Gibson Rhoads Les Paul

[SirBoye]

Doesn't really look like an aged white, more of a painted yellow. I'd rather Mr. Willy's real 75

I'm definitely a fan of those white aged LPs though. Edge's too:

 

[SirBoye]

I see the Norlin era Gibson's catch a lot of flack, but they seemed to work OK for Rhoads, Sykes and Zakk. Imagine this. Those guys might have "made it" and had careers if they could have only gotten their hands on good Les Pauls and not that useless Norlin crap they ended up with. If only the Les Paul forum guys could have helped those guys find real guitars.

 

[Ancient Alien]

Just typical Gibson douchebaggery IMHO
I have yet to play a single LP that even warranted a $2000 price point as far as quality, playability and craftsmanship.
And that includes authentic 59 bursts.
I know this will upset the Gibson Fanboys, but I have made this mistake dozens of times and been left very disappointed, even by their custom shop.
Every good LP I have ever played was a friends worn in, beat to crap standard, but not worth even $2K IMHO
My first concert was RR with Ozzy, and he is the reason I play guitar.
But, Gibson can take that guitar and shove it so far up their asses

 

[SirBoye]

Just typical Gibson douchebaggery IMHO
I have yet to play a single LP that even warranted a $2000 price point as far as quality, playability and craftsmanship.
And that includes authentic 59 bursts.
I know this will upset the Gibson Fanboys, but I have made this mistake dozens of times and been left very disappointed, even by their custom shop.
Every good LP I have ever played was a friends worn in, beat to crap standard, but not worth even $2K IMHO
My first concert was RR with Ozzy, and he is the reason I play guitar.
But, Gibson can take that guitar and shove it so far up their asses

 

[Shiny_Surface]

I see the Norlin era Gibson's catch a lot of flack, but they seemed to work OK for Rhoads, Sykes and Zakk. Imagine this. Those guys might have "made it" and had careers if they could have only gotten their hands on good Les Pauls and not that useless Norlin crap they ended up with. If only the Les Paul forum guys could have helped those guys find real guitars.

Norlin's actually seem trendy/hyped on the various forums based from what I've read lately.

Maybe Gibson caught wind of it and decided release a Norlin based reissue to capitalize on it.

 

[blackba]

I see the Norlin era Gibson's catch a lot of flack, but they seemed to work OK for Rhoads, Sykes and Zakk. Imagine this. Those guys might have "made it" and had careers if they could have only gotten their hands on good Les Pauls and not that useless Norlin crap they ended up with. If only the Les Paul forum guys could have helped those guys find real guitars.

Norlin's actually seem trendy/hyped on the various forums based from what I've read lately.

Maybe Gibson caught wind of it and decided release a Norlin based reissue to capitalize on it.

I see very mixed reviews of the norlin era Gibsons. Some say they are much better than anything Gibson is putting out today, others say Gibson's historic series blows them away.

All I know is that my '73 LP custom was much cheaper than this Rhoads Les Paul. On an interesting note, the person I bought my '73 LP custom from had a '71 custom, '73 custom, and a historic VOS (don't remember which model exactly). He still has the VOS and doesn't have the '71 custom anymore. So its obvious what he prefers. I am pleased with my '73 LP custom, I do prefer my '04 Standard LE, but the '73 custom is no slouch. Only played mine and another '73 and liked both, so I haven't had that much experience with the norlin era guitars.

 

[russellconner]

looks like a cool guitar to me...no way i could afford it right now, but cool regardless.

regarding whether the price is fair, i guess it depends on the individual. i bought my zakk for $3k in '02, played it for 7 years, and got a free replacement from the gibson custom shop when the neck developed a back-bow. from my perspective, the price is high but the value is also high. my replacement guitar is the best ive ever had my hands on, much less owned. i really dont have anything bad to say about gibson...i paid a higher price, received stellar service, and absolutely love the guitar i have.

are there functional equivalents available at a lower price?..absolutely, no doubt about it. are the substitutes hand-built les pauls from the craftsmen at the gibson custom shop, that come with a lifetime warranty (that works)?..no. it just depends on what you want, and if youre willing to pay for it.

russell

 

[tonmazz]

looks like a cool guitar to me...no way i could afford it right now, but cool regardless.

regarding whether the price is fair, i guess it depends on the individual. i bought my zakk for $3k in '02, played it for 7 years, and got a free replacement from the gibson custom shop when the neck developed a back-bow. from my perspective, the price is high but the value is also high. my replacement guitar is the best ive ever had my hands on, much less owned. i really dont have anything bad to say about gibson...i paid a higher price, received stellar service, and absolutely love the guitar i have.

are there functional equivalents available at a lower price?..absolutely, no doubt about it. are the substitutes hand-built les pauls from the craftsmen at the gibson custom shop, that come with a lifetime warranty (that works)?..no. it just depends on what you want, and if youre willing to pay for it.

russell

I read another post about you telling about your experience with them replacing your bullseye, that's great! I also bought mine in 02 and I have to say it is by far the best guitar I have ever owned and yes it was expensive but worth it. I don't know if it's the custom shop aspect or not but that guitar plays great, feels great. As for the Norlin era stuff, only really played one recently and I though it was pretty great. I'm not sure what you'd look for to say they are less then perfect but all in all I'm a Gibson fan boy so maybe I over look the little things. Neck was straight, no major defects and played great. What else is there?

 

[rupe]

regarding whether the price is fair, i guess it depends on the individual. i bought my zakk for $3k in '02, played it for 7 years, and got a free replacement from the gibson custom shop when the neck developed a back-bow. from my perspective, the price is high but the value is also high. my replacement guitar is the best ive ever had my hands on, much less owned. i really dont have anything bad to say about gibson...i paid a higher price, received stellar service, and absolutely love the guitar i have.

Henry?

 

[9ball]

are there functional equivalents available at a lower price?..absolutely, no doubt about it. are the substitutes hand-built les pauls from the craftsmen at the gibson custom shop, that come with a lifetime warranty (that works)?..no.

i'm kind of biased about gibson because i used to have a custon shop gibson ZWLP, and the thing had a terrible nut on it. EVRY TIME you'd bend the G string hardly at all - it would bind in the nut, then "PING" back into place, and knock the whole guitar out of tune lol.
pretty pathetic for what was supposed to be "custom shop hand built" lol, and after spending so much money on the guitar, i couldn't justify spending even more money to fix it, so i sold it.
now i have two ltd mustaines made in korea and cost less than a thousand each, and they have no such problems whatsoever lol.
i've been out to try les pauls here and there as well, and none of them i've tried felt much different than the epiphones hanging on the walls lol.

 

[rupe]

i'm kind of biased about gibson because i used to have a custon shop gibson ZWLP, and the thing had a terrible nut on it. EVRY TIME you'd bend the G string hardly at all - it would bind in the nut, then "PING" back into place, and knock the whole guitar out of tune lol.
pretty pathetic for what was supposed to be "custom shop hand built" lol, and after spending so much money on the guitar, i couldn't justify spending even more money to fix it, so i sold it.

Filing a nut slot would have broken the bank for sure...good decision

 

[9ball]

So what? You don't have to like them. My point is that they these particular guitars are not very expensive. Your initial argument is that they are OVERPRICED to begin with...but that is just not true with all of their models. You are clearly biased against them. As for me, I am far from a Gibson fanboi. I have never bought a new Gibson, and don't see myself buying one anytime soon, but that is because I tend to buy used instruments. That said, a lot of their guitars come with lifetime warranties, which you have to factor in to their "overpricing... " I mean $1100 for a brand new SG is a pretty damn good deal for a Standard. I have owned $3k guitars that weren't better and simply didn't have the mojo. So, in summation, are they the best? No...there is no best. Do you have to like them, no...WGAS what you like. Are they all overpriced? Hell no.

i still think gibsons are all overpriced. you picked the 4 cheapest gibsons out there lol.
but yes i still think 1400 for an explorer is too much. a more reasonable price would be in the 800 dollar range for that guitar IMO.
i guess you could mention the "faded" guitars which look like absolute dog shit and still cost around a thousand bucks lol
what does a les paul standard cost now? almost 2500 dollars?

 

[9ball]

Filing a nut slot would have broken the bank for sure...good decision

my point is WHY should anyone have to do ANY kind of maintenance on a 3 thousand dollar guitar that was supposedly "hand built by the best"? you know what i mean? lol

i also sold it because it was just too much money to have sitting around in a guitar, but i just thought it was pretty ironic and funny that it wouldn't even stay in tune worth a shit and it had "custom shop" on the case lol

 

[Shiny_Surface]

Here's some pics of one of the aged ones (not VOS) from LPF.

 

[bigdaddyd]

i'm kind of biased about gibson because i used to have a custon shop gibson ZWLP, and the thing had a terrible nut on it. EVRY TIME you'd bend the G string hardly at all - it would bind in the nut, then "PING" back into place, and knock the whole guitar out of tune lol.
pretty pathetic for what was supposed to be "custom shop hand built" lol, and after spending so much money on the guitar, i couldn't justify spending even more money to fix it, so i sold it.

Filing a nut slot would have broken the bank for sure...good decision

I was just thinking the same thing...but then again we are talking about 9ball....logic doesn't apply.

 

[bigdaddyd]

So what? You don't have to like them. My point is that they these particular guitars are not very expensive. Your initial argument is that they are OVERPRICED to begin with...but that is just not true with all of their models. You are clearly biased against them. As for me, I am far from a Gibson fanboi. I have never bought a new Gibson, and don't see myself buying one anytime soon, but that is because I tend to buy used instruments. That said, a lot of their guitars come with lifetime warranties, which you have to factor in to their "overpricing... " I mean $1100 for a brand new SG is a pretty damn good deal for a Standard. I have owned $3k guitars that weren't better and simply didn't have the mojo. So, in summation, are they the best? No...there is no best. Do you have to like them, no...WGAS what you like. Are they all overpriced? Hell no.

i still think gibsons are all overpriced. you picked the 4 cheapest gibsons out there lol.
but yes i still think 1400 for an explorer is too much. a more reasonable price would be in the 800 dollar range for that guitar IMO.
i guess you could mention the "faded" guitars which look like absolute dog shit and still cost around a thousand bucks lol
what does a les paul standard cost now? almost 2500 dollars?

You are entitled to your opinion..but you don't get to price things. The market determines the prices. You own a bunch of guitars that are built overseas and cost pretty close to the "cheapest" gibsons I picked. Your guitars are quite good, but they can be priced that way for a reason. I don't like the faded guitars myself, but the faded guitars are priced that way because they can save money in the finishing process, just like your beloved guitars can be priced lower by being made overseas.

 

[bigdaddyd]

Filing a nut slot would have broken the bank for sure...good decision

my point is WHY should anyone have to do ANY kind of maintenance on a 3 thousand dollar guitar that was supposedly "hand built by the best"? you know what i mean? lol

i also sold it because it was just too much money to have sitting around in a guitar, but i just thought it was pretty ironic and funny that it wouldn't even stay in tune worth a shit and it had "custom shop" on the case lol

you wouldn't have to...you could send it back, or have it fixed under warranty. Every guitar company puts out guitars with this problem. This is not strictly a Gibson thing.

 

[crankyrayhanky]

I'd taket that nickleback Les Paul in a hearbeat over these RRhoads models...and for the record I love all Ozzy/Sabbath and do not own any NBack CDs

 

[tonmazz]

Here's some pics of one of the aged ones (not VOS) from LPF.

I hate the whole aged thing as someone else has said. This looks like shit and if I didn't do the damage than it means nothing to me.

 

[Shiny_Surface]

I hate the whole aged thing as someone else has said. This looks like shit and if I didn't do the damage than it means nothing to me.

I agree, I like to do my own natural relicing.

From a collector's viewpoint (who I'm assuming will make up the majority who purchase these) the limited run of aged guitars will likely go up in value more than the VOS versions, which is all they care about.

The guy who bought the aged one in these pics also bought a VOS version to actually play(?). Must have dropped close to $8K for both of them I reckon.