To buy or not to buy....LP Custom

madcult

Been looking for nice tobacco finish for some time. I do own a LP already but a new one so this is my first "vintage" instrument. Good thing is, there is a return policy if I'm not happy with it as the shop is way too far away. 

This is the info I have so far from the seller:

Weights 10lbs exactly. It has been refretted professionaly at some point and the frets are in excellent condition. The tailpiece has been replaced but with a Gibson one from the correct era. The last owner cleaned the gold hardware a little too much and it has worn away most of the gold. The pickups are 100%.

84 LP Custom - Imgur

So far I managed to reduce the price to 2300Eur.

Is it a fair price?
Is this still a norlin?
Was that period specific in something in terms of quality?
Any idea about the neck profile?

Thanks for advice guys!

richardhomer

I wouldn't consider an '84 guitar to be 'vintage' - but then again, I'm not a vintage dealer.

The quality of early-mid 80s Gibsons was generally good - though weights were high. 10lbs is a fair bit heavier than an Historic reissue usually comes in at. Whether this matters is down to personal choice, unless you think you may sell it. 'Do you have an accurate weight?' is pretty much a standard question in the classified here and elsewhere.

Again on resale - black or white would be better choice - those are 'the' LPC colours.

I would expect the neck to be much thinner than modern examples. IIRC, Notlin sold out in '86 - I may be wrong on the exact year - but it doesn't really matter. 'Pre-Norlin' is like 'Pre-CBS' with Fenders - inherently more desirable. 'Norlin era' seems to be increasingly used as a plaudit; it shouldn't be.....

The price sounds high to me - though it looks to be in nice condition.

I'm sorry if I sound negative but this 'pseudo' vintage thing really irritates be. It seems a way of dealers passing off old instruments which are not intrinsically better than newer ones at a premium. If this guitar IS better than a new one, it is far more likely to be down to sample variation than because it is from some illusory 'Golden Era'.

p90fool

I've no idea whether that's a good price where you are but it's a real looker, and 10 pounds isn't too heavy, in fact it's a nice weight for a solid sounding LP in my experience.

ICBM

I agree with richardhomer up to a point, but I do generally prefer many Norlin Gibsons to many modern ones - they seem more 'solid' usually.

Yes, it is a fair price - not super cheap, but reasonable even considering the condition of the hardware (which personally I think makes it look better) and the non-original case.

Yes, it is still a Norlin, although it doesn't have the most notorious features which got the late-70s ones a bad name - Gibson returned to many of the more traditional features in the early 80s. It's not even that heavy for one of that era - actually lighter than average - in fact to me, 10lbs is a good solid weight for a Les Paul rather than excessively heavy.

Quality from that era is generally good, I would say better on average than modern ones especially in the area of fretwork and finishing.

The neck will be fairly shallow and flat, probably. They do vary but as richard said, none are like the baseball bats they use on many of the models today. It's probably not that far off the current '60s taper', although possibly still a little slimmer.

madcult

Hi guys

Thanks for the responds!

I do realize that the price is not cheap. But than again the guitar is from dealer . Which means higher price but also a return policy which is really important for me as I'm fairly new to these Gibsons . If I buy it I plan to take it straight away to London Gibson specialist just to make sure everything is alright and as advertised. If you know about any reputable shop who is doing this kind of service in London please let me know.

I'm specifically looking for tobacco burst custom, would you say I should look for a different year?Older, reissue?I will take any good advice.

I do own the Les Paul Custom Lite which is 3.6kg. This Custom is just 1kg heavier which is not a tragedy for me. Where there any Customs which where much lighter than 10lbs?

ICBM

Personally if you want a tobacco burst and you like the feel of the guitar, I would buy that one. Mid-80s is probably the crossing point between quality and non-"vintage" price now. I agree with richard that the prices for 70s Gibsons are now getting silly, and tobacco burst is rare from that period too. It's going to be cheaper than a 70s one, most of which have the 'bad' features (although some buyers now specifically look for those too), and in my opinion probably a better guitar than a later one.

€2300 is £1800 which I would consider at least 10% under the going rate for a dealer price on a Custom of that age and condition… although that's just my opinion.

Under 10lbs is rare for a Custom. In my opinion they don't have the proper Custom tone when they get much lighter either.

I also wouldn't bother taking it to an expert who will charge you money for something that many of the members here will do for free. Just post good clear close-up photos of the important bits - including inside the control cavity and if possible the undersides of the pickups, if you don't mind taking them out. If it's not genuine it will be easy to spot.

Parker

Norlin is a great era - the majority of 'experts' who state otherwise have usually read it on the web and not tried them for themselves. I have had numerous 70's, 80's and, in fact, every era up to modern Les Pauls. I have not played a bad Norlin era guitar....period! The sweeping generalisation of 70's Les Pauls is a massive shame and more fool you if you dicount owning one without playing it.

The 80's catelogue seemed quite variable and many of the models I have owned have had great necks, but normally with a headstock repair.

It's a buyers market out there - you can pick up some real vintage bargains. £1500-2000 will get you the pick of the crop. My '71 Les Paul recently sold for £1700. They were going for a grand more five years ago!

Neil

^^^^

As you say most people seem to reiterate web folklore.

Paddle head stocks, three piece tops and maple necks move way from the vintage Les Paul formula but that certainly doesn't make them bad guitars. In fact many people prefer them and  the Norlin models have built up a bit of a cult following. 

BloodEagle

Ive got a 78 custom (in TB sunburst, coincidentally) and its the best sounding and playing Les Paul Ive owned. I hadnt done any research into what the internet though about that particular era before I got it, and I cant say any of the supposed bad things (which Im still not 100% sure what they are) make any difference to me whatsoever

GuitarMonkey

It looks superb in the pictures I must say.

ICBM

BloodEagle said:

Ive got a 78 custom (in TB sunburst, coincidentally) and its the best sounding and playing Les Paul Ive owned. I hadnt done any research into what the internet though about that particular era before I got it, and I cant say any of the supposed bad things (which Im still not 100% sure what they are) make any difference to me whatsoever

The "bad things" are:

3-piece laminated maple neck with a reduced head angle and a volute. Purists don't like that, but it does stop them breaking. It also sharpens up the tone a bit. Even before they did that, they went to a laminated mahogany neck with the reduced angle and volute, which helps a bit but not enough. The maple does almost completely fix it.

'Pancake' body - the mahogany went from a single piece to a three-layer sandwich with the middle layer very thin, almost a veneer.

Flattened top contouring - noticeably less deeply carved and without the slight 'dish' near the outer edge.

3-piece maple cap, usually not highly flamed, and often very poorly matched for grain.

Sharper cutaway horn tip. Not 'sharp' like an ES-175 but noticeably more pointed than the older ones.

'Paddle' headstock - actually makes no difference on a Custom, because all that happened was that they made all the non-bound headstocks the same size as the Custom one… but they look bigger, without the binding.

Generally heavier weight.

Most of these changes had been reversed by the early 80s, so if you *don't* want the Norlin features but do want an older Les Paul without paying the premium for an early-70s one, these are a good buy.

Personally I like the maple neck - both tonally and because they don't break - and I don't mind the heavier weight unless it's really excessive (over 12lbs is definitely too much, over 11 is pushing it). I don't particularly like the paddle headstock (although I like Customs anyway, so it's less important), I don't really like but can live with the sandwich body, I'm less keen on the flat top contours, but oddly the one that really does it for me is the sharp cutaway horn - it just looks wrong and I don't think I could get used to owning one with it. I am shallow, yes!

But many of these things are desirable to people who like the heavy, powerful tone they have because they are a sign of the 'right' years. There's really nothing quite like a late-70s Custom for massive drop-tuned crunch… listen to Adam Jones for a good example, the Silverburst is the definitive version probably.

BloodEagle

Interesting, mines definitely not got a pancake body its very obivously one piece of wood, and I'm aware of but never really notice the sharp cutaway. To me the headstock looks pretty cool. The top contour again I noticed but i couldnt care less - the guitar is insanely powerful sounding and, yes, with a dropped tuning it sounds incredible.

ICBM

The return to the one-piece body was the first of the reversed changes I think - definitely as early as '78, possibly '77.

I like the big headstock on Customs, and I genuinely think it's part of the reason they sound different to Standards - it can only be that and the ebony board, since everything else is just cosmetic. The mass of the headstock does have a real effect on the resonance of the neck and the tone and possibly sustain. It seems to me that bigger headstocks give a slightly deeper and clearer tone, whereas smaller ones are more middy and 'woody'. I couldn't swear I would be able to tell blind, just something I've noticed as a pattern over the years. I prefer big-headstock Strats now for the same reason.

ThePrettyDamned

ICBM;403596" said:

The return to the one-piece body was the first of the reversed changes I think - definitely as early as '78, possibly '77.



I like the big headstock on Customs, and I genuinely think it's part of the reason they sound different to Standards - it can only be that and the ebony board, since everything else is just cosmetic. The mass of the headstock does have a real effect on the resonance of the neck and the tone and possibly sustain. It seems to me that bigger headstocks give a slightly deeper and clearer tone, whereas smaller ones are more middy and 'woody'. I couldn't swear I would be able to tell blind, just something I've noticed as a pattern over the years. I prefer big-headstock Strats now for the same reason.

I remember Joe satriani clipping a brass weight onto his headstock to "tune" the resonance by increasing headstock mass.

Okay, prolly just endorsement but...

I have experimented with doing this and it basically made some notes clearer and sustain better and some notes worse, some unaffected. It did make a difference though.

Voxman

As we've spoken about before, my advice is you should be looking for a nice Gibson Les Paul rather than restricting your choices to a custom or the tobacco sunburst colour.  There are some lovely Customs out there and I agree with RH that the 'classic' custom colour is black - but I don't agree that white is a particularly wanted colour (in fact my view is quite the opposite - I don't like LP's in white).   If you want something that looks great and is a little different, I really like the LP Custom SilverBurst which don't come up often.  I think I pointed you to a 1980's one at £2k with original case and in great condition with not too much 'yellow oxidation' that in my view was a great price.  Heck, if I'd have had the money I'd have gone for it myself...truly!

But there are also some lovely 'Standards' out there that sound, feel & play great, and these will typically cost less than the custom - if you dismiss this option you could be missing out on some lovely guitars. 

Although I have a 1990 LP Custom in tobacco sunburst its only because one came up at such a great price because the guy needed dosh quickly, it had no case, a dent, and bad buckle rash but played very nicely and sounded lovely, had virtually no fret wear, and the gold hardware was in really great nick.  As it was going to be a gigging guitar I didn't want to pay hundreds more for one in pristine condition because I'd have then worried about every mark it got ....this way, I just play it and enjoy it.  But I would equally have quite happily gone for a Standard if I had happened to find one that played well and felt good.

Re the guitar in the pics, £1,800 for a 1984 LP Custom is in my view a fair price, but the fact the guy has rubbed nearly every bit of gold off would dissuade me simply because IMHO with Tobacco Sunburst, the gold really sets it off.

But that's just me and my 2 cents. Of course, its your money and your choice - but if you are hung up about a LP Custom in Tobacco Sunburst than your choices will be more limited and you may well end up paying over the top.  

richardhomer

^ White was the Steve Jones/Manics thing - LPCs should 'only' be black for me but I know those two have a lot a fans, so white (well cream) ones are popular.

ICBM

I don't think there's anything wrong with shopping by colour or for a particular model. A Standard is not the same as a Custom, and it's not just a visual thing - they feel and sound different.

Silverbursts have become very expensive now, mostly due to Adam Jones - if you can find one for £2K now that's a great price, even in average condition.

madcult

I do play mostly heavy music, that's one of the reasons I want to get a Custom.I saw that Silverburst you mentioned. He was selling it on gumtree for 1800.Lovely guitar but still I always wanted the tobacco sunburst. As I said if it doesn't suit me I return it.

I did get few pics of control cavity and pickups. Is there everything as it should be?

http://imgur.com/a/6NyYm

dano

This is my 1980 Les Paul Custom, Tobacco burst and pretty much exactly what you are looking for  !

Mine plays amazingly well, weights closer to 12Ib then 10, and it's well built, at 34 years old and the gold has aged well, it's plays and sounds great and showing no quality / build problems. 

The price seems fairly reasonable they are asking, but the proof comes in how it plays.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o307/blackscience/DSC02853a.jpg

GuitarMonkey

The control cavity looks original and untouched. They look like original "Tim Shaw" pickups too.

Here's another Tobacco Custom, more expensive but given its condition not *that* much overpriced

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TIMEWARP-Vintage-1989-GIBSON-USA-LES-PAUL-CUSTOM-TOBACCO-BURST-AMAZING-Shop-/171530249273

Given its age, that one will likely have the Bill Lawrence PCB-backed pickups.

ICBM

madcult said:

I did get few pics of control cavity and pickups. Is there everything as it should be?

Looks like it, yes. And as GuitarMonkey says those are the good pickups.

If it matters though, the bridge has not had the gold plating worn off - it's a chrome plated replacement. Having looked at the original pics again the tailpiece is the same (and was already mentioned as a replacement). The bridge does look like a proper Gibson one, can't tell about the tailpiece.

Personally I think it looks much better with almost all the gold gone from the pickup covers, but I'm not convinced about the mismatch with the bridge and tailpiece, I would probably want to change them for gold (suitably worn!) ones at some point.