#1
I only just saw this today although i'm guessing it was released with the rest of the 2015 line up:

http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/2015/Les-Paul-Less-Plus.aspx

A thin body Les Paul with a belly cut! I actually think this looks like a really nice guitar, at a decent price point too. Not got the top grade wood or BB Pro's but for me I think all the new innovations in the 2015 seem to fit much better on a guitar like this than a standard. I spose it's going to compete with the SG standard at that price, but just from looking at in on the internet i think i'd prefer the less paul.

Anybody tried one yet?
#2
So they basically made an Eclipse.

I bet it took 10 years of extensive research and prototypes.
"Your signature can not be longer than 250 characters."

How you know you have too many guitars...

Apparently once also known as PonyFan #834553.
#3
Quote by HomerSGR
So they basically made an Eclipse.

I bet it took 10 years of extensive research and prototypes.

ZEN JUDDHISM
The new solo project, and spiritual philosophy... Album out now !
----------------------------------------------------------
hybrid 6.0
Debut album 'Silent Destruction' out now
Read the Two Guys Metal review here
#4
I was gonna say "No, its clearly differnet from the eclipse!" but it really isnt. Altough the e-tuners are a nice touch. But i like the eclipse headstock better.
Joža je kul. On ma sirove z dodatki pa hambije.
#6
Quote by CorrosionMedia
What's weird is that the only two Les Pauls I'm interested in are this and the Studio, but only if they ditched the earwax coloured plastics.


Yeah... those things are fugly. I can only imagine that Gibson had a warehouse full of them that they needed to get rid of.

I've been eyeing the Less + also. I like the 57' classic pickups.
#7
There are several at my local GC, so I pulled one down and gave it a run. The body of the guitar is nearly the thickness of an SG, and the "tummy cut" is more dent than anything (there's not much of "cut" there). The one I picked up was a bit neck heavy (though not quite as bad as some of the SGs I've handled. The thinness of the body means that there's less of that clunky neck heel to deal with when you're in the upper frets, so that's not too bad. And, of course, the weight is down.

They evidently felt that carving out the INSIDE of the guitar was too time consuming and wasted wood. Cheaper to simply whack body thickness. So now the guitar sounds more like an SG and less like an LP.

Carvin does a better job of this with their CS series and the woods are far better (as are the new Kiesel pickups).

I don't care for the auto-tuning "feature." It's okay if you're only ever going to be retuning to standard. Thing is, the only guitars I have that are frequently going out of tune are Les Pauls with their ancient headstock design and Crappy Corian (I think that's a brand) plastic nut.

More to the point, the alternate tuning thing by changing string tension has always been a non-starter, from back when they tried it with the TransPerformance Bridge twenty years ago. You end up with two floppy strings, two that are tight as cheese cutters and a couple of normal tension ones. Try bending a chord on that <G>.
#8
Cheers for the info, although I was under the impression that the body was chambered? Website says 9 hole relief which is think is the most basic.

I still think it's an interesting addition to the line, even if it is just copying others progression. It's a good business model, design a classic guitar, let others copy and improve it over 50 years, copy the the improvements and sell alongside the classic model.

Carvins are hard to find here in Europe but yeah its going to be tough to compete against the EC-1000 which is almost half the price and are built to excellent standards.
#9
My back likes this guitar.

Regarding the tuning system- G-force? What happened to Min-E Tune? Is it inferior already? I bought a Les Paul Future with Steinberger Gearless tuners instead of the Min-E Tune, didn't care for a big clunky plastic tuner on the back of my headstock.
Agile Interceptor Pro 725 EB EMG
Gibson LP Future Tribute
G12T-75 4x12 Avatar
Krank Nineteen80-watt
Koch Loadbox
Avatar 18w
RMC4


Soundcloud
#10
Quote by Funk Monk
G-force? What happened to Min-E Tune? Is it inferior already?


They just rebranded it. Or actually i think they added an extra bank of presets (because who doesn't need 743 preset tuning combos) but the technology hasn't changed as far as i know.

I can see dspellman's point but it's certainly pretty handy for quickly checking your still in tune or shifting among minor changes, E to Eb for example. It's also very useful when trying a guitar in a store!
Last edited by jecooper86 at Feb 12, 2015,
#11
Quote by jecooper86
I can see dspellman's point but it's certainly pretty handy for quickly checking your still in tune or shifting among minor changes, E to Eb for example. It's also very useful when trying a guitar in a store!


They now call it the G-Force (which is also the name of a movie featuring guinea pigs).

It's handy for ordinary tuning, but not particularly accurate. And you have to think about it before you reach up and try to change things manually, or you could break it. And if you break it during a performance, you need to grab your backup guitar. Do you have one?

I've mentioned that I use a Variax for alternate tunings. If I've got a singer who announces that the song that you've spent a couple of days learning in the original key needs to be down a couple of steps because the high notes are out of reach, I can downtune instantly and play the song as learned with NO floppier strings (as you'd get with the G-Force).

Gibson's had self-tuning guitars available for twenty years, on and off. It's never been a particularly popular item on folks' checklists.
#12
Quote by dspellman
They now call it the G-Force (which is also the name of a movie featuring guinea pigs).

It's handy for ordinary tuning, but not particularly accurate. And you have to think about it before you reach up and try to change things manually, or you could break it. And if you break it during a performance, you need to grab your backup guitar. Do you have one?

I've mentioned that I use a Variax for alternate tunings. If I've got a singer who announces that the song that you've spent a couple of days learning in the original key needs to be down a couple of steps because the high notes are out of reach, I can downtune instantly and play the song as learned with NO floppier strings (as you'd get with the G-Force).

Gibson's had self-tuning guitars available for twenty years, on and off. It's never been a particularly popular item on folks' checklists.
I had a min-E-tune on a 60's tribute Les Paul. It never once got all 6 strings in tune on the first attempt, and usually took 3 or 4. Maybe I just got a shitter, but if I can avoid ever having one again, I think I will.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#13
Quote by Funk Monk
My back likes this guitar.


Gibson have made very light Les Pauls for years, through a process called chambering. They got a lot of criticism for it, but I do believe the criticism came from people who thought anything but a thick solid body was sacrilege so I would guess they hate this too.

Anyway, I took a closer look at it and even the back contour seems to be directly copied from the Eclipse. So... ESP has started to offer more 'full thickness' Eclipse-models and Gibson releases this. Is this some sort of confirmation of a mutual admiration? Next week: Gibson and ESP is in a relationship.
"Your signature can not be longer than 250 characters."

How you know you have too many guitars...

Apparently once also known as PonyFan #834553.
#14
Quote by HomerSGR
Gibson have made very light Les Pauls for years, through a process called chambering. They got a lot of criticism for it, but I do believe the criticism came from people who thought anything but a thick solid body was sacrilege so I would guess they hate this too.


Gibson has had varying degrees of weight relief for years, of course, including simply drilling a number of round holes in the guitar (the original "weight relief" that they didn't fess up to until xray photos of the guitars began to circulate and until some folks noticed that Gibson didn't shake all the bits of wood out of those holes (rattles ensued). Then, of course, we got modest chambering, modern weight relief and some SERIOUS skeletonized chambering on the guitars that have a fancy maple top AND back with a barely-there mahogany skeleton in between. And then there were the Guitars Of The Week explorer and V guitars that looked like Mission Oak furniture with the holes right out there for everyone to see <G>.

Not all the criticism came from those who thought the chambering non-traditional. At one point it was virtually impossible to buy a solid body Les Paul from Gibson if you wanted one (weight be damned).

Gibson has had thin-bodied LPs before, and some of them have had balsa interiors (they had a different name for the interior wood, but that's what it was). Very popular among females and those who had shoulder issues. The Axcess has a thinner body (though not as thin as the "Less") and a tummy cut, but the standard Axcess production models are weight relieved as well, and the Custom version seems to be chambered.

The L6S is a thin-bodied single-cut that's solid, but that also has a body about the same thickness as the SG. It's actually wider than an LP, so in the '70's, the traditionalists poked fun at it as the "road-killed" Les Paul. Squish. Thing is, it was Gibson's first 24-fret guitar, had Gibson's first hot pickups, used in and out of phase parallel and serial wiring on "both pickups selected" options and was far more comfortable to play in the upper reaches than any LP ever was. It was also interesting in that in addition to the usual treble rolloff, it also had a mids rolloff. It was popular, but not quite as popular as the LP even then.
#15
Quote by HomerSGR
So they basically made an Eclipse.

I bet it took 10 years of extensive research and prototypes.


hahahahahaha
I'm an idiot and I accidentally clicked the "Remove all subscriptions" button. If it seems like I'm ignoring you, I'm not, I'm just no longer subscribed to the thread. If you quote me or do the @user thing at me, hopefully it'll notify me through my notifications and I'll get back to you.
Quote by K33nbl4d3
I'll have to put the Classic T models on my to-try list. Shame the finish options there are Anachronism Gold, Nuclear Waste and Aged Clown, because in principle the plaintop is right up my alley.

Quote by K33nbl4d3
Presumably because the CCF (Combined Corksniffing Forces) of MLP and Gibson forums would rise up against them, plunging the land into war.

Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Et tu, br00tz?