Andy,
I will agree on most points. But, my reason for purchasing the VOS was that all the standards that GC had; 1. were weight releaved, 2. fit and finish were not as nice, 3. they did not sound as good as the VOS I picked out. And OOO I looked for many months at all the standards and classics that came in and out of the store. It mostly boiled down to how the guitar felt and sounded. I would have loved to have picked up a less expensive standard or classic but could not find one that was "right".
Andy---you mention something VERY important that I left off my post. Standard LP's are
weight relieved which means in plane english they actually have appx 9 large holes routed out in the main body to lower the weight. That was never part of LP's original design and is no small change. When I retired my "classic" 1960 Gold top LP for the Historic I took it too a guy I know who has a super high-end weight scale at his store and weighed both guitars. In spite of the "weight relief" holes in the Classic LP it came to 10.5 LB's the non-weight releived Historic RO comes to 8.10 lb's. My LP Custom 1979 came to 12.5LBS

The difference between 10.5lb and 8.10lb is quickly noticable when you strap it on. Especially after a 2hr show or rehearsal.
I alos forgot Historics use Nitro-cellulous
spelling? Laquer opposed to poly on standards. These are two very different animals I can tell you. I have some Nitro-cell in my shop room and it's not at all like poly.
Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:37 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I'll brand myself a heretic right here and now and say that I don't see jack of difference between the Standard and the Historic to justify more than twice the price for a cherry sunburst Les Paul.
I have no complaints about the quality of wood in my Standard, but even if the Historic is a "higher" quality of wood, go down to the fine woods dealer and see how much difference that comes out to. It ain't thousands, not even hundreds for the amount you need to make a guitar. Maybe $50?
All the spec differences don't add up to the price difference either. Does it really take that much labor to make the neck tenon longer, the headstock and neck angle different? Hey, they carve less wood out of the Historic's top, so it should be cheaper on labor........and for all the PR they put into it I don't doubt for one second that either guitar's parts are loaded onto a CNC machine and carved, with just a different program loaded........
It all adds up to a big spin for those who can't get over that Les Pauls aren't made exactly the same as they used to be to my ears....and hands. If that makes the difference in the way you percieve the guitar, cool. I've played a real Gibson from the golden ages quite a bit growing up, my '06 Les Paul Standard plays and feels no worse to me. My only complaint is still the pickups......lo and behold, the Historic uses the same pickups as my Standard without the wax and with an A2 instead of an A5.........
I'd give them $3K tops for the '59 Historic compared to my $2K Standard, anything else is highway robbery.
Rip away on me.........
Hey Flames no ripping will come from me as I really appreciate your post. I would like to just note a few things in the spirit of healthy discussion

.
We all have valid gripes with Marshall, Gibson etc. My main gripe with Gibson is this:
Why sell a guitar and call it something it has little in common with???
Like Andy noted "weight relief" is another serious departure from the original design and illuminates a clear difference in wood they use if they have to drill alot of holes to reduce weight, which still does not approach a historic weight with no relief holes. Sure the wood may only cost 50.00 more per block to aquire but it is different grade of wood no less.
Dropping the Long Neck Tenon in lieu of a glued neck in heel is another serious design departure. A neck going through a body instead being glued into the heel is not something to dismiss.
Locating the TP and ABR, controls and cavity, Headstock pitch in the right place are important and necessary if you a going to sell a true Les Paul design. I do think those apps are going to also have a cumilitive effect in conjunction with more serious structural apps like non-weight relief, correct wood grade and Long neck Tenon.
I will draw a parallel: there are people who think the Marshall HW series is Marshall just trying to add some old looking guts to garner more money etc and the net result is nill compared to a standard SLP reissue. But I think we all now here on Metro that Marshall took a step in right direction using PTP boards, better components etc...sure no doubt due to demand and potential $$$. We also know that the HW's can be tweaked for futher goodness i.e replace OT, better glass and NOS Mustard coupling caps which
does make a clear difference.
I look at the Historic line the same way as I do the HW series amps. A more accurate production design needing some tweaking to taste.
New A LP Standard is appx 2k, a historic at appx 4-5k. You can find a used Historic around 3 if you really shop. Considering what they offer in a considerably more accurate design I don't see the price being excessive or shocking. After working in studios for years and now having built one myself I encounter engineers young and old that often say, to get that last extra 5%-10% of quality in gear thats where the rub ($$$) comes in, you pay alot more money for that final extra gain that sets it apart from the rest. It's often true IME. I really feel the same applies here, except you get more like 15-20% more gain in a Historic especially after tweaking.
For me I found the best tool I could find thus far in this Historic RO and it was worth the extra $$. I am not a guitar collector and only have two intruments. The RO and a Fender/Parsons Tele B-bender as a back up. My Marshalls, guitars, studio equip the whole lot are just a means to and end. The band, music and the idea's are the most important.
Cheers,
Eric