How close is an R9 to a real '59?

Jonathanthomas83

Similarly, how close is an R8 to a '58? I know they're meant to be amazing replica's of the best and most sought after guitars in Gibson's history, but for those who've had the luxury of playing an original, how close do they get?

p90fool

As a musical instrument seen and heard from the front row of an audience or on your audio platform of choice, easily close enough. 

As a microscopically accurate replica of tedious inconsequential details good enough to fool black light-equipped lab techs who can't even play a barre chord? Don't even go there. 

octatonic

The point is that the thousand or so of real '59's that they made vary from one to the other quite a bit.

stonevibe

They both usually have six strings and you can tune them how you like? Who knows, you could probably even play the same songs on either. 

ThorpyFX

approximately 0.0005% +/- 0.00005% in favour of the vintage one

Jonathanthomas83

Don't misunderstand this as me being picky about it, Im not, just interested in some informed opinions. Thought it may be a good discussion to raise. In hindsight, possibly not! Haha.

Jonathanthomas83

...And also, to satisfy my intrigue for what a real '59 feels/sounds like. As I've never and will likely never will play one.

ThorpyFX

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Don't misunderstand this as me being picky about it, Im not, just interested in some informed opinions. Thought it may be a good discussion to raise. In hindsight, possibly not! Haha.

apologies i was being a dick. realistically its a very hard thing to quantify, mainly because there is more than physical feel involved. its the smell, the psychology, reverence etc etc. I have an R9 which i love...... but i have also played (and own) OLD guitars and they were in a different league because they are lighter (assume due to properly dry wood) more resonant and had that emotional connection.

A good R9 is an amazing thing, but like old guitars you can get some right dogs too. so realistically Id say search for a good les paul standard (regardless of R moniker) and enjoy it. Eventually it'll be 50 years old, dried out, played in and degaussed too. 

WezV

In simple terms, it be better and more consistently built, but  from slightly worse materials.

The R9 will likely play better and sound more like you expect a 59 too. 

 

Jonathanthomas83

ThorpyFX said:

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Don't misunderstand this as me being picky about it, Im not, just interested in some informed opinions. Thought it may be a good discussion to raise. In hindsight, possibly not! Haha.

apologies i was being a dick. realistically its a very hard thing to quantify, mainly because there is more than physical feel involved. its the smell, the psychology, reverence etc etc. I have an R9 which i love...... but i have also played (and own) OLD guitars and they were in a different league because they are lighter (assume due to properly dry wood) more resonant and had that emotional connection.

A good R9 is an amazing thing, but like old guitars you can get some right dogs too. so realistically Id say search for a good les paul standard (regardless of R moniker) and enjoy it. Eventually it'll be 50 years old, dried out, played in and degaussed too. 

Not at all @ThorpyFX, I didn't thank that for a second. I was in fact replying to those above you and only realised you posted shortly after I posted mine! :-)

You make some good points. I played an R8 last week and really liked it. Although, I can't say "I liked it £2k more than my Standard" type liked it. So there's definitely something in what you're saying.

I REALLY liked the Custom Buckers though!

Phil_aka_Pip

Isn't it the same thing as Greene King brewing an ale and calling it Morland's? They may be using the same yeast hops and wort, but they're not using the same liquor ('cos Morlands used to get it out of their own well in the middle of the brewery - which GK closed down) and it don't taste the same. They probably aren't even using the same other ingredients either, they're just cashing in on the name of Morlands.

No, hang on, it's not quite the same thing, I think Gibson are probably making an honest attempt to reproduce a product they once made before, hence the neck profiles change with the year, but they ain't using the same wood, so would you expect the guitars to sound the same?

I'd still like an R9 though.

ThorpyFX

Jonathanthomas83 said:

ThorpyFX said:

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Don't misunderstand this as me being picky about it, Im not, just interested in some informed opinions. Thought it may be a good discussion to raise. In hindsight, possibly not! Haha.

apologies i was being a dick. realistically its a very hard thing to quantify, mainly because there is more than physical feel involved. its the smell, the psychology, reverence etc etc. I have an R9 which i love...... but i have also played (and own) OLD guitars and they were in a different league because they are lighter (assume due to properly dry wood) more resonant and had that emotional connection.

A good R9 is an amazing thing, but like old guitars you can get some right dogs too. so realistically Id say search for a good les paul standard (regardless of R moniker) and enjoy it. Eventually it'll be 50 years old, dried out, played in and degaussed too. 

Not at all @ThorpyFX, I didn't thank that for a second. I was in fact replying to those above you and only realised you posted shortly after I posted after mine! :-)

You make some good points. I played an R8 last week and really liked it. Although, I can't say "I liked it £2k more than my Standard" type liked it. So there's definitely something in what you're saying.

I REALLY liked the Custom Buckers though!

you see i didn't, in actual fact i swapped mine out and have a set of OX4s in the R9. I have montys in a  different single cut. both suit their respective guitar and both are insane. put  set of them in a standard and youll be laughing all the way to the bank with the money saved. My mates standard with Lollars is easily on par with my R9 if not better.

Jonathanthomas83

ThorpyFX said:

Jonathanthomas83 said:

ThorpyFX said:

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Don't misunderstand this as me being picky about it, Im not, just interested in some informed opinions. Thought it may be a good discussion to raise. In hindsight, possibly not! Haha.

apologies i was being a dick. realistically its a very hard thing to quantify, mainly because there is more than physical feel involved. its the smell, the psychology, reverence etc etc. I have an R9 which i love...... but i have also played (and own) OLD guitars and they were in a different league because they are lighter (assume due to properly dry wood) more resonant and had that emotional connection.

A good R9 is an amazing thing, but like old guitars you can get some right dogs too. so realistically Id say search for a good les paul standard (regardless of R moniker) and enjoy it. Eventually it'll be 50 years old, dried out, played in and degaussed too. 

Not at all @ThorpyFX, I didn't thank that for a second. I was in fact replying to those above you and only realised you posted shortly after I posted after mine! :-)

You make some good points. I played an R8 last week and really liked it. Although, I can't say "I liked it £2k more than my Standard" type liked it. So there's definitely something in what you're saying.

I REALLY liked the Custom Buckers though!

you see i didn't, in actual fact i swapped mine out and have a set of OX4s in the R9. I have montys in a  different single cut. both suit their respective guitar and both are insane. put  set of them in a standard and youll be laughing all the way to the bank with the money saved. My mates standard with Lollars is easily on par with my R9 if not better.

Ah ok, maybe that's down to my lack of experience with different pickups then. My understanding is that the Custom Buckers are pretty close to original PAF's, or at least, that's the marketing spiel. Are the OX4s even closer? I really liked the definition, punch, tightness I got out of the Custom Buckers (I play at relatively high gain - not really classic rock), so if that's what a PAF delivers, I'm in for the OX4s! :-)

WezV

Phil_aka_Pip said:

Isn't it the same thing as Greene King brewing an ale and calling it Morland's? They may be using the same yeast hops and wort, but they're not using the same liquor ('cos Morlands used to get it out of their own well in the middle of the brewery - which GK closed down) and it don't taste the same. They probably aren't even using the same other ingredients either, they're just cashing in on the name of Morlands.

its unlikely the issue

Water profiles are an important part of any beer recipe.  I live in Burton, famous for our water, and the first thing we do is strip out every single chemical and remix it for the appropriate recipe.   The process is called Burtonisation, as it was originally done to copy our natural water profile.  Our brewing water is still drawn from the same aquifers as always 

GK would not ignore the water profile, its an easy bit to get right.  But they will likely make changes for other reasons (cost and mass market appeal are the normal culprits).   Some breweries are just not as good at flavour matching as others and changing from one lot of equipment to another can cause variation even if everything else is exactly the same

guitars4you

There are features on an R7/R8/R9 that they have not quite got right - The more 'trainspotter' about this you are, then the more it will irk you - Some issues Gibson don't quite get right, but they could - Granted they can't do anything about the Brazilian rosewood fingerboard

Interesting in that all original 1959 models are not exact DNA replicas of each other, partly/mainly due to the variation within a hand built instrument

There has been many blogs on FB about this, time after time and one or two members have all the appropriate info down to a fine art

As for the pick-ups - read this http://www.tonequest.com/files/TQRJan09_proof.pdf and pay attention to the final paragraph that say's 
 The truth is, no one may ever be capable of reproducing the exact tone, dynamic and vocal character, clarity, bloom and rich harmonics found in a great set of PAFs, which were, after all, essentially happy accidents created by the convergence of extremely varied and largely undocumented materials and components, assembled by relatively unskilled factory workers laboring with flexible specifications and imprecise equipment.

As for which to buy - Consider this - Gibson only built around 1,500 59 Les Pauls - Only about 3,000 are still in existence ! - With prices in excess of 100K and beyond, then most of us are grateful that we can buy a good R9 from around £3500/4000 on wards - Is it as good, maybe, maybe not, but they have reduced the differences regarding how the guitar performs, so much so that  the needs of most are satisfied by a good replica

Granted Gibson have made regular tweaks to their 'best ever' R9 and in due course will come up with another 'best ever' - IMO ignore this, play any/many R9 replicas and evaluate them on your own terms - Your hands and ears never lie

p90fool

Jonathanthomas83 said

 My understanding is that the Custom Buckers are pretty close to original PAF's, or at least, that's the marketing spiel. Are the OX4s even closer? 

The problem is that it's a moving target, as there's nearly as much variation between real PAFs in terms of magnet types, number of windings and other variables as there is between good quality modern replicas. 

That is actually the single reason why the entire vintage market stays afloat. Everyone can claim their product is the closest because there is no single correct answer. This leads to punters having loyalty to their own favourites, once they've spent a fortune on a bunch of similar but not identical products on the way.

If it was a simple cookie-cutter product somebody would've just made a perfect clone decades ago and the job would've been done. 

You could doubtless find an original PAF that sounds exactly like a Custom Bucker and another which sounds exactly like an OX4, hence my slightly facetious original answer to your question. 

The history and construction of those old guitars is a genuinely fascinating subject and I'm glad there are experts who obsess over the minutiae just like I'm glad there are specialists in ancient Minoan pottery - but there does come a point at which you have to ask yourself what you actually want from an electric guitar and how much money you have. 

It is, when all is said and done, a crumbling old piece of consumer electronics made on a production line largely by semi-skilled workers who'd rather be fishing. 

andyoz

I just wish Gibson could get their R9 fretboards darker and closer to the real deal by selecting better IRW.  Most are dry and too light brown looking. 

Gadget

guitars4you said:

...Consider this - Gibson only built around 1,500 59 Les Pauls - Only about 3,000 are still in existence !...

Have they been breeding?!

Sporky

guitars4you said:

As for which to buy - Consider this - Gibson only built around 1,500 59 Les Pauls - Only about 3,000 are still in existence !

Sorry - I am at risk of being a dick here - is that a typo, and only around 300 are still in existence, or was it a joke about fakes?

guitars4you

Gadget said:

guitars4you said:

...Consider this - Gibson only built around 1,500 59 Les Pauls - Only about 3,000 are still in existence !...

Have they been breeding?!

it has always been a tongue in cheek comment aimed at a number of 'forgeries' on the market today 

Gadget

guitars4you said:

Gadget said:

guitars4you said:

...Consider this - Gibson only built around 1,500 59 Les Pauls - Only about 3,000 are still in existence !...

Have they been breeding?!

it has always been a tongue in cheek comment aimed at a number of 'forgeries' on the market today 

Crikey. Good job I'm not in the market for one then!