software

...a two piece body??? It's a 2004 Gibson Les Paul Classic on ebay. I noticed that the picture showing the back looks like a freakin' two piece body to me!!! And for $1600, yeah right! from : localhost/cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...308238511amp;rd=1

My goodness, what the heck is going on with Gibson?

$1600 is cheap, you'd be lucky to get a 1-piece body on the more higher end models anymore, wood is getting more rare and more expensive. A two-piece body on a $1600 guitar is totally normal.

Okay, this is Gibson and not Epiphone. I expect quality to pay $1600 for a Guitar. I've played and owned Gibson Les Pauls for nearly 24 years now and not since the 80's i've seen Gibson quality go down the drain. I currently own 2 Customs, 2 Standards and 1 Classic. My Classic is from 2000 and the quality is comparable to the higher end models and absolutely flawless. Nice wavy flat sawn maple top and straight grain mahogany body ( ONE PIECE ! ). Here's my 2000 Classic. The last Gibson i ever bought.70's Norlin Era Les Paul's were very commonly three peice bodies, in fact, their tops were often three peice as well and could sometimes include a regular peice of maple, a quilted peice, and a flame maple peice on the *SAME* guitar...now THAT is poor quality control

Go check out other Classics and see. I've never seen a two-piece other than from the '70's. But as TatooedCarrot said, the price is good, and wood is getting scarce, so maybe Gibson is slipping a few in. Jeff

It looks like a normal bookmatched top to me. It's not a very nice one, but it doesn't look out of the ordinary. That's the way they're making them now. Yours is very pretty, by the way.

I saw a two piece back on a Standard at Dave's. However, it was the lightest weight Standard, so it would still be worth considering.

I do think Gibson's demand is more than their supply of decent weight mahogany that's large enough for one piece tops.

Two piece bodies aren't bad, they're fairly common, doesn't freak me out.

$1600 isn't that much money for a pro level American made instrument these days. It is a bit of a mind stratch for someone who has paid a lot less for equivalent guitars in the past but that is the market. Those green inlays still freak me out though, ick!


Originally Posted by HellionIt looks like a normal bookmatched top to me. It's not a very nice one, but it doesn't look out of the ordinary. That's the way they're making them now. Yours is very pretty, by the way.

look at the back... you can see that it's made from 2 pieces too.

slade


Originally Posted by Wattage

Those green inlays still freak me out though, ick!

Yeah, i'm with you on that one. I who knows what gibson was thinking at the time. I think this was an attempt to make it look quot;Agedquot;. Well, it didn't quiet look that well. However, the early Classics didn't have the quot;Greenquot; inlays when they were first introduced in 1990.


Originally Posted by Old GhostHowever, the early Classics didn't have the quot;Greenquot; inlays when they were first introduced in 1990.
So the only other difference besides that and the Standards are the tops then?

...and what is this supposed to be??? I know Gibson had done this before as early as 1954 when the LP was first introduced mainly to quot;hidequot; imperfections. You'll commonly see these black paint on the back of the Headstock. But c'mon now...


Originally Posted by ranalliSo the only other difference besides that and the Standards are the tops then?

No, the Classic has the 60's Slim Taper Neck, smaller frets, narrower headstock, ABR-1 bridge, coverless pickups ( 500T and 496R both are loaded w/ ceramic magnets ) and Kluson style tuners.


Originally Posted by CapoFirstFret70's Norlin Era Les Paul's were very commonly three peice bodies, in fact, their tops were often three peice as well and could sometimes include a regular peice of maple, a quilted peice, and a flame maple peice on the *SAME* guitar...now THAT is poor quality control

Yes, the Norlin era was the dark years for Gibson. These guitars were often called quot;Frankensteinsquot; because they were building guitars from quot;leftover partsquot;. The same exact thing happened to Harley-Davidson Motorcylces when the company was bought by AMF. Very sad years.


Originally Posted by Old Ghost...and what is this supposed to be??? I know Gibson had done this before as early as 1954 when the LP was first introduced mainly to quot;hidequot; imperfections. You'll commonly see these black paint on the back of the Headstock. But c'mon now...

I've only ever seen that on a refin to cover up a repaired break.

And I agree, the green inlays on the classic are just nasty, borderline neon green on some of them. Supposed to simulate aging, yet you don't see it on the historics which are suposed to also look old.

that poor poor guitar, man

it looks like something hondo crimped out!

this issue makes me fairly angry because people pound gibson for putting 2 piece bodies(which isn't a big deal) on some of their lower priced les pauls, but then I saw Jalins thread with his beautiful McNaught that everyone was saying is SOOOOOO much better than gibsons(probably is SUPER Nice) and that guitar had a 2 piece back. Nothing personal, its just a pet peve of mine when people do that kind of thing.

USA customs prefers not to use 1 piece backs as they tend to warp as compared to 1 piece.