CDee wrote
Well, to start off, thanks for all the input. I'm not offended by anyone's post. I do appreciate the feeling in this forum to "protect members" and inform them of potentially "bad decisions". That is what we are here for, we all need to learn for each other.
What this thread has done is, it let me investigate the differences between the Studio and Standard and Customs a bit. Now I can make a better informed decision.
I was just excited about the fact that the R vs $ is currently making it possible for me again to look at Gibson.
Well thank goodness. From the horses mouth ?
That's all I was saying. The Studio is an affordable, carved top, Gibson-branded LP. I had a friend who owned one in the '90s. It was a very decent guitar - significantly better put together than Epiphone LPs at the time. It's very noticeably different from a Standard or a Custom. But that doesn't mean I'm saying it's a bad guitar.
With the good exchange rate, I'd rather look at a more traditionally styled guitar like the LP Traditional ( :?). The American prices for these are very reasonable. So if you're paying in the ballpark ($1800 or so as opposed to the $3,000 for one recently reported on sale in Durbs in a thread on GFSA) then I'd say it's a more traditional option. My concern was that they aren't making the new Studios to the same spec as the old ones. And I thought you should know that.
But in your shoes, and I doubt Rheinard would disagree with me here, I'd buy second hand. You could get a Les Paul Classic for not much more than that Studio from the States second hand. And the Les Paul Fadeds (although not terribly attractive IMO) have a reputation as some of Gibson's best factory LPs in the last 20 years.
