New Gibson ES-LesPaul Bass for 2016

slinkp · January 06, 2016, 01:53:00 PM

I wouldn't pay $3k for it, but I think it's gorgeous.

uwe · January 07, 2016, 07:04:34 AM

Quote from: Granny Gremlin on January 06, 2016, 01:11:12 PM
So what Dave is saying is that it is a low budget (as in cheaper to make - routed center slab with back and front caps, barely carved so cheaper to on the labour and materials) semi hollow body instrument, priced at what a boutique proper hollowbody jazz archtop would cost. Gibson pulled another Gibson.

I don't know where that "routed body" allegation comes from, it's not! It's a classic hollow-body with three ply top, back AND SIDES. The smallish sustain block is a different wood than the rest of the body. And the top is visibly arched, very artsy in fact.

The whole bass looks and feels petite, but also has an expensive, even lavish workmanship aura to it. The fin has a depth no other of my Gibsons - old or new - has.

For once I have to come up in Gibson's defense: That bass is a jewel. Granted, the f-holes look large, but they are in fact just a bit smaller than on an EB-2 or an LP Sig (which both have larger bodies of course), but making them any smaller would have sacrificed acoustic sound.

It's really a too small a bass for me to feel comfortable with on stage - I prefer an Explorer or T-Bird in my hands -, but Sheryl Crow would look great with it!

gearHed289 · January 07, 2016, 08:17:15 AM

Quote from: uwe on January 07, 2016, 07:04:34 AMbut Sheryl Crow would look great with it!

And then prices would double.

Granny Gremlin · January 07, 2016, 11:39:59 AM

Quote from: uwe on January 07, 2016, 07:04:34 AMbut making them any smaller would have sacrificed acoustic sound.

The small body volume is the bottleneck there (not even the larger EB2 has a usable-for-anything-other-than-bedroom-practise acoustic tone); the F holes are only slightly more functional than the ones painted on a vintage Gretsch.

Anyway, the routed slab thing was an assumption (because most non-gibson guitars of this style, including the Phish guy's sig thing and copies, which abound, are built that way, and what Dave said made that seem more likely here too), so sorry for that. BUT, if is is ply then it is still a bit too expensive, even if the fit and finish is better than we have come to expect from Gibson. You can get a solid wood proper hand built acoustic archtop for that much. For a couple hundred more, it could be from a boutique luthier whose name you'd recognise (if you were a jazz guitarist).

gearHed289 · January 08, 2016, 08:42:40 AM

Here's one for a mere $2700. http://www.ebay.com/itm/2015-Gibson-ES-Les-Paul-Semi-Hollow-Body-Short-Scale-Bass-/201498912155?

uwe · January 08, 2016, 09:39:54 AM

Mine isn't as tiger-striped. That look has been so overdone, it actually devalues it a little.

Re acoustic tone: The ES-LP sounds (plugged) a lot airier than an EB-2. I always found EB-2s comparatively dead-sounding. Of course, when they came out, no one was concerned with giving a bass a semi-acoustic tone, it was just a body shape Gibson deemed suitable after the EB-1 body had been refused by bassists for being too small (by 1958, when the EB-2 was introduced, the already then 5 year old EB-1 was a failed model). They didn't have many alternatives, the classic Les Paul shape would have been too small as well - compared to the larger dimensions of Fender bass product - and shapes such as the SG or LP Junior (both not ideal either) or the TBird were yet to come, even the more exotic larger body shapes from the Modernist Line (Flying V, Explorer) were not yet out. The EB-2 was a case of "make-do" really, Gibson has a penchant for those types of a "solution" after all!

Unplugged, there is also no comparing the two: The EB-2's top is deadened by (almost) full contact to the sustain block, while the LP-ES sustain block is more akin to the LP Sig one, i.e. no full contact to the top.

I've now done so much propaganda for that model, I really should have gotten mine for free.

Dave W · January 08, 2016, 12:46:16 PM

Quote from: uwe on January 08, 2016, 09:39:54 AM

I've now done so much propaganda for that model, I really should have gotten mine for free.

Your propaganda would have to help sales in order to do that. $3200-$3500 for a non-vintage bass that won't cover the tonal needs of most bassists is never going to sell much. Not that Gibson ever expected it to.

uwe · January 08, 2016, 01:20:20 PM

"Whaddaya mean, no free bass?!!!"

"Not that Gibson ever expected it to."

True, it's a vanity model.

nofi · January 08, 2016, 01:25:10 PM

is that little joey goebbels.

uwe · January 11, 2016, 11:22:34 AM

Of course, a propaganda purveyor if there ever was one. Also probably (for me at least) the most interesting of the Nazi greats, a cynic and intellectual, comparatively unmilitary (he never served) and at the same time with a fervent adulation for Hitler bordering on the religious even though he was well aware that Hitler was not an intellectual at all and did not really take Goebbels seriously (he never consulted with him in military matters, Goebbels regularly only found out about new military offensives after they had already commenced). He had brains enough to realize long before Hitler that the war was lost for Germany and that there would be no Wunderwaffen to help the Reich change the tide, yet he stayed faithful (and longer than the Himmlers, Görings, Speers, Bormanns and what have you of this world) until the very end, even after Hitler's end: He was addicted to the Führer's personality. Yet he considered Mein Kampf to be "unbearably badly written".

Basvarken · January 31, 2016, 07:49:19 AM

What about that new Ibanez Artcore? Same "problem" with too large F-holes. But I have to admit it looks damn sexy with the worn wood look.

And check out that bridge. Remind me a lot of a TH bridge by a certain Czech company

Pilgrim · January 31, 2016, 07:23:52 PM

I like it. The body is a bit larger and the F-holes don't bother me.

Dave W · January 31, 2016, 11:07:06 PM

I'm not sure the Artcore body is bigger, although it looks that way at first glance. The waist appears to be lower than on the Gibson and the f-holes are definitely placed lower; that makes the upper bouts seem wider and the body larger.

Pilgrim · February 01, 2016, 09:37:29 AM

You're probably right; to me the visual is better.

hieronymous · February 24, 2016, 11:00:40 AM

I played one today. Didn't mean to, the guy at the store kind of shoved it on me. Played it through a 2X8 TC Electronics combo (BG250-208?).

A few observations:
1. It sounded nice! Came strung with flatwounds which is kind of surprising in this day and age - looks like they are stock - nice fat sound.

2. The tuners are small open back Hipshots in matte finish - that was weird! Looked very out of place to me - in my opinion they didn't match the aesthetic of the bass.

3. The different pickups didn't sound that different. Neck pup soloed wasn't that different from both pups together, and even the bridge pup soloed wasn't as thin sounding as I would expect, though it's obviously related to the fact that it's strung with flats.

4. My hair is definitely thinning on top.

5. I was much more impressed with the $250 Tobias Toby Deluxe IV - the Les Paul I put down pretty quick, but the Toby I played for 5-10 minutes.