Les Paul Standard with no binding

I should go on the Gibson or LP forums I guess, but if anyone has any ideas.....
 
Anyway, I'm like 13 years too long for this question. I bought a used LP at a guitar store, local guy, 13 years ago. (background: before this I owned a LP classic, and LP studio, bought new, but sold them for some insane reason). 
 
I was really attracted to this guitar because I thought it was a studio, it had no cream colored binding, so I assumed it was a Studio. But the shop owner said it was a standard and just missing the binding.  Serial number dates it to 1991 Nashville factory.
 
Well I played it, and it had the feel and tone that I expected from a Les Paul, and I was crunching away. In fact, I like it better than my previous fancy Classic reissue. (But I still miss my golden flame studio, my friend told me not to sell it, and he was right, I regret it immensely..... anyway......)
 
In my ignorance I simply never asked the owner "why" didn't it have binding. i was also caught up in the guitar, and my love (eventually wife) helped me buy it. So it has special meaning.
 
But the fact that it didn't have binding, and simply said "les paul model" on the headstock, had me thinking it was fishy. Plus the owner of this shop is a trip...... I've heard bad things........ but I still to this day go there.......
 
Now all this talk of counterfeit guitars has me paranoid again. Although my guitar has none of the symptoms: truss rod cover, electronics, etc.. In fact, I'm sold it's a real deal, and it's been set up by pros and they never said anything....
 
So, does anyone have any idea why it doesn't have the cream colored binding? It's way too heavy to be a studio, i wanted a studio for that reason. But I fell for this guitar.
 
Could it have been removed? Or just a weird run of guitars in 91? I don't know. Don't care that much, because i don't like binding. Too much for me....
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

It is my impression that Gibson's Nashville and Memphis electric guitar facilities are frequently making short runs of non-standardized feature sets.

That's one reason I am so curious about the counterfeits because there are so many variants of recent real Gibsons... it made me realize that if you are not working with reputable vendor that you might want to exercise extra caution.

I am more afraid of ebay, pawn shops and guitar show scams... I optimistically doubt a music store owner will risk their brick and mortar to swindle customers.

The part that concerns me is that I often pay a premium for the Made in USA feature while I acknowledge that there are many great instruments and good values that are made elsewhere. If I arbitrarily choose to pay more for a domestic product.... I darn sure hope I am getting what I choose to pay extra for.

The idea that someone on ebay could easily make a career buying at $300 and selling at $2000 makes me realize that it is probably already happening.

best regards,
mike

Like this? Gibson Standard Club 

If it has no binding it should be a Studio. It should say that on the truss rod cover. FYI for people wanting to buy LPs. Go somewhere with a bunch and play them all. The good and bad thing about LPs is that they sound very different from guitar to guitar unlike the 1%-2% difference that a Ibanez or Fender will normally have. If you've played a LP and think it sounded like crap, it is because the owner bought one on looks instead of sound. Buying a LP is like buying a car. Go to the dealer when you have a few hours to burn.

I have pics, but need a mini usb, and it's not here........... I'll have later.


It's not a studio. I've owned a studio before. They are much lighter, and if I remember, kind of "smaller". And they say Studio on the headstock.


My guitar has nothing on the truss rod cover, but says Les Paul, then "Model".....
Which would signify a standard of some sort.

There's no binding on the neck either, has trapezoid inlay.

I think I'll take it to this little stringed instrument shop. where I bought my '67 Gibson Southern Jumbo (has a broke headstock now, from toddler accident).
The people there know everything, and some say they are kind of snobby, which I agree. But they'll give me the low-down.

It's not a studio. I've owned a studio before. They are much lighter, and if I remember, kind of "smaller". And they say Studio on the headstock.

My guitar has nothing on the truss rod cover, but says Les Paul, then "Model"..... 
Which would signify a standard of some sort. 

 



Actually......I say this nicely.........(its the internet, I'm not trying to be harsh)


Both statements are incorrect..............


Not all Gibson LP studios are lighter than their.............


"Standard" model counterparts........


"Studio" and "Standard" models from your era...............come in a  variety of specifications.....


Including Solid 1 piece body,weight relieved, and later, chambered. 


They also vary in wood type,p/u type /pot origin etc..........


A solid body 1 piece mahogany "Studio" could weigh as much as a Maple top 'Standard'


And "Les Paul Model "  appears on virtually all Gibson LPs from the "Norlin era to present.....


With the exception of the "Customs and  some re-issues..........


It has nothing to do with being designated a "Standard"


I have owned several "Studios" none of which are labeled "Studio", I'm sure it is possible though...........




Heres a quick picture of 4 of my 5 Gibson LP's.........(my new 50's Tribute is at the shop being properly set up)






In order............L/R


1972 LP Deluxe/GT (Pancake Body,3 piece neck)
1978 LP Standard Tobacco (Solid Body,3 piece neck)
2006  LP Studio Vintage Mahogany(Not Faded Version)(Solid 1 piece body and 1 piece neck)
2001 LP Special SL (2 piece  Body, 1 piece neck)


Only the "Standard" is labeled as such on the TR cover.........


But they all have 1 thing in common.........


They all say..............."Les Paul Model"


You could have owned a refinished "Studio" or a possible "Custom Shop " Studio..............or it is very common to find re-necked Gibsons as they are prone to neck damage(thus the birth of the dredded "Volute") and 3 piece neck


I would say a re-neck or re-finish is the more possible scenario...........


But I'm not a dealer or very "Snobby" guitar wise......I like 'em all.


I'm with you .......I prefer the "Studio's" to the "Standards"


My little "Special" plays well too..............


Good luck..................


If you do get a pic I'd love to check it out.............

zungle

It's not a studio. I've owned a studio before. They are much lighter, and if I remember, kind of "smaller". And they say Studio on the headstock.
Myguitar has nothing on the truss rod cover, but says Les Paul, then "Model"..... 
Which would signify a standard of some sort. 

 

Actually......I say this nicely.........(its the internet, I'm not trying to be harsh)
Both statements are incorrect..............

Not all Gibson LP studios are lighter than their.............

"Standard" model counterparts........
"Studio" and "Standard" models from your era...............come in a  variety of specifications.....

Including Solid 1 piece body,weight relieved, and later, chambered. 

 

I think this is good, that I was incorrect. I should have said, "someone correct me if I'm wrong". And some more research, I found that they do vary as you say.
 
 
 
I think it's problem solved - it's a Studio.
 
 Also when I try to remember back......... I think I misunderstood the shop owner 13 years ago. In fact, IIRC, he never actually said it wasn't a studio. I think when I said "studio", he went on about how they really aren't that differnt than a standard. He merely thought I didn't consider it a "real" Les Paul, (when actually I wanted a studio).......  And then from there he left the conversation, I played it for while through a nice tube amp. Liked it and bought it. 
 
So, when I left the store later, I was like "did he say it was a standard?"  When actually he never did, just went on about how there was "no difference", except for the binding...etc.....
 
Any thanks for confirming it's a studio. My bad, and spacing-out...... I'm not worried about it being a "fake" anymore. It's too nice to be that, I just didn't know my models very well.
 
 
 
 

I get a kick when Gibson does a takeoff of a takeoff. I'm talking about the new Slash AFD Les Paul (and now they have an Epi version). The Les Paul Slash used on AFD was not even made by Gibson, it was made by a ghost builder in LA! (like many of Slash's Les Pauls). I guess legally they are covered because they say that the Slash AFD Paul is a copy of the one used by Slash on Appetite for Destruction, which means it is actually a copy of a copy.
Les Pauls are generally very average construction and way over priced. In fact, a good Epi. Paul with decent pups installed is often as good or better than the USA version for 1/2 the price. 
I had a 2001 USA plus top but sold it, it just never inspired me to play, it felt chunky and old fasioned. Funny that 'cos a Strat is just as old a design but still feels 'modern'. I've often have toyed with the idea of getting a DC Pro that they made a few years ago (with no neck binding and chrome hardware). The DC's have the chambered body making them lighter and have a nice tonal character, it's a very underestimated version. Seems like they are hard to find used (I guess the folks that have them realize that they are keepers). Also, they were reasonably priced when new (around 1400).

Taking shots at #1 is easy..................

But you got to do a hell of a lot better than  "Ed Roman"

Not only is that a joke...........

Now the forum is contaminated with ..............."Ed Roman"...stench.

zungle


Taking shots at #1 is easy..................

But you got to do a hell of a lot better than  "Ed Roman"

Not only is that a joke...........

Now the forum is contaminated with ..............."Ed Roman"...stench.

My first LP was a new '68. I've owned three or more of them through the years.
A 347, L5S and own a LP now but prefer Strats.
 
I played and favored Gibson's until sometime around 1980 and started enjoying
the Strats.
 
Now I've read what Ed had to say about them and thought it of interest. Especially
since I'm knee deep in the process of learning to build guitars. He states he repairs
them and should anybody have one that brakes it would be good to know it
may be saved...wouldn't you agree? He also states that it would be better. He states
many things...I don't believe everything I read but he is entertaining and is successful
in the guitar world so probably knows more than you and me about them. He likes to rant.
 
You on the other hand seem to not like anything I post. (or maybe you haven't gotten
to MemphisJO yet)
 
Maybe you assume to much.
I'll assume you don't like Ed Roman (or me) and are very protective of your guitars.
I'll also assume that you'd rather talk about them rather than letting them talk for themselves
as I don't see a link for any music they may make.
I'll also assume since you've been here since 2006 and still don't have anything
musically to offer you're probably just going to continue with you verbal attacts at everything
I post. So thanks zungle.

'll also assume since you've been here since 2006 and still don't have anything musically to offer you're probably just going to continue with you verbal attacts at everything I post. So thanks zungle.

1. Actually if you took the time to look.............(It really shouldn't matter)


You would see I have posted 3 items I played in the song section in just the last couple months.


If you looked even more you'd find I put up 2 more projects I recorded for others some 2 years back..........


And in this very forum have put up 2-3  Behringer V-Amp test tones.........




2. You should quit being such a little pussy **** at every turn............ 


3..You posted your ...Gibson.............link ....which was so musical and helpful....I posted my reply.............


Now your whining and jabbing in one breath...........?


And verbal attacks at everything you post?....................Dude I've posted in your threads maybe once..........

Then you you started crying and blubbering.......in the dam "Coffee House"?

Please..............quit being a baby...................

I'll also assume that you'd rather talk about them rather than letting them talk for themselves as I don't see a link for any music they may make.

Yeah your right, next time someone asks about his guitar or instrument I'll just post a video or WAV of me playing.....That extra helpful and offers alot more musically.

Whether you are a beginner learning to zero, or an IT professional looking to better the tone, the choice of a Les Paul can be a challenge. There are nearly 127 models that were published under the name Les Paul since 1952. To make your decision easier, it is useful to remember that these are all derivatives of the three basic models. There are about 13 or so variations on the basic design near Les Paul today.