http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/Les-Paul-Classic-7-String.aspx
(http://images.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/Les-Paul-Classic-7-String/LPCS7EBCH1-Hero.jpg)
I doubt this will be around long. Don't believe there's a lot of overlap between the people who want and can afford Gibsons and the people who do the chugga-chugga.
Okay, that is friggin hot. I don't care what anyone else says. It look badass.
Quote from: madbean on October 10, 2014, 03:08:50 PM
Okay, that is friggin hot. I don't care what anyone else says. It look badass.
Yup! I know Epiphone did one in the late 90's early 2000's. Some one on the forum bought one. I'd get one.
EDIT: As long as it doesn't have those garbage robot tuners!
I love how Gibson released the 7-string version on their "Classic" line ::)
Ironic 8)
Do blues lawyers play Korn now?
I feel so persecuted
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: madbean on October 10, 2014, 03:08:50 PM
Okay, that is friggin hot. I don't care what anyone else says. It look badass.
I like it, too. And I'm surprised it is as "cheap" as it is.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on October 10, 2014, 04:23:44 PM
I love how Gibson released the 7-string version on their "Classic" line ::)
I agree. But then again the 2014 Classics weren't very classic either. I really don't see why they have both Traditional and Classic as model/line names. It's confusing to me, as those words are at least generally synonyms. Might as well add a Vintage line and an Old-School line to muddy it up. ;D
It looks like a cool guitar. What year is that?
It doesn't have the 2014 twelfth fret inlay, nor does it have that brass nut/zero fret that is supposedly standard on the Gibson USA line for 2015. I can't remember Gibson using Seymour Duncans in the past either, but perhaps they have. Maybe they just didn't want to develop a 7-string pickup.
Quote from: culturejam on October 10, 2014, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on October 10, 2014, 04:23:44 PM
I love how Gibson released the 7-string version on their "Classic" line ::)
I agree. But then again the 2014 Classics weren't very classic either. I really don't see why they have both Traditional and Classic as model/line names. It's confusing to me, as those words are at least generally synonyms. Might as well add a Vintage line and an Old-School line to muddy it up. ;D
Just proof that their line names do not really refer to the "type" guitar but, more to the way they price....
If this was under the "Traditional" line the tag would probably read $3500-5000 :o
Quote from: pickdropper on October 10, 2014, 04:47:29 PM
It looks like a cool guitar. What year is that?
Not sure, but I would assume a 2015. It just started to show up at Euro dealers, as far as I can tell.
http://www.thomann.de/gb/gibson_les_paul_classic_7_string.htm
Could be that they didn't want to design the "new stuff" around a 7-string body for just one model/year.
According to their website, it's a 2014. Not all the 2014's had the 12th fret marker. I think they've used SD's in a couple of other special situations too.
Wouldn't a Korn fan buy an Ibanez 7 string, since that's who brought out Munky's signature guitar?
That said, decent looking LP, the headstock reminds me of those Italia guitar headstocks for some reason...
A typical Korn fan, yeah. But a blues lawyer's got to have a Gibson. Anything less would be plebeian.
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on October 10, 2014, 04:49:31 PM
Quote from: culturejam on October 10, 2014, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: Govmnt_Lacky on October 10, 2014, 04:23:44 PM
I love how Gibson released the 7-string version on their "Classic" line ::)
I agree. But then again the 2014 Classics weren't very classic either. I really don't see why they have both Traditional and Classic as model/line names. It's confusing to me, as those words are at least generally synonyms. Might as well add a Vintage line and an Old-School line to muddy it up. ;D
Just proof that their line names do not really refer to the "type" guitar but, more to the way they price....
If this was under the "Traditional" line the tag would probably read $3500-5000 :o
The Classic predates the Traditional by a long time, somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 years.
The original classic came out in the early 90's and was more expensive than the Standard. It had more traditional binding and appointments and a thin neck (supposedly like a '60 Les Paul), push in tuners, etc. Oddly, they had Ceramic pickups, which aren't accurate at all.
At the time, Gibson also released the precursors to the Historic series. From what I've read, the early ones weren't all that different than the Classic, but they were a lot more expensive (and not terribly accurate). Eventually, the Reissues (eventually Historics) became a better attempt at an accurate representation of the old ones to justify their price tag. They also changed the silkscreen on the Classic to further differentiate it (and to keep people from changing a few parts and passing them off as a reissue).
The Classic got killed off for a while, but they brought it back. My guess is they wanted to trade on a known model name, but this time around, it was less about it being a reissue style guitar.
The Traditional is a newer creation. For years, Gibson made the Les Paul standard with solid mahogany, but as the world's supply has been restricted and/or used up, it's getting more difficult to get lightweight body blanks. The lightest ones generally get bounced to the Historic lines. Because of some complaints about the weight (and probably some sensitivity to all the boat anchor references from the Norlin era Les Pauls), Gibson started using weight relieved bodies (some refer to as Swiss Cheese bodies). As the bodies continued to get heavier, it Swiss Cheese holes weren't enough so they started routing more wood out of the center. If the holes get big enough, it starts to affect the sound a bit, like a chambered body. Of course, the size of the holes affects the resonance and they tried to balance the effect out. Some folks complained that they wanted a "solid" body, even if the weight was a bit more, thus the Traditional was born. I thought the Traditionals were fully solid, but I was incorrect; they simply revert back to the old Standard formula with Swiss Cheese holes. You can see the differences here:
(http://www.guitarthai.com/picpost/gtpicpost/A3030023.jpg)
So basically, the models are confusing, but there is a history there that apparently Gibson didn't want to rip up:
- Classic: originally a 1960 reissue style guitar, less so these days. Probably has standard Gibson weight relief
- Standard: updated version of the classic design with small weight relief chambers
- Traditional: closer to the old standards with fewer holes (swiss cheese style). Usually heavier than Standards.
Now if only Fender could be arsed to release a seven string Tele. Here's to hoping they will.
Quote from: Muadzin on October 10, 2014, 10:20:08 PM
Now if only Fender could be arsed to release a seven string Tele. Here's to hoping they will.
Hell yeah.
I saw this article earlier today: http://geargods.net/news/the-new-gibson-les-paul-7-string-and-why-it-will-fail-and-why-thats-good-for-gibson/
I think I agree with them - a short-scale 7-string? That sounds like trouble.
Quote from: lincolnic on October 11, 2014, 04:42:02 AM
I saw this article earlier today: http://geargods.net/news/the-new-gibson-les-paul-7-string-and-why-it-will-fail-and-why-thats-good-for-gibson/
I think I agree with them - a short-scale 7-string? That sounds like trouble.
Of course that article assumes that if it fails they will learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately Gibson seems to be run by executives these days and they're like politicians. Just as politicians will never EVER admit that they were wrong, executives will never see their own mistakes, blame some underling and lay off some workers to appease stockholders. And cheerfully make new mistakes. Methinks the only thing that will save Gibson are a new set of executives, and if we're very, very, very lucky they will try to distance themselves from the previous crop by coming up with a back to basics strategy that actually goes back to basics. But for now Gibson has become Dilbert's company. With pointy haired bosses and conehead CEO's.
And I still hope that Fender will do a 7 string Tele regardless. I want a 7 string that looks like one of my favorite guitars dammit, not one of those accursed shred abominations. I may end up using it for chugga chugga, doesn't mean I want a chugga chugga guitar.
There's no problem with running a 24.75" scale that low. I used a fifths based tuning starting at C on a Les Paul for years. You just need to put the right gauge strings on it.
There are plenty of people that could use a decent 7-string for things other than metal and this guitar could be perfect for them. Jazz, classical, and Brazilian guitarists used 7-strings for decades before they were used in metal. Personally, I've wanted a non-shred, non-chug, cheap-but-decent 7-string to experiment with thirds based tunings for awhile now. Unfortunately, this one's outside the price range I've got for experimenting, but I hope it succeeds so maybe other companies will look at making more normal 7-strings.
Quote from: pickdropper on October 10, 2014, 08:11:58 PM
I thought the Traditionals were fully solid, but I was incorrect; they simply revert back to the old Standard formula with Swiss Cheese holes.
After a bit of reading, it seems that the Traditionals used swiss cheese holes were there until about 2013 and then Gibson switched over to no weight relief on that model.
Quote from: RobA on October 11, 2014, 11:39:27 AM
There's no problem with running a 24.75" scale that low. I used a fifths based tuning starting at C on a Les Paul for years. You just need to put the right gauge strings on it.
Doesn't Iommi run 8's with drop tuning on a SG, LP scale length? (That is, not 13s or something.)
Quote from: alanp on October 11, 2014, 05:36:31 PM
Quote from: RobA on October 11, 2014, 11:39:27 AM
There's no problem with running a 24.75" scale that low. I used a fifths based tuning starting at C on a Les Paul for years. You just need to put the right gauge strings on it.
Doesn't Iommi run 8's with drop tuning on a SG, LP scale length? (That is, not 13s or something.)
According to his site, yes. http://www.iommi.com/equipment/la-bella-guitar-bass-strings/ (http://www.iommi.com/equipment/la-bella-guitar-bass-strings/)
I've got to admit that I think that's nuts. I can barely play with heavy bottom 9's on a normal tuning. I did play with 8's in the 70's when that was all the rage, but the gauge slowly crept up until a few years ago when I was using 15 flat wound strings. I've forced that back down to 12's for my main guitar. Then when I got the SG, I figured I'd try to let it keep the low string height it had so I started with 9's on it. I couldn't do it. That guitar is now at 10's LT-HB. I can live with that. I now have an active PU guitar that I'm keeping at LT-HB 9's for testing purposes and I have to think about how I play that guitar, especially on the lower frets. It's so freaking wobbly. I can't imagine using 8's in a drop tuning or 7's like Gibbons does. It would give you the ability to do vibrato and bends telepathically though.
Funny thing about 7 strings is that the earliest versions were hollow bodies made by Gibson and similar builders for Jazz Cats. No joke, Gibson was doing them in their classic era, long before Ibanez and such.
Jacob
Quote from: jkokura on October 11, 2014, 07:48:33 PM
Funny thing about 7 strings is that the earliest versions were hollow bodies made by Gibson and similar builders for Jazz Cats. No joke, Gibson was doing them in their classic era, long before Ibanez and such.
I think the first one was by Epiphone in the 1930s for George van Eps tuned AEADGBE.
Quote from: Muadzin on October 11, 2014, 10:19:06 AM
Quote from: lincolnic on October 11, 2014, 04:42:02 AM
I saw this article earlier today: http://geargods.net/news/the-new-gibson-les-paul-7-string-and-why-it-will-fail-and-why-thats-good-for-gibson/
I think I agree with them - a short-scale 7-string? That sounds like trouble.
Of course that article assumes that if it fails they will learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately Gibson seems to be run by executives these days and they're like politicians. Just as politicians will never EVER admit that they were wrong, executives will never see their own mistakes, blame some underling and lay off some workers to appease stockholders. And cheerfully make new mistakes. Methinks the only thing that will save Gibson are a new set of executives, and if we're very, very, very lucky they will try to distance themselves from the previous crop by coming up with a back to basics strategy that actually goes back to basics. But for now Gibson has become Dilbert's company. With pointy haired bosses and conehead CEO's.
And I still hope that Fender will do a 7 string Tele regardless. I want a 7 string that looks like one of my favorite guitars dammit, not one of those accursed shred abominations. I may end up using it for chugga chugga, doesn't mean I want a chugga chugga guitar.
I think most people that follow Gibson have a love/hate relationship with Henry. Gibson was in bad shape when he took over and he did get rid of the generally reviled Norlins construction techniques, but he does an awful lot of things that people hate.
I don't know where people keep coming up with the idea that he is going to get voted out. He is co-owner of the company. I doubt he is going to be easily rooted out.