#1
Hi, I just wanted to get some advice on a future guitar.

My decision is between the 2014 Les Paul Classic or the 2013 Les Paul Traditional Pro II.

Both in Wine Red (trad pro in merlot), similar features.

I just wanted to here some additional information (or pics) or either guitar. Does anyone know major differences, perhaps in construction or finish type?

Basically, what do YOU recommend? I play styles from rock to jazz to alternative to metal.

Don't give me that " why not get *insert guitar I prefer over Les Pauls* " crap...

Thank you in advance, your opinions are greatly appreciated!
#3
Gibson I think.

What I recommend? Heritage H-140/H-150. FAR better than any Gibson Les Pauls I have played (and cheaper), and I went in thinking I was going to get a GIBSON Les Paul, I think that should show you how frickin good they are. Though you might have trouble finding any to try out.
Quote by Cathbard
You, my man, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Quote by Knarrenheino
You hold your guitar upwards from your lap like an erect phallus and tell me I have problems?
#4
Don't give me that " why not get *insert guitar I prefer over Les Pauls* " crap...


What I recommend? Heritage H-140/H-150.


While I could recommend my own preferences, that one right there deserves a note because to is not an arbitrary response counter to your wishes. Heritage is a brand started by former Gibson employees using original Gibson equipment in a factory Gibson closed. As such, it is among the few brands that really, honestly and truly gets it right down to the smallest details.

Some of the Japanese companies that were producing LPclones in the lawsuit era are likewise very good at producing guitars that are faithful reproductions of the Gibson originals, often at better prices and better QC.
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!

Log off and play yer guitar!

Strap on, tune up, rock out!
#5
Correct, Gibson. And although I appreciate the other suggestions, I've had many people (from music stores as well) rudely recommend other options that I am simply not interested in. Sorry to come off as an ass, but every time I seem to bring up Gibson to a pro, I feel like I get laughed at.

I've heard many issues and stories about the brand and understand there always seems to be room for basic improvement, but I tried these guitars (not in the same finishes) and still enjoy them quite thoroughly.

Now, I have not tried many "knock off" (for lack of a better word, I apologize) or lawsuit Gibsons, but I have tried enough guitars, outside of the brand as well, to know what I want.

I enjoy the sound, playability, and aesthetics of both models.
#6
ok i've pretty much found that with Gibson that guitars are in ranges and don't vary much qualty wise within that range. either would be a good choice. the finishes are the same.

i've only tried the classic myself and thought it was nice (i'm not a LP guy more into SGs)

check the specs which should help answer any of the ?s you have. are you thinking about replacing he stock pups?
#7
Unless you truly won't be happy with anything other than Gibson on the headstock I wouldn't really recommend any of the newer Les Pauls, maybe a 13 Trad/Std. You could always get a Historic but they are fairly expensive and imo a good H-140/H-150 is on par with a good Historic.

The Heritages are made in Kalamazoo (old Gibson factory) where they made the 59 Les Pauls with some employees from those days still making the guitars today.

I think it's a cool story but it's not what sold it for me, just simply how good the guitar is. The best way I can put is the Gibsons feel and sound dead in comparison. They are pretty much Les Pauls with some slight differences and a different headstock.
Quote by Cathbard
You, my man, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Quote by Knarrenheino
You hold your guitar upwards from your lap like an erect phallus and tell me I have problems?
#8
Quote by Badmotorfingers
Unless you truly won't be happy with anything other than Gibson on the headstock I wouldn't really recommend any of the newer Les Pauls, maybe a 13 Trad/Std. You could always get a Historic but they are fairly expensive and imo a good H-140/H-150 is on par with a good Historic.

The Heritages are made in Kalamazoo (old Gibson factory) where they made the 59 Les Pauls with some employees from those days still making the guitars today.

I think it's a cool story but it's not what sold it for me, just simply how good the guitar is. The best way I can put is the Gibsons feel and sound dead in comparison. They are pretty much Les Pauls with some slight differences and a different headstock.


really doubt at this point anyone that worked on the original LPs is still working at Heritage in a production capacity. it's been 55 years since the original LPs stopped being made. may be some guys from the norlin era but that's not exactly the same.
#9
They are really very similar spec. With Gibson it's a matter of individual instruments more than models, at least when it comes to these fairly similar LPs. Beyond the boost and coil splits on the Classic there are very few differences at all. I played a Trad Pro II last weekend and liked it quite a lot, the Gibson site says it has a corian nut and no G-Force but I'm fairly certain the one I played had the new brass nut and tuning system. Haven't played a 2015 Classic yet.

Honestly I'd get the classic for the Seafoam green color. There's so little difference between them that unless you can get a stack of each in a room, the model is nearly arbitrary.

On the other hand, for the price of either of these guitars new you could probably get a used Historic which is almost certainly going to be a step up from either. Something to consider.
#10
Seafoam green


Of all the things in the current lineup, that color is the one thing that stood out. Gorgeous.
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!

Log off and play yer guitar!

Strap on, tune up, rock out!
#11
Quote by monwobobbo
really doubt at this point anyone that worked on the original LPs is still working at Heritage in a production capacity. it's been 55 years since the original LPs stopped being made. may be some guys from the norlin era but that's not exactly the same.

The dudes working there are really old, lol.
Quote by Cathbard
You, my man, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Quote by Knarrenheino
You hold your guitar upwards from your lap like an erect phallus and tell me I have problems?
#13
Why not get a Strat?
"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 paulltheviking


My decision is between the 2014 Les Paul Classic or the 2013 Les Paul Traditional Pro II.

Both in Wine Red (trad pro in merlot), similar features.


Really, it comes down to a lot of details that come up when you have the actual guitars in hand. No overwhelming dealbreaker either way. Very similar.

I would very much recommend finding a good tech and getting your frets superglued, and consider having a PLEK job done on the frets unless they're absolutely level. Ignore anything that says the factory already did a PLEK job. It's just not the same. You'll probably want to have someone go over the nut (and perhaps even replace it with a Tusq-style nut). Once you've got playability and potential tuning issues taken care of, either of them will be good to go.

Aside from an Axcess Custom purchase several years ago, most of my Gibsons are from 1980 or before. That wasn't a plan; I just realized one day that the Gibsons I really like aren't modern. The current versions that I think are similar in quality to the ones I have are all $3500 and above. Hopefully, Gibson is returning to that level of quality.

My other issue with Gibsons is that aside from the Axcess (with the shaved neck heel, thinner body, etc.), Gibsons are far too traditional. I don't care for the standard LP neck heel, with the 90 degree point of the body that nails your palm when you try to go beyond the 16th fret. I prefer a flatter radius and taller frets (Gibson has recently LOWERED the average height of their frets by 23%), I don't care for baseball bat necks, I don't really want to deal with the potential for headstock breakage, I *really* don't like nitrocellulose as a guitar finish, and I think they can offer a lot more in the way of finishes and woods than they do.

My newer LP-style guitars have Floyds (including that Axcess) and shaved neck heels. A couple of them have 16" and 14" radii, jumbo frets, stainless frets, wider/thinner necks, tummy cuts, and three of them are SOLID (no chambering, no cheesing) bodied guitars. I get FAR nicer woods from Carvins (and a wider selection of finishes), better finish quality from almost anything else, ebony fretboards on most of them, real MOP inlays on most of them, and I'm mostly not paying premium prices for a non-premium guitar whose only real positive is the logo on the headstock. Pretty much none of this is available from Gibson. And I have no issues with the sound, sustain, quality or playability of those guitars. There's just no magic or mojo attached to that headstock logo any more. I don't mind paying Gibson prices, and I don't even mind paying MORE than Gibson prices, but I want the value to be there at every level.

My suggestion is that if you can't come any closer to making a decision based on what you hold in each hand when you have the guitars with you, flip a coin.
Last edited by dspellman at Apr 13, 2015,
#15
I agree with the OP. Sometimes there really is nothing like the feel of an original Gibson...or Fender for that matter.

There really is a tonne of history in the Gibson name. Do the modern Gibson's do a good job carrying on the proud Gibson tradition? Sadly, its hit or miss. I just bought a 2014 Les Paul Studio Pro and I think its one of the best Gibson's released in the last few years. The Burstbucker Pro and the '57 Classic are a perfect match.