When did Gibson stop using ebony on the LP Custom fretboards

Shawn Lutz":t5gr09yr said:
It probably would sound better with a different cap or pickup too ;) I think you are only person I ever heard say ebony is a shitty tone wood. it may not be the case on every body wood type but in my experiments with swapping necks I found ebony can work better than maple. I tried it on two different strat type of guitars, a mahogany body with maple top and an ash body. I like ebony over maple on mahogany/maple body but liked maple over ebony on the ash body. Granted there are modest differences between the two but I honestly doubt guitar company's would be using ebony if it were a shit tone wood.

Here's what Tom Anderson thinks about ebony:

http://www.andersonforum.com/board/show ... stcount=14
 
danyeo":1eaimn17 said:
chunktone":1eaimn17 said:
danyeo":1eaimn17 said:
chunktone":1eaimn17 said:
danyeo":1eaimn17 said:
chunktone":1eaimn17 said:
You can thank the Fed's for this. They seem to only be concerned with what wood Gibson uses. If you like this type of "help" from the government, vote democrat.

Watch the video that Lester just posted and you'll realize how misinformed you really are.
That's an old video, and yes I have seen it. If being "informed" means believing the government is out for the good of the people, or anything other than power and control, then I hope to never be as enlightened as you. :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

Make sure you keep your torch and pitchfork handy when the Democrats come knocking. Of course, this would never of happened if Bush were still in office.
Well, at least we both agree things were much better under Bush.


It was like this...Bush had a stick of Dynamite in his hands, lit the fuse, and ran and watched it blow up in Obama's face. However, I doubt things would be any different no matter who was in office then, or now. Both parties make me sick at this point.
This is hard to believe, but I actually agree with you on this!
 
Code001":rm53w4dq said:
Shawn Lutz":rm53w4dq said:
It probably would sound better with a different cap or pickup too ;) I think you are only person I ever heard say ebony is a shitty tone wood. it may not be the case on every body wood type but in my experiments with swapping necks I found ebony can work better than maple. I tried it on two different strat type of guitars, a mahogany body with maple top and an ash body. I like ebony over maple on mahogany/maple body but liked maple over ebony on the ash body. Granted there are modest differences between the two but I honestly doubt guitar company's would be using ebony if it were a shit tone wood.

Here's what Tom Anderson thinks about ebony:

http://www.andersonforum.com/board/show ... stcount=14

I believe the man himself as I love every Anderson I put my hands on, albeit only handful. What he doesn't say is what body woods he was using ebony with. I can only base my opinion on what I heard on my mahogany/maple top and ash bodies switching between maple and ebony necks and I don't find ebony brittle sounding with mahogany/maple top, I prefer it over maple. I don't have any rosewood necks or FB's. I don't recall why I didnt like ebony with ash but I know liked maple better than ebony on that fiddle.
 
Shawn Lutz":4thorovu said:
rupe":4thorovu said:
Ebony looks nice but its an absolutely shit tone wood for an electric guitar. I love my old Les Paul Custom but I have no doubt that it would sound better with a rosewood board. If an electric guitar with an ebony board sounds great, its in spite of the ebony, not because of it. Acoustics are a different story.


It probably would sound better with a different cap or pickup too ;) I think you are only person I ever heard say ebony is a shitty tone wood. it may not be the case on every body wood type but in my experiments with swapping necks I found ebony can work better than maple. I tried it on two different strat type of guitars, a mahogany body with maple top and an ash body. I like ebony over maple on mahogany/maple body but liked maple over ebony on the ash body. Granted there are modest differences between the two but I honestly doubt guitar company's would be using ebony if it were a shit tone wood.
Tom Anderson is who I would have pointed you toward but somebody beat me to it. Rand Havener has said it as well. How many "A-list" famous players (who play with a tone that retains a great deal of dynamics) chose to use a LP Custom over a LP Standard? Not many. They sound very different but the only significant difference in their construction is the fretboard material...the rest is basically cosmetic.

And I disagree with your assertion on guitar companies. I think most of them are more concerned with what will sell, not what they think sounds the best. Having worked in music retail for many years, I can say with complete confidence that the vast majority of guitarists shop with their eyes instead of their ears...and ebony looks great.
 
rupe":nko8k4jn said:
Shawn Lutz":nko8k4jn said:
rupe":nko8k4jn said:
Ebony looks nice but its an absolutely shit tone wood for an electric guitar. I love my old Les Paul Custom but I have no doubt that it would sound better with a rosewood board. If an electric guitar with an ebony board sounds great, its in spite of the ebony, not because of it. Acoustics are a different story.


It probably would sound better with a different cap or pickup too ;) I think you are only person I ever heard say ebony is a shitty tone wood. it may not be the case on every body wood type but in my experiments with swapping necks I found ebony can work better than maple. I tried it on two different strat type of guitars, a mahogany body with maple top and an ash body. I like ebony over maple on mahogany/maple body but liked maple over ebony on the ash body. Granted there are modest differences between the two but I honestly doubt guitar company's would be using ebony if it were a shit tone wood.
Tom Anderson is who I would have pointed you toward but somebody beat me to it. Rand Havener has said it as well. How many "A-list" famous players (who play with a tone that retains a great deal of dynamics) chose to use a LP Custom over a LP Standard? Not many. They sound very different but the only significant difference in their construction is the fretboard material...the rest is basically cosmetic.

And I disagree with your assertion on guitar companies. I think most of them are more concerned with what will sell, not what they think sounds the best. Having worked in music retail for many years, I can say with complete confidence that the vast majority of guitarists shop with their eyes instead of their ears...and ebony looks great.

Maybe you have seen or played this guitar...

Parker made a LP type guitar in Korea. It was bubinga wood, very knotty figured top with clear coat. Has ebony plank and stainless frets. They were not popular. I got one used thru a local retailer friend saying this is a great guitar that is just not popular. I got it for $200. Coil tap knobs for the 2 buckers.

Like you said, by the ears it almost has tele clarity, just looks unusual.
 
rupe":8gahcaoy said:
Shawn Lutz":8gahcaoy said:
rupe":8gahcaoy said:
Ebony looks nice but its an absolutely shit tone wood for an electric guitar. I love my old Les Paul Custom but I have no doubt that it would sound better with a rosewood board. If an electric guitar with an ebony board sounds great, its in spite of the ebony, not because of it. Acoustics are a different story.


It probably would sound better with a different cap or pickup too ;) I think you are only person I ever heard say ebony is a shitty tone wood. it may not be the case on every body wood type but in my experiments with swapping necks I found ebony can work better than maple. I tried it on two different strat type of guitars, a mahogany body with maple top and an ash body. I like ebony over maple on mahogany/maple body but liked maple over ebony on the ash body. Granted there are modest differences between the two but I honestly doubt guitar company's would be using ebony if it were a shit tone wood.
Tom Anderson is who I would have pointed you toward but somebody beat me to it. Rand Havener has said it as well. How many "A-list" famous players (who play with a tone that retains a great deal of dynamics) chose to use a LP Custom over a LP Standard? Not many. They sound very different but the only significant difference in their construction is the fretboard material...the rest is basically cosmetic.

And I disagree with your assertion on guitar companies. I think most of them are more concerned with what will sell, not what they think sounds the best. Having worked in music retail for many years, I can say with complete confidence that the vast majority of guitarists shop with their eyes instead of their ears...and ebony looks great.

Ebony is like playing with a with a fretboard made of Formica. Smooth and fast, easy to the physical touch. But, I got to say I generally like the feel and character of a good dark rosewood board. It seems to have a little more depth and flavor when digging in. Some woods just work better than others. There are some beautiful rosewoods out there to be had and they can be both comfortable to play and some serious eye candy.

I'm sort of on the fence, just depends on the guitar. But, I would opt for rosewood in a pinch.

Steve
 
Shawn Lutz":t25lfbp2 said:
I believe the man himself as I love every Anderson I put my hands on, albeit only handful. What he doesn't say is what body woods he was using ebony with. I can only base my opinion on what I heard on my mahogany/maple top and ash bodies switching between maple and ebony necks and I don't find ebony brittle sounding with mahogany/maple top, I prefer it over maple. I don't have any rosewood necks or FB's. I don't recall why I didnt like ebony with ash but I know liked maple better than ebony on that fiddle.

It's all personal preference. I wouldn't worry about it too much. Suhr offers ebony, so Anderson and Suhr obviously have some disagreements. Both of them dislike neck-thru designs, but Bernie Rico Jr is in love with them. Tyler hates floyds, but all of the aforementioned like them, albeit some like different brands more than others. Just buy what you like; there's plenty of room to enjoy everything the guitar market has to offer. :rock:
 
good point, its personal preferences and I agree Bill visual element is what initially draws a guitarist to an instrument, not the sound. I also find that in higher gain stuff the tone of fretboard differences are generally small where a lot of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between ebony, rosewood or maple anyway.
 
Shawn Lutz":1vgq4q1k said:
I also find that in higher gain stuff the tone of fretboard differences are generally small where a lot of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between ebony, rosewood or maple anyway.
Absolutely...which is exactly why I think you see more ebony boards on guitars being played by "metal" guys than anywhere else. Its what I was alluding to when I mentioned that you rarely see a LP Custom being used by players "who play with a tone that retains a great deal of dynamics".
 
I guess I'm the only one that thinks it's very cool that Gibson is exploring alternate sources for wood.
 
As a company, Gibson needs to re-right that ship and get back to doing what it did best years ago and that is turn out a few designs of high quality guitars without all the bullshit. All these options, new body designs, neck woods, budget versions and all that. Stick with the Les Paul historics, ES, SG models and be done with it. Spin off all the Epiphone, Maestro and other entry level / budget brands that are money suckers from a corporate financial standpoint. All this does is dilute the rest of the company. They could then concentrate on being a guitar company selling quality, high end guitars. I think it has been proven that enough people will pay up for high spec guitars and custom shop work. Having to retool for many different designs, pay for corporate staff and shop costs for so many models has got to be a strain. Fender is the same way and were forced to cancel their IPO. They are all so diluted and flood the market with shit and marketing schemes that people are afraid to buy. They could then afford to do a little research on the wood. In the end, catering to the masses and being the biggest often times doesn't translate into profit or being the best and stupid fiscal decisions are made.
 
steve_k":35y9802t said:
As a company, Gibson needs to re-right that ship and get back to doing what it did best years ago and that is turn out a few designs of high quality guitars without all the bullshit. All these options, new body designs, neck woods, budget versions and all that. Stick with the Les Paul historics, ES, SG models and be done with it. Spin off all the Epiphone, Maestro and other entry level / budget brands that are money suckers from a corporate financial standpoint. All this does is dilute the rest of the company. They could then concentrate on being a guitar company selling quality, high end guitars. I think it has been proven that enough people will pay up for high spec guitars and custom shop work. Having to retool for many different designs, pay for corporate staff and shop costs for so many models has got to be a strain. Fender is the same way and were forced to cancel their IPO. They are all so diluted and flood the market with shit and marketing schemes that people are afraid to buy. They could then afford to do a little research on the wood. In the end, catering to the masses and being the biggest often times doesn't translate into profit or being the best and stupid fiscal decisions are made.
This... With the exception of keeping the Epiphone line. Kill off the idiotic body shapes and "robot" technology BS and build awesome Les Pauls' SG's and ES's (as well as the regarded acoustic models) - and then build "budget" versions of those under the Epiphone brand. I could be wrong, but I don't think the Import series is a money sucker; quite the opposite. They make less per instrument, but add to the coffers due to the volume of sales. The profit margin is certainly higher on the USA and custom stuff, but they simply don't sell as many. There has to be some reason why all of the big manufacturers have an import line...
 
Spaceboy":iix6ng3s said:
I guess I'm the only one that thinks it's very cool that Gibson is exploring alternate sources for wood.

I like that Gibson is exploring alternate sources of wood, but it sucks they had to be slapped by the government to start doing that.

I watched the Taylor video posted earlier in this thread and cutting down 20 or so Ebony trees to get 2 good ones, is aweful. Nice to see Taylor stepping up too.
 
Epiphone is their cash cow...hardly a money sucker...so I can't see them ever spinning that brand off. Aside from that, I agree that Gibson should pull back and focus on quality over quantity. It's bad enough that you have to sort through their production instruments to find one that's worth keeping, but I'm finding that its a necessity with their custom shop offerings as well...sad.
 
rupe":s9v9c6i2 said:
Epiphone is their cash cow...hardly a money sucker...so I can't see them ever spinning that brand off. Aside from that, I agree that Gibson should pull back and focus on quality over quantity. It's bad enough that you have to sort through their production instruments to find one that's worth keeping, but I'm finding that its a necessity with their custom shop offerings as well...sad.

Maybe, I don't know. I guess it is popular for every major brand to have a budget brand to appeal to more of the masses. Being a private company, I wouldn't know what the contribution is from the other company lines. But, I bet a dollar to a donut, that if Gibson spun everything off except its Gibson USA and Custom Shop, and cut out some of these silly shapes, robotic guitars, 8 lines of Les Pauls, that they would be money ahead. No matter what country a guitar is built in and assembled in, with all the components and administration, I just cannot see making any sort of profit margin that is over a few percent. You cannot sustain a company very long on that, without cutting costs somewhere else. This is what killed them.

As far as the wood goes, they should be able to go to Madagascar and pay Joe Shit the Tree man whatever he wants and buy wood with the fucking US government having any say. The government needs to be more concerned with people on its own streets rather than worrying about the price of Rosewood in Africa.

That's my opinion. Remember though, I don't know fuck all....
 
To answer my own question from the original post....I called Gibson this morning because I'm interested in the one for sale in the classifieds. For Customs - the first Richlite guitar was serial number CS-200599. Higher serial numbers have Richlite.

I played a Richlite Custom in the shop and it sounded great, so I don't think it's a question of tone quality. I just don't think I could spend $3-4K on a new one simply due to the synthetic fretboard.
 
With the term "Tree Hugger" around I am really surprised so many do not knwo how government works :confused:

The US government is INFORCING laws put into place due to CITIZENS lobbying congress to ENACT laws protecting endangered forrests. As an outdoor sportsman myself and NRA member I fully support legislation protecting natural habitats; yes some legislation is odd and seems rather stupid but everyone has an equal chance to voice their concerns............this is America. Right in my town we have a black bear running around that the yuppies want taken out but guess what? Sorry Biff and muffy but that bear is protected and is not bothering anyone so he is here to stay.

Taylor Guitars owns the last place you can get ebony in legal manners and Gibson can buy from Taylor at any time. While gibson invests in endorsing dethklock and squidbillies Taylor invested in the materials he needs to build instruments.

and yes Epi is gibson's cash cow, no epi gibson would fail.
 
Digital Jams":128qzkn9 said:
With the term "Tree Hugger" around I am really surprised so many do not knwo how government works :confused:

The US government is INFORCING laws put into place due to CITIZENS lobbying congress to ENACT laws protecting endangered forrests. As an outdoor sportsman myself and NRA member I fully support legislation protecting natural habitats; yes some legislation is odd and seems rather stupid but everyone has an equal chance to voice their concerns............this is America. Right in my town we have a black bear running around that the yuppies want taken out but guess what? Sorry Biff and muffy but that bear is protected and is not bothering anyone so he is here to stay.

Taylor Guitars owns the last place you can get ebony in legal manners and Gibson can buy from Taylor at any time. While gibson invests in endorsing dethklock and squidbillies Taylor invested in the materials he needs to build instruments.

and yes Epi is gibson's cash cow, no epi gibson would fail.
:clap:
 
Digital Jams":36kdbzkh said:
The US government is INFORCING laws put into place due to CITIZENS lobbying congress to ENACT laws protecting endangered forrests.

Though it's a shame when our government picks and chooses which laws to enforce and which to ignore as a matter of politics. ;)
 
blackba":yuoqmfd1 said:
Spaceboy":yuoqmfd1 said:
I guess I'm the only one that thinks it's very cool that Gibson is exploring alternate sources for wood.

I like that Gibson is exploring alternate sources of wood, but it sucks they had to be slapped by the government to start doing that.

I watched the Taylor video posted earlier in this thread and cutting down 20 or so Ebony trees to get 2 good ones, is aweful. Nice to see Taylor stepping up too.

For sure, not only is it sad and awful, it's obscene. It's ironic too, that kind of shit embodies exactly why I play guitar. An escapism from that crap for a moment. But there's no escape from being a hypocrite. \:D/
 
Back
Top