour guitars and those that show the grain of the wood through the finish are the ones that match as close as possible.


It's not just how many pieces are in the body that separates the two. Believe me, I own a Standard and a 50's Tribute. I think my Standard will still be rocking long after the 50's Studio Tribute has fallen apart. Nothing against the Tributes at all, they're all great values, but they just don't feel as "solid" to me as the Standard. The finish on my Tribute is already showing signs of age and chipping in a couple spot and I don't even use it that much and have only gigged it once! You get what you pay for.


----------



## Gene Machine (Sep 22, 2007)

*Theory of relativity*

For me, it is all relative.

Do I think that a multi-piece back will sound significantly different or be any less durable or robust? Nope. Many multi-piece fenders have survived for 50 years, and they sound fine.

However, if I'm going to pay $2500+ for a new guitar, I want one made out of a single block of mahogany. I can buy a multi-piece one made by people that don't care for $300. Why would I pay 10 times that for the same thing? No no no, for that kind of money, I want quality parts and pieces put together with loving attention to detail.

In the case of these 60s tributes, either match the bodies, or paint them a solid colour. Mis-matched wood looks like ass. I don't like it in a fender, and I don't like it in a Gibson.

I do own a LP Std and yes it is a solid back. I've owned a 52RI tele and it was 3 piece, but REALLY hard to tell. My MIM Std tele is (probably?) multi-piece (3 or 4, maybe 5?) but solid colour, sounds great, looks great, $300 used.

It's all relative.


----------



## notjoeaverage (Oct 6, 2008)

Gene Machine

Gibson does not now and to the best of my knowledge has never produced a Les Paul from a single block of mahogany. If you make one from a single piece it will eventually warp unless kept in an humidity controlled enviorment 24/7/365.

Ask anyone who works with wood.

Look at all the Les Paul unfinished bodies you can get from different companies and none of them offer a 1 piece.


----------



## notjoeaverage (Oct 6, 2008)

Hollowbody

Yeah I'm not impressed with the finish on my 60's Tribute Les Paul in Ebony, but the Worn Cherry on the 60's SG I got looks like it will last.

I figure with the worn or "Relicish" finish on the LP, if it doesn't stand up to regular use, I'll strip the hardware off the body and mask the fret board sand it properly and give it a finish that will last. I don't think these tribute models will have any appreciable resale value no matter how limited edition they are.

I bought mine to play them daily, not to hang on the wall. 2 Gibsons for less than 2 grand with taxes works for me. Plus the P90's sound AWESOME.


----------



## vasthorizon (Aug 10, 2008)

notjoeaverage said:


> Gibson does not now and to the best of my knowledge has never produced a Les Paul from a single block of mahogany. If you make one from a single piece it will eventually warp unless kept in an humidity controlled enviorment 24/7/365.
> 
> Look at all the Les Paul unfinished bodies you can get from different companies and none of them offer a 1 piece.


Gibson Historics have one piece bodies.


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

I went to check these guitars out at my local guitar shop (Lauzon Music)
here in Ottawa and was seriously disappointed. I haven't seen a guitar made up of so many pieces in my 17 years of playing guitar, especially not for $850+ dollars. They looked like butcher blocks for crying out loud. 
Screw Gibson. I just ordered Larrivee RS2 with P90's for pretty much the same price as the LP 60's tribute. It's a 1 piece body and will knock the socks off the Gibson. 
I got it for $1099 shipped to my door and it comes with a gorgeous case. 
I know some people here are happy with theirs, good on ya but I can't even think of paying that kind of music for those guitars. Oh and what's the deal with the "worn" finishes? They look horrendous. 
Sorry guys but I just wasn't digging them at all. 

http://www.jerrysleftyguitars.com/larrivee_guitars/larrivee-rs-2-t-red-p90-lefty.html


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

You guys that dont know woodworking, thinking one large slab of wood is better, maybe your not seeing what Gibson did ....what gibson does on some of there higher end guitars, they may use one piece mahogany, back, but the maple top is glued up in 3 pieces, gluing these two pieces together makes for a very strong body.. no chance of the mahogany body cupping...


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

notjoeaverage said:


> Hollowbody
> 
> Yeah I'm not impressed with the finish on my 60's Tribute Les Paul in Ebony, but the Worn Cherry on the 60's SG I got looks like it will last.
> 
> ...


Same here. I wanted a goldtop and the price was right. The fact that it plays awesome and sounds like heaven is a bonus! And yeah, if the finish decides to fall off on me, I'm planning on having it refinished in a proper goldtop.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Wildwood Guitars | Gibson | Historic Les Paul Reissue
If your the "Don't tell me - show me" kind of guy (or girl), check out these guitars. Most are one piece bodies.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

Gibson will use a One piece mahogany back , but the top is 3 piece or 2 piece matched grain.. gluing these pieces together would make for a strong body.The two piece maple top will not allow the mahogany to cup.. maple is stronger and harder then mahogany. Mahogany is considered a hardwood, but really is soft and easy to sand. and has an open pore grain which is why its great for guitar building.Its a True tone wood.
BUT just bulding a body out of a one piece mahogany would not be good.. 

You cant compare a tribute too a 6,000 historic, no matched grain, but it does look like they could have been more careful when they glued up the pieces for the body.
When you get several pieces in the body it makes you think, they are just using up scraps of wood.

My 1982 LP Custom I bought new in 82 , for 1800.00 ( what would that be in todays standards ) has a one piece mahogany back and a 3 piece maple top, no matched grain.BUT the joints on the top of the body are equal acrossed the body. they run on each side of the pickups.SO visually . not as nice as matched grain of course, but looks like the body wasnt just thrown together..and it shouldnt have been for that price.


----------



## Jimmypaz (Sep 15, 2009)

Hey I played a '63 Melody Maker for 40 years, it was 2 pieces of mahogany, 1 for body , one for neck (no wings on MM headstock) 1 piece of rosewood , fingerboard. The body never moved, headstock did split along the tuner holes though. Fixed it and played it for another 30 years.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Rick31797 said:


> You guys that dont know woodworking, thinking one large slab of wood is better, maybe your not seeing what Gibson did ....what gibson does on some of there higher end guitars, they may use one piece mahogany, back, but the maple top is glued up in 3 pieces, gluing these two pieces together makes for a very strong body.. no chance of the mahogany body cupping...


People seem to focus on the bodies simply being multi-piece as the issue. I don't think most people have any problem with that. The issue is that on a guitar costing around $900, you'd expect some cosmetic care and some consistency. 

I have read posts on a lot of forums where people say it's doesn't matter and that it's just cosmetic. I have a really tough time imagining they would say that about any other brand in that price range besides Gibson lol. Some people will stand up for Gibson no matter what. I have nothing against the company, but I am shocked guitars can get shipped to stores looking like that one in the photo.


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

My 1997 LP Standard was also a 1 piece body. Quite a nice piece if mahogany actually. 2 piece maple top of course. 
It's funny to hear people say these tributes are a good value because I just $1099 for a Larrivee RS2 with in house wound p90s, a hard shell case and a 1 piece mahogany body. 
Honestly it's as good as a Collings 290, no kidding. 
Anyhow, enjoy the tributes but they won't be getting my money that's for sure.


----------



## notjoeaverage (Oct 6, 2008)

Guitar101

Thanks for the link, very nice guitars, but they are made by Gibson Custom, not Gibson USA, they are not a regular production guitar. They do not specifically say a 1 piece mahogany body, but they do mention 1 piece neck specifically. A lot do look like 1 piece or perfect matching grain patterns and shades, but a couple are obviously 2 piece. I would expect these to look perfect or no one would by them for the price they ask.

The tribute guitars are obviously a lesser quality over all, but they are no more a parts guitar than anything else coming out of Gibson USA. They don't take as much care in matching grains and shades, that's why I got an Ebony, plus I'm not a big fan of the Burst look. Right now I can't justify spending $2500 for a real Les Paul, but getting an LP and a SG for less than $2000 with taxes, is worth it to me.

Remember the only opinion that really matters is your own, since yours is the only wallet being emptied.

I do like that everyone here has different opinions and does there best to back them up with examples and facts, that's why I keep coming back.

Keep up the good work and keep playin and talkin Guitars.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

I wont be around, but 40 yrs from now it would be interesting too see what, these 60s tribute are selling for.. being a limited number i would think, anybody that had one, would wish they had bought 5 of them.I dont think the number of boards in the body will matter..
GUITARS dont get much appreciation, until there old,.. I got a Yamaha Weddington that was made in 1990 and at that time they could hardly give them away.. now they are getting more attention..


----------



## captainbrew (Feb 5, 2010)

Rick31797 said:


> I wont be around, but 40 yrs from now it would be interesting too see what, these 60s tribute are selling for.. being a limited number i would think, anybody that had one, would wish they had bought 5 of them.I dont think the number of boards in the body will matter..
> GUITARS dont get much appreciation, until there old,.. I got a Yamaha Weddington that was made in 1990 and at that time they could hardly give them away.. now they are getting more attention..


You might have point but I personally don't buy guitars as investments I buy them because they are fine instruments that inspire me to make great music. Resale means nothing to me as I rarely sell much gear.


----------



## AlcolmX (Oct 12, 2009)

I finally got to sit down with the Tribute GT today, and I gotta say... it was a fun guitar to play. PUs sounded great, neck was perfectly comfortable, even acoustically it sounded lively and robust - I would have loved to walk away with it, if only it weren't for that damn wood mismatch. Oh well, Gibson just saved me $850.


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

I checked out a Les Paul Studio Tribute this evening...the phrase that comes to mind is...

"She looks good from far...but she's far from good"...ha ha ha...

The honeybursts look the best out of the bunch though...I'd get one...warts-and-all...as a beater guitar...


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

AlcolmX said:


> I finally got to sit down with the Tribute GT today, and I gotta say... it was a fun guitar to play. PUs sounded great, neck was perfectly comfortable, even acoustically it sounded lively and robust - I would have loved to walk away with it, if only it weren't for that damn wood mismatch. Oh well, Gibson just saved me $850.


what shop did you go to that had them for 850? is that in canadian funds?


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

$850...long and mcquades....Canadian funds...


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

jimihendrix said:


> I checked out a Les Paul Studio Tribute this evening...the phrase that comes to mind is...
> 
> "She looks good from far...but she's far from good"...ha ha ha...
> 
> The honeybursts look the best out of the bunch though...I'd get one...warts-and-all...as a beater guitar...


Really? All the 50's and 60's Tributes I tried were ALL good players! They may not have looked all that great, but they all played and sounded legit! Strange that we'd have completely opposite experiences.


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

About half of them had bridges with one post straight...while the other was at a 45 degree angle...or the stop tailpiece had one end tightened down to the body...while the other end was 3/4 of an inch away from the body...in an effort to properly line up the strings evenly along the neck...the pickup covers were extremely loose and had a lot of play in them...these are all hardware issues...

Some of the mis-matched woods were blatantly obvious...and made the guitars looks cheap...

But other than those faults...I'd still pick one up because I wouldn't worry about dinging or scratching the finish...


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

jimihendrix said:


> $850...long and mcquades....Canadian funds...


odd...my local L&M have these for like 1150 i think it was...

edit, i take that back. i just gave them a ring to see if they had any i could try out and they are $850


----------



## soldierscry (Jan 20, 2008)

Played the 60 tirbute sg yesterday nad it sounded and played great. the finish wasn't the greatest (the body could have been sanded a bit better)


----------



## Zman (Nov 20, 2010)

Rick31797 said:


> Spent alot of time in a woodworking plant, I can see why Gibson production guitars, look like this.. it would not be in there best interest, to stand there are match grain..so it looks pretty.. they do that in the custom shop and u pay for it.
> 
> on these 60s tribute guitars the stain is so light you notice it more then you would a guitar with a darker back.
> The wings as u call it on the headstock, is called blocking.. they need to beef up that area in order to get the width to make the headstock,so there will be joints there..
> ...


I was hoping someone who worked with wood might reply to this thread. How do you feel about multiple pieces of wood with a chambered body. I have owned two chambered guitars, a regular Studio and a Classic. compared to my 96 Standard they were light as a feather. I wonder how these would hold up over the years?


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

I Have 3 chambered guitars, the oldest is a Fender Flame Elite ( Master series ) 1984 , and its holding up just fine..... Group FInish

I actually like the Chambered sound, u get some acoustic vibe coming through. As far as gluing up multiple for the body and then chambering it, i wouldnt have it any other way..

If u use one slab of mahogany and then chamber it,taking all that would out of there, its going too want too cup.. the only thing that is saving it is the glued maple top.
Even though multiple joints may not look that good, if they are evenly placed acrossed the back, it looks fine too me..This is one of the problems with the tribute models, narrow and wider boards are being used for the body.

Another important fact.. with the grain on the back running length ways, and the grain on the maple cap running acrossed the guitar, it makes for a very strong union..
so chamber or not, these tributes are not going too fall apart.. We also used Franklin titebond 50 wood glue, its an industrial glue you cannot buy in store.
When you glue two boards together properly with this glue and do a smash test, the board breaks not at the glue joint but along the grain.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

well, I played a 60s LP last night at the L&M

overall the fit and finish was actually BETTER than all of the Gibson Studios(regular) they had in stock

the top was quite stunning IMHO.

i flipped the guitar over and although it didn't look like a butcher block, you could see it was a 3 piece body. the color match was actually very well done. the routing for the control cavity was a bit sloppy. there was clearance all around the screw on plate. 

the factory set-up was very playable.

the tone itself, although was decent, it didn't really scream BUY ME. 

compared to my epiphone, the only thing i liked over it was the matte nitro finish and easy to play neck. I think I'll be sanding my neck down in the near future


----------



## Barcham (Jun 26, 2010)

If you're interested in how LPs are made, this is a great 4 part series on youtube from the Discovery Channel. At the 3 minute mark of part 1, you'll see that LPs are made of 3 pieces of wood. 

YouTube - How it´s Made Gibson - Some assembly requiered PART 1


----------



## Barcham (Jun 26, 2010)

Double post. Sorry bout that.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

I received my 60s Gold top today and gave it a Test drive.Right out of the box,the action was too high, so i lower the bridge, which made it much better, but still could use a pro set up.

The finish and wood in this one is satisfactory, the back does not have any really stand out grain,but also no dark or light boards, which would make the joints stand out. One thing i do notice is how dark the neck is ,as too the body, probably because i believe the neck is quarter sawn . so more open grain though-out the neck.I also notice the no binding on the neck, you can feel the fret ends, my first guitar with no neck binding.
I thought the top would have more shine, but they really do put very little work into the finish.What i like the most about this guitar is the P-90 Growl, these pickups are pretty sweet, and sound great, never had P-90s before.

My guitar also did not come with the right period correct volume and tone knobs, just gold top hats, also no see through acrylic control cavity covers, just standard black and no warrenty card.I was hoping that what was advertised is what i would get.

Also i notice the stop bar threaded bolts.. one side is down tight, the other side still has 4 threads showing, and then i look at the bridge, and one side is down, the other side has a gap, not tight too the flange
Anybody that has one of these, did u notice this.. i will loosen the strings and make it right.

This guitar is not perfect, but overall, with a good set up and fixing the hardware,i think it will make a great player..I keep hearing its a good guitar for the money and i agree.. i would not want to pay the suggest retail of 1399.00
This guitar i have weights 7.2 lbs, no weight issue here.Even though i have issues with the 60s tribute, i will be keeping it. I am going too say it again, these pickups are awesome, alot of bite, and the best part of owning this guitar.

My expectations are very high, and i am fussy about my set up. I once went too a music store and played alot of high end Gibsons and other Guitars and only one guitar was close too what i liked and it was a PRS,@ 5,000.00
So i got too realize that paying 849.00 for a Gibson tribute is not going too be in the same league as playing my White Falcon.
One thing i really notice is no binding on the neck.. this will take a bit getting use too, but really injoy the tone from this guitar.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

*Gibson goldtop*

I received my 60s Gold top today and gave it a Test drive.Right out of the box,the action was too high, so i lower the bridge, which made it much better, but still could use a pro set up.

The finish and wood in this one is satisfactory, the back does not have any really stand out grain,but also no dark or light boards, which would make the joints stand out. One thing i do notice is how dark the neck is ,as too the body, probably because i believe the neck is quarter sawn . so more open grain though-out the neck.I also notice the no binding on the neck, you can feel the fret ends, my first guitar with no neck binding.
I thought the top would have more shine, but they really do put very little work into the finish.What i like the most about this guitar is the P-90 Growl, these pickups are pretty sweet, and sound great, never had P-90s before.

My guitar also did not come with the right period correct volume and tone knobs, just gold top hats, also no see through acrylic control cavity covers, just standard black and no warrenty card.I was hoping that what was advertised is what i would get.

Also i notice the stop bar threaded bolts.. one side is down tight, the other side still has 4 threads showing, and then i look at the bridge, and one side is down, the other side has a gap, not tight too the flange
Anybody that has one of these, did u notice this.. i will loosen the strings and make it right.

This guitar is not perfect, but overall, with a good set up and fixing the hardware,i think it will make a great player..I keep hearing its a good guitar for the money and i agree.. i would not want to pay the suggest retail of 1399.00
This guitar i have weights 7.2 lbs, no weight issue here.Even though i have issues with the 60s tribute, i will be keeping it. I am going too say it again, these pickups are awesome, alot of bite, and the best part of owning this guitar.

My expectations are very high, and i am fussy about my set up. I once went too a music store and played alot of high end Gibsons and other Guitars and only one guitar was close too what i liked and it was a PRS,@ 5,000.00
So i got too realize that paying 849.00 for a Gibson tribute is not going too be in the same league as playing my White Falcon.
One thing i really notice is no binding on the neck.. this will take a bit getting use too, but really injoy the tone from this guitar.


----------



## notjoeaverage (Oct 6, 2008)

Rick if you bought the case when you picked up your guitar your warranty card and owners manual are probably in the gigbag the guitar was delivered to the store in, give'm a call and have them check.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

these should come in a gig bag.

only the 50s come with transparent control cavities, not the 60s.

most stores have a free set up with guitar purchase. long and mcquade did an excellent set up on one of my les pauls which included dressing the fret ends.

neither my bridge or my tailpiece are screwed all the way down on any of the posts on my 60s LP trib.

my low E side is threaded higher. ive played about 5 different 60s guitars and they were all similar for bridge height and control cavity covers.

if you are picky about guitar set ups from factory you should not have ordered this one and found one in store to try before you buy.


----------

