150's are not Les Pauls!

[Guest HRB853370]

Ever notice that 150's and 157's are frequently listed on Ebay as Les Pauls? This must drive Gibson nuts-have you ever seen a Gibson Les Paul listed as a Heritage? Nope!

[SouthpawGuy]

There was an '80s Gibson Les Paul Heritage model, a pre cursor to the R9s etc of today I think.

 

http://www.lespaulfo...suearticle.html

 

As for listing 150s as Les Pauls obviously it probably gets more hits on Ebay searches, whether it helps make a sale or not who knows

[Guest HRB853370]

There was an '80s Gibson Les Paul Heritage model, a pre cursor to the R9s etc of today I think.

 

http://www.lespaulfo...suearticle.html

 

As for listing 150s as Les Pauls obviously it probably gets more hits on Ebay searches, whether it helps make a sale or not who knows

 

Of course, it is also called key word spamming which Ebay can enforce and end the auction immediately. Have seen it happen.

[Bonenut]

I wonder if descriptions like 'heritage cherry' are part of the Gibson revenge strategy? Maybe it's time for Ebay to exert a bit of control over misleading listings.

 

Of course, legal continuity is only one kind of continuity with the past. Didn't Leo Fender still make 'Fenders' after he sold the company? I doubt that many here think that Gibson still fully honours the traditions it inherited. Perhaps other companies do a better job of honouring those traditions.

 

That said, is the 'Les Paul' name trademarked? Even if it is I suppose you can only sue rival companies and not isolated Ebay listers.

[smurph1]

I wonder if descriptions like 'heritage cherry' are part of the Gibson revenge strategy? Maybe it's time for Ebay to exert a bit of control over misleading listings.

 

Of course, legal continuity is only one kind of continuity with the past. Didn't Leo Fender still make 'Fenders' after he sold the company? I doubt that many here think that Gibson still fully honours the traditions it inherited. Perhaps other companies do a better job of honouring those traditions.

 

That said, is the 'Les Paul' name trademarked? Even if it is I suppose you can only sue rival companies and not isolated Ebay listers.

Oh Yeah it's trademarked allright...As far as Leo making Fenders after he sold the company, no he didn't..He started making G&L's which some people including me,think are better instruments than the F brand versions..As always YMMV..

[hinesarchtop]

Do a search for Gibson Kalamazoo Award guitar and click on images. You'll find where Heritage got the ideas for how to dress their guitars up. It goes back and forth.

[kbp810]

I once had myself caught up in a casual conversation that turned to guitars, and then to Heritage, of course, in which I actually made an attempt at trying to describe the 150 and 157 without using the term "Les Paul" - didn't take too long before I caved and dropped the term "Les Paul body style" in order to scathe off the blank stares and confused looks that were quickly developing.

 

I know that's not the same thing as using it in a listing where a picture is present and already means a thousand words, but I think it shows how universally accepted of a term "Les Paul" is for describing the body style... so that being said, I wonder how many of these may just be among the Heritage "uninitiated" who are adding the "Les Paul" term simply because they honestly believe it's an accurate descriptive term to use.

[bolero]

that kalamazoo award gtr is pretty funky!! must be rare

 

I always tell people my 150 is like a Les Paul but better

[the jayce]

I guess i dont understand why heritage owners get so upset when thier guitars are referred to as gibson copies/or modeled after ect ect. It's because they are......... the les paul was developed by gibson by and for les paul. The gibson 355 and all thier archtops ect are thier designs and heritage keeps the heritage alive by building gibson modeled guitars from the old days of gibbys prime.

 

Us owning one doesnt make them less of a copy of the originals. But im fine with that, I think what the boys at heritage are doing is great. Look at the guitars we get for the money.

 

Changing the headstock shape and altering the horn a tad and slapping a different name isnt gonna hide what thier modeling after. When someone lists them as a lespaul, its because thier trying to get the masses to look at the guitar and auction, because the masses doesnt even know what a heritage is and will be chalked up as another onother guitar company trying to sell a copy. Theres been hundreds of great guitar company that do this, heritage is different because it's owned by ex gibby employees that built the originals. Yes I get a little put off when people tell me my 157 is just a copy of the real thing, but i know it's quality and what i have and thats all that matters. But in the end are these accusers of copy really wrong in thier assumption, no! But who cares. I love my les paul copy.

 

This is the very reason why I have always stressed the importance of heritage advancing in strictly heritage designs and marketing the hell out them and get a name based on them and not what they mirror the image of with the gibson models. Because sooner or later reinventing gibsons wheel isnt going to fly with up and coming guitar players.The lespaul and 355 styled guitars are great but its high time thier some new stuff on the market to look at and play. Everybody and thier brother has a lp or copy and a 355 or copy, and they have been around for over 50 years now. sure would be nice to see somthing different rock the guitar world, i hope its heritage that designs it and not gibson for the millionth time. but if they dont quite reinventing the wheel everyday im afraid thats all they will ever accomplish. you can bet gibson knows this and yes they have had plenty of flops but they will hit on somthing big again because thier trying to. Is heritage??

[brentrocks]

if people want a gibson, they will buy a gibson

[the jayce]

if people want a gibson, they will buy a gibson

Very true depending on wether thier wallet agree's to it and gives them permission.

[Guest HRB853370]

I once had myself caught up in a casual conversation that turned to guitars, and then to Heritage, of course, in which I actually made an attempt at trying to describe the 150 and 157 without using the term "Les Paul" - didn't take too long before I caved and dropped the term "Les Paul body style" in order to scathe off the blank stares and confused looks that were quickly developing.

 

I know that's not the same thing as using it in a listing where a picture is present and already means a thousand words, but I think it shows how universally accepted of a term "Les Paul" is for describing the body style... so that being said, I wonder how many of these may just be among the Heritage "uninitiated" who are adding the "Les Paul" term simply because they honestly believe it's an accurate descriptive term to use.

 

I think you nailed it KPB. I don't believe they do it to be dishonest or to be deceitful. Some do it just to get more hits in a search. Most I think just describe it generically as a Les Paul, just like we call a cola a Coke or a tissue a Kleenex or a G&L Legacy a Strat. Its easier to identify and relate to as the body shape is so well known.

[Guest HRB853370]

I guess i dont understand why heritage owners get so upset when thier guitars are referred to as gibson copies/or modeled after ect ect. It's because they are......... the les paul was developed by gibson by and for les paul. The gibson 355 and all thier archtops ect are thier designs and heritage keeps the heritage alive by building gibson modeled guitars from the old days of gibbys prime.

 

Us owning one doesnt make them less of a copy of the originals. But im fine with that, I think what the boys at heritage are doing is great. Look at the guitars we get for the money.

 

Changing the headstock shape and altering the horn a tad and slapping a different name isnt gonna hide what thier modeling after. When someone lists them as a lespaul, its because thier trying to get the masses to look at the guitar and auction, because the masses doesnt even know what a heritage is and will be chalked up as another onother guitar company trying to sell a copy. Theres been hundreds of great guitar company that do this, heritage is different because it's owned by ex gibby employees that built the originals. Yes I get a little put off when people tell me my 157 is just a copy of the real thing, but i know it's quality and what i have and thats all that matters. But in the end are these accusers of copy really wrong in thier assumption, no! But who cares. I love my les paul copy.

 

This is the very reason why I have always stressed the importance of heritage advancing in strictly heritage designs and marketing the hell out them and get a name based on them and not what they mirror the image of with the gibson models. Because sooner or later reinventing gibsons wheel isnt going to fly with up and coming guitar players.The lespaul and 355 styled guitars are great but its high time thier some new stuff on the market to look at and play. Everybody and thier brother has a lp or copy and a 355 or copy, and they have been around for over 50 years now. sure would be nice to see somthing different rock the guitar world, i hope its heritage that designs it and not gibson for the millionth time. but if they dont quite reinventing the wheel everyday im afraid thats all they will ever accomplish. you can bet gibson knows this and yes they have had plenty of flops but they will hit on somthing big again because thier trying to. Is heritage??

 

Don't count on Heritage creating their own "Firebird X or 150 Robot". Won't happen!

[brentrocks]

there are a lot of cork sniffers out there that would not lower themselves to buy a Heritage or a Hamer or a G&L

[TalismanRich]

Yeah, but those same cork sniffers would crow about having a Tom Anderson Classic (strat) or a Drop T (tele), or Kirn Barnbuster (tele) or a Suhr Classic (strat) or Classic T (tele), or a Grosh, or a Melancon or a Lentz, or any number of "Fender" style guitars.

 

Why can't they accept that Heritage might make better version of a classic Gibson design?

[SouthpawGuy]

there are a lot of cork sniffers out there that would not lower themselves to buy a Heritage or a Hamer or a G&L

 

There are also a lot of players who haven't heard of Heritage or G&L.

 

I was talking to a local lefty player,who's been playing twenty years, and he asked me what I was playing. I responded with Heritage and G&L and was greeted by a blank stare, at which point I laughed loudly ! The mentality of the big three, tele strat and les paul, is so embedded in the minds of so many players it's not funny.

[the jayce]

 

Don't count on Heritage creating their own "Firebird X or 150 Robot". Won't happen!

The firebird x was very cool. I wouldnt be against one. The robot is just a malfunction waiting to happen and most people just wouldnt chance it for that kind of money.

[the jayce]

 

There are also a lot of players who haven't heard of Heritage or G&L.

 

I was talking to a local lefty player,who's been playing twenty years, and he asked me what I was playing. I responded with Heritage and G&L and was greeted by a blank stare, at which point I laughed loudly ! The mentality of the big three, tele strat and les paul, is so embedded in the minds of so many players it's not funny.

I have been told so many times by guys i have try to sell heritages on , and i quote ( if im gonna spend over a grand on a guitar it's gonna be the real deal) and i cannot describe how mad that makes me. But thats the mentality of 95% of guitarists. The big three or nothing. no convincing them otherwise. Believe me iv'e tried!

[heritagefan7]

I find that lots of people aound here know "of" Heritage and believe that Heritage is a good product. In fact, recently I mentioned Heritage to an instructor who said, "Oh yeah, those are the Gibson copies"...but then stopped himself and said, "Well, their not really copies." SO, I think that some folks know ABOUT Heritage but as others have said, Heritage isn't a marketing giant like Gibby or Fender and so doesn't get the exposure on the cover of magazines or on rock videos or award shows. I even talked w/ a music store owner this week who said tht he thought abt carrying Heritage & tht they were great guitars...but he didn't feel tht the name recognition was enough to sell the product, so--he carrys PRS, G&L, Daisy Rock, and some entry level stuff like Cort. I think it's a shame....But as others said, I'm glad that Heritage doesn't cost what Gibby does and that the product (IMHO) is much, much better.

 

Final Note---just read a thread form the Les Paul Forum entitled "What's all the hype over Heritage?" 95% of the respondants were Gibby owners and Pro Heritage! I thought that was really awesome! (Being a gibby owner, but a Heritage loyalist!)

[H555rocks]

there are a lot of cork sniffers out there that would not lower themselves to buy a Heritage or a Hamer or a G&L

That stinks for them, more gits for us;)

[knopfler74]

I'm a newbie here, but I'll weigh in on this one.

I've only been playing guitar for four years, but when I started I purchased my first electric at Steilberg String Instruments in Louisville, Kentucky. They sold G&L and Heritage, and the guys that work at the store, both employees and lesson teachers, all described the G&L and Heritage guitars as "The way a Fender and Gibson SHOULD be, but aren't." In fact my teacher, Craig Wagner ( plays Buscarrino guitars - can you say $$$$ damn!) said the Heritage and G&L guitars were FAR and away better made than Gibson and Fender. I not sure that's totally true in every instance, but I once had a Les Paul classic and compared to my 157, the Gibson was a tinker toy. Not even in the same ballpark. Now, I may have had a lemon Gibson, but man, how many horror stories about poor playing Gibson guitars have we all heard? For my part, I've heard and actually played plenty. I've honestly never heard a bad thing about Heritage's quality, sound, cost, etc...

After four years of experimenting and losing money on trades, sales etc...I've settled more than happily on the Heritage 157 I recently purchased. I also have a Warmoth Strat that is just MILES beyond the American strat I used to have. My only complaint? I had to trade in my G&L ASAT classic to get the Heritage....I'm sure I'll be gassing for another G&L in the future, but the Heritage and Warmoth will have to be pried from my cold dead hands...

[barrymclark]

I have been told so many times by guys i have try to sell heritages on , and i quote ( if im gonna spend over a grand on a guitar it's gonna be the real deal) and i cannot describe how mad that makes me. But thats the mentality of 95% of guitarists. The big three or nothing. no convincing them otherwise. Believe me iv'e tried!

It's alright. Really. I worked in guitar retail for the better part of a decade before settling into my career in fire protection design & engineering. You really get comfortable with the fact that most people really aren't interested in growing in guitar. They just want to look like their heroes in their minds. As a salesman, I can tell you GIbsons would sit on the wall for months before they sold. Heritages might last a day when they came in used. There was a reason for this. You'd get honest musicians come in looking for something in the way of a Les Paul or something. They'd start to play the Gibsons on the wall and once they got sick of going through roller coaster necks, I'd point them to the Heritage we just got in. You could see the hooks catch their lip after a chord or two. They'd just start playing and wouldn't stop. After awhile reality set back in that they didn't own the guitar they were loving up and sought to fix that issue.

 

Heritage is really for musicians. In fact, to find someone who isn't really a player know about them is pretty rare. I am ok with that. I see guitar owners like the voting public. Most of them are pretty ignorant to most everything around them and will pretty much buy anything their preferred party tells them about the other party regardless of how much they say they don't trust any politician. I stopped trying to save the world that way... and I stopped trying to save the guitar world with Heritage. I found in both cases that the world doesn't want to be saved for the most part. ...so its a losing battle.

[Guest HRB853370]

It's alright. Really. I worked in guitar retail for the better part of a decade before settling into my career in fire protection design & engineering. You really get comfortable with the fact that most people really aren't interested in growing in guitar. They just want to look like their heroes in their minds. As a salesman, I can tell you GIbsons would sit on the wall for months before they sold. Heritages might last a day when they came in used. There was a reason for this. You'd get honest musicians come in looking for something in the way of a Les Paul or something. They'd start to play the Gibsons on the wall and once they got sick of going through roller coaster necks, I'd point them to the Heritage we just got in. You could see the hooks catch their lip after a chord or two. They'd just start playing and wouldn't stop. After awhile reality set back in that they didn't own the guitar they were loving up and sought to fix that issue.

 

Heritage is really for musicians. In fact, to find someone who isn't really a player know about them is pretty rare. I am ok with that. I see guitar owners like the voting public. Most of them are pretty ignorant to most everything around them and will pretty much buy anything their preferred party tells them about the other party regardless of how much they say they don't trust any politician. I stopped trying to save the world that way... and I stopped trying to save the guitar world with Heritage. I found in both cases that the world doesn't want to be saved for the most part. ...so its a losing battle.

 

Pretty well said Barry. Those in the know will gravitate to Heritage or similarly manufactured brands. Those who want to look like their heroes on stage will buy a Gibson, PRS or Fender. But it is an educational process too. Take for example, the new HOC member, Lachiron, who has a 13 year old son who is playing better than I ever will; his dad has educated him about Heritage and the son wants one; he could care less about owning a Gibby, PRS or Fendy.

[mark555]

Oh Yeah it's trademarked allright...As far as Leo making Fenders after he sold the company, no he didn't..He started making G&L's which some people including me,think are better instruments than the F brand versions..As always YMMV..

 

The early Tokai's were called "Les Paul reborn" - well, some one had a to get the ball rolling on better Les Pauls, but yes, that is what started the law suit era.

[conorb]

there are a lot of cork sniffers out there that would not lower themselves to buy a Heritage or a Hamer or a G&L

 

That's one of the reasons why I love my Heritage and Hamer guitars.

 

Oh, and they're great guitars. That helps as well.

 

conorb