Firebird X limited edition - - - - (go on take a peek)

timhulio

Ergonomically, I've always liked the Teuffel Tesla. I don't see why other non-boutique manufacturers can't have a bash at something like this. It doesn't even have to be headless - in fact I'd prefer it not to be.

Yeah the Firebird X, awful. Anyone remember the Dusk Tiger? Now that was a strange concept.

Handsome_Chris

Remember the Dusk Tiger?! I've got one and I think it is lovely. I've already got a selection of super-strats, and a proper Fender one just in case some old geezer needs something to play, but I always love my Gibsons. The tuning system makes it a delightful piece of gear when doing a set with a variety of open tunings.

I believe that what irked the purists, was that it looked like an LP, yet it wasn't.

ICBM

Handsome_Chris said:

I believe that what irked the purists, was that it looked like an LP, yet it wasn't.

I also like the old Les Paul Recording for that reason - it actually has useful sounds too, if you're not trying to make it sound like a Standard through a Marshall - but I really didn't like that they combined it with a cheapening of the construction, going to the big plastic control panel, and I think that may have been part of the reason they weren't successful. They are actually becoming quite valuable now though, if you get one in good enough condition with all the electrics working properly.

I had the bass version (the Les Paul Triumph) at one point, it was really good-sounding - but let down by a really poor bridge design that was never fit for purpose in the first place, and I traded it in for a Martin 12-string acoustic... which I still have, 25 years later. Conservatism rules!

johnnyurq

ICBM said:

Handsome_Chris said:

I believe that what irked the purists, was that it looked like an LP, yet it wasn't.

I also like the old Les Paul Recording for that reason - it actually has useful sounds too, if you're not trying to make it sound like a Standard through a Marshall - but I really didn't like that they combined it with a cheapening of the construction, going to the big plastic control panel, and I think that may have been part of the reason they weren't successful. They are actually becoming quite valuable now though, if you get one in good enough condition with all the electrics working properly.

I had the bass version (the Les Paul Triumph) at one point, it was really good-sounding - but let down by a really poor bridge design that was never fit for purpose in the first place, and I traded it in for a Martin 12-string acoustic... which I still have, 25 years later. Conservatism rules!

I like the Dark Fire and the Dusk Tiger for similar reasons to @Handsome_Chris.

@ICBM you are correct.

But I have owned a 71/72 LPR (see my avatar) for many years which has a load of great tones in it for a variety of genres. The low impedence mode is great and quiet as a mouse when recording.

Add a phase switch, decade pot and separate bass and treble pots and you can even get a thin weedy single coil Strat alike tone too. it was the DF and DT of its day minus the tuning capabilities.

Mind you the Tronical new tuning kit could be retrofitted, mmmm.

My only true keeper since ever I owned a guitar.

ICBM

Ha, I should have clicked on your avatar pic! I didn't see what it was.

I had a Les Paul Signature recently - which has a simpler version of the low-impedance electrics - and it was possibly the best-sounding guitar I've ever owned, and incredibly versatile. It could basically go from "acoustic" to "full on rock" just with the onboard controls. I couldn't get on with the typical 70s wide/thin neck profile though, it actually hurt my hand. Such a shame, it was a beautiful thing too.

If they'd have put those more normal-looking low-impedance pickups in the LPR with rear-mounted controls so it looked like a 'proper' Les Paul, they might have had more luck. We're forty years too late to tell them that though .

johnnyurq

@ICBM

I am lucky the LPR's neck is a perfect fit for my wee sausage fingered hands and the volute has saved it from disaster due to cack handed band mates and drunken jams more than once.

The pickups were actually one of the things that attracted me to it and made the guitar stand out from a sea of standards with normal buckers. To my young mind at the time it looked like the future LOL.

The range of tones etc were a bonus, I knew it was flexible but it exceeded my expectations.

I can honestly say it can sound great through any amp, stomps and Multi FX over the years no matter how cheap or expensive. No other guitar I have ever owned can equal that.

But yes from psuedo acoustic tones to balls out were easily got, it also has a certain clarity even through hjgh gain setups that records well and very low noise live.

It is now like an old favourite pair of shoes, familiar and comfy.

Can you tell I like it. 

Edit

Of course a heavily modified LPR with a Bigsby was Les Paul's weapon of choice especially at the Iridium club, no wonder he sat down with it though it is very bloody heavy.

http://origin-minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/08/13/les-paul

bntylr

You'll get kids 30 years from now desperately trying to find stuff like this. Like a lot of guitars in the past, they were laughed at when they were new but at some point suddenly become the "thing to have"

Still doesn't make them any more likeable, 

Handsome_Chris

bntylr said:

...but at some point suddenly become the "thing to have" 

Usually that point is when someone of note, plays one for long enough to make 'em cool. It was Dave Grohl's fault I became a Gibson man.  For some reason I thought that if a Firebird Studio is good enough for him, it'll see me right, and it has.