Gibson Les Paul 100 Junior

underdog

roberty said:

I hesitated and didn't get this at £280 and I regret it to this day

Think mine was £280 from Amazon then knocked off £40 or something because the case didn't have a key when it got to me. Best guitar bargain I ever got

Edit: actually £60 sticks in my head rather than £40

roberty

underdog said:

roberty said:

I hesitated and didn't get this at £280 and I regret it to this day

Think mine was £280 from Amazon then knocked off £40 or something because the case didn't have a key when it got to me. Best guitar bargain I ever got

Edit: actually £60 sticks in my head rather than £40

Stop it hurts

ICBM

Don't worry about it. I wouldn't buy one even at £100 unless it was purely to re-sell. I can't stand the wide neck - even with corrected string spacing - and that's the one thing that's effectively impossible to fix.

p90fool

I have big hands and found the wide neck ok, my main reservation about it was that it was so unusually wide I worried it might make swapping between it and conventional guitars a chore.
Look at the pic in the OP, the strings are nowhere near the edge of the board, it really is weird and a stretch for thumb-over styles.

It was well made and sounded great though.

RaymondLin

As a collector they are fun to add to the collection as it’s a quirky year for Gibson but as something I play, I have it a miss and probably forever will.

merciful-evans

ICBM said:

They also made the neck - but not the string spacing - wider because that design of nut has 'end pieces' which stick out further than a standard nut, which is why the string spacing is then too narrow for the neck... just a succession of bad ideas, each of which forced the next.

The wider neck and (conventional) string spacing was a design choice, not a workaround for the nut (The following year they halved the extra width on the HP models to 0.050"). It would have been easy enough to have designed an adjustable nut for conventional width necks. 

The combination of neck width and string spacing is ideal for some players, including myself. I had no intention of buying a Les Paul until it looked likely (later that year) that these might never be made again. 

Seziertisch

The hologram signature is the real crime. It looks like a scan that has been blown up, and the 100 tagged on to the end in different script looks so amateurish

InactiveX

That headstock reminds me of this (for the Alan Partridge fans):

https://i.postimg.cc/t42h0V94/APSig.jpg

Jez6345789

Nice to see people still bent out of shape over these lol I was clearing out guitars and pulled mine out before lockdown I only bought it too mod at the time at the silly low amazon price. It had sat in the case for a couple of years fired it up tuners battery still had charge it went pretty much straight in to tune and despite listing it for sale and getting good offers I played it solid for a week and really did not want to let it go.

it will always be an ugly looking thing but I don’t seem to have an issue with the neck or string spacing. Has to be said I am not a technical player so perhaps it upsets more precise players.

anyway play the things you like for your reasons not because the internet says you should get past the cosmetics or alter the cosmetics if you wish. 

phil_b

ICBM said:

They also made the neck - but not the string spacing - wider because that design of nut has 'end pieces' which stick out further than a standard nut, which is why the string spacing is then too narrow for the neck... just a succession of bad ideas, each of which forced the next.

You may or may not like the wider neck. You may or may not like the idea of the robot tuners. But the whole package just isn't right - and the robot tuners *will* stop working reliably sooner or later, even if that's not for some years.

If you want to replace the tuners with standard ones, fit a bone or plastic nut with string spacing that correctly matches the neck - and while you're at it, remove the well-intentioned but just plain awful logo and refinish the head with a normal Les paul one - then you'll have a decent Les Paul Junior for someone who likes wider necks.

would you also need to change the string spacing at the bridge?

ICBM

phil_b said:

would you also need to change the string spacing at the bridge?

No.

merciful-evans

phil_b said:

would you also need to change the string spacing at the bridge?

This is widely misunderstood. You benefit an extra 0.050" inch either side of the E strings. Often vibrato is difficult on the E strings. Now its easier. Also if changing fretting position quickly eg: 5th to 10th, pulling a string off the fingerboard can be a hazard. These issues are felt more keenly on a Telecaster build which has a stingy reveal (called 'real estate' by the yanks). 

A wider fingerboard suits many younger players & certain older players (such as myself). The string spacing is just fine.