Faded Gibson V?

[DrNewcenstein]

I've had one of these before, as well as a couple of Kahlered 80s models. Only thing I didn't like was the frets, but I've read lots of negative comments about the faded models - low grade wood, etc.

What's the real story?

[Andrew Lamprecht]

I have heard from a few different sources they import the hardware from China on the Faded models. I've never heard about low quality wood but....

[BloodRose]

I had one and it was a nice player. seem like it was kind of cobbly made tho. I figure fit and finish is all a bit of compromise to get to the lower price point. (of course they are MUCH more than they were when they came out). Ive played some fadeds that were very nice and some they looked like they were made by a child..

[whatshisname]

Mine has been my main guitar, since I got it six years ago. You won't find me making any negative comments!

[TattooedCarrot]

No complaints here. I don't care for the faded cherry look, but otherwise they are cool and great for modding. I've actually been GASing a bit for a faded black one.

[milkbone]

I have a Faded Explorer and love it! It has Grovers, don't know about the bridge and tailpiece. Mine is in faded cherry. I absolutely love the neck (finish)! So smooth and easy to play! I don't believe the "inferior" wood conspiracies (not on mine anyway). The finish does wear off though. All I have for now is a cell pic....Sorry

[DrNewcenstein]

Not worried about hardware - Jackson had a run some years back with USA-made models sporting import hardware to reach a lower price, and they're great guitars. Hardware can always be changed at a later date to bring it up to snuff, but bad wood and bad construction, you're stuck with.


Carrot - Is that a faded cherry that's been stripped? Looks nice, if it is. I once saw one that someone had a glossy coat put on aftermarket and it looked no different from the pre-faded '67 r.i. model.

However, as I said the only thing I don't like about them is the frets - they feel a bit short (especially those 80s models - felt like fretless wonders). I don't mind feeling the board, but would rather feel less of it. Maybe the ones I had just needed to be slicked up, I dunno.


Thanks guys

[uOpt]

I've had one of these before, as well as a couple of Kahlered 80s models. Only thing I didn't like was the frets, but I've read lots of negative comments about the faded models - low grade wood, etc.

What's the real story?

The one I had sounded very dark and warm, not what I wanted. I was shocked to see how different it was from my non-faded Explorer.

No problem with the frets, in fact this was one of the more trouble-free Gibsons I had. I think mine was a 2-piece body?

[St_Genesius]

OH NOES! Two pieces of guitar-forum internet lore are at odds!

On the one hand, we all KNOW that guitars with translucent/transparent finishes get "better" wood than those with opaque finishes.

On the other, we also all KNOW that in order to get a "better" piece of wood from Gibson you have to buy a Standard or above (in fact, many of you have deemed anything cheaper not a "real" Gibson).

WHAT WILL WE DO?

[TattooedCarrot]

Carrot - Is that a faded cherry that's been stripped? Looks nice, if it is. I once saw one that someone had a glossy coat put on aftermarket and it looked no different from the pre-faded '67 r.i. model.

Yep, stripped and tung oiled. Also, the routing is such that P90's will fit with no mods, just buy a custom pickguard off ebay.

[Jessie's ghost]

I've never gotten into the whole "grade of wood" thing. At least Gibson provides some information about the levels of wood they use. For what it's worth, I have no problems with the wood used in my Faded V. It looks nice, and in many ways it's among my best-sounding guitars. It has an unreal midrange punch, and it seems to gel quite well with those hot ceramic pickups. It doesn't get along well with neck relief; it sounds a lot better with a dead-on straight neck. And it's no shredder; it just doesn't do for me what a Jackson or an Ibanez can do. But it's a sweet little guitar that I could do about 90% of my playing on. The only changes I've made to it were a bone nut and sanding down the edges of the fretboard and the fret ends along with it -- they were murder on my hands.

[DrNewcenstein]

OH NOES! Two pieces of guitar-forum internet lore are at odds!

On the one hand, we all KNOW that guitars with translucent/transparent finishes get "better" wood than those with opaque finishes.

Never heard that one. However, I have worked in situations where base materials deemed "better" were reserved for a particular process and/or higher-priced bracket, while the "affordable" product range was taken from the "hit-or-miss" stock.

On the other, we also all KNOW that in order to get a "better" piece of wood from Gibson you have to buy a Standard or above (in fact, many of you have deemed anything cheaper not a "real" Gibson).

Speaking from experience, the LP Studios I played some years back felt lighter and sounded thinner (similar to an Epiphone) than the Standard I had. Maybe things have changed since then, but I'm not usually one to give second chances.

[whatshisname]

I don't give a damn about the wood. If it sounds good, it IS good.

This reminds me of a guy that bought a MIM Strat, believing it had an Alder body. He was over the moon happy with it, and couldn't believe how great it sounded.

He then found out that it was actually made of Poplar. He went from praising his guitar, to hating it, and trashing Fender for using "junk wood".

[DrNewcenstein]

How about all those guys who praise the old Charvel Model models from the 80s and bash "them new-fangled Ibenhad shredsticks" for being made of basswood - when most of the Charvels were


Alder/Poplar, makes no difference to me. Tonally they're identical anyway, which is why Jackson uses both.

However, when I think Gibson V, I think mahogany neck, and mahogany body. I don't want alder or maple or korina, I want mahogany. I want *good* mahogany, not "in the mahogany family" like cedro.

[whatshisname]

True, I'd prefer my Gibsons to be Mahogany. Although, some models(for instance, the Voodoo was Swamp Ash) have been made of other woods, and many of them sounded fantastic.

[Jessie's ghost]

This reminds me of a guy that bought a MIM Strat, believing it had an Alder body. He was over the moon happy with it, and couldn't believe how great it sounded.

He then found out that it was actually made of Poplar. He went from praising his guitar, to hating it, and trashing Fender for using "junk wood".

In reality, he was probably angry with himself for being an idiot and painting himself into a corner like that. Some people can't come around to thinking that something sounds good unless they have a bunch of reasons on paper for why it should sound good. And that's just really sad.

If a guitar doesn't sound good to you, you modify it, or get rid of it. If it does sound good, you play it. If you find out that your wife came from a white trash family and that's why you never visit them, she's still your wife. She's the same woman who did that thing with the feather duster that you liked. So she's not exactly the blue-blood she acts like in public. Big deal. Just keep your mouth shut around the guys, and you won't get kicked out of the country club.

[Andrew Lamprecht]

I've heard the translucent finish thing/using better wood before. I'm not sure that's true. I knew a guy who always bought guitars and would repaint them for people. He thinks they tend to use better looking wood but not neccesarily better sounding wood.

[St_Genesius]

And how do you think companies, when they bother to grade wood at all, grade it? Do you think they take a glance at its appearance and throw in in Stack A vs Stack B or do you think they tap each piece and measure resonance, EQ curves and the like?

These are factories, remember.

I've heard the translucent finish thing/using better wood before. I'm not sure that's true. I knew a guy who always bought guitars and would repaint them for people. He thinks they tend to use better looking wood but not neccesarily better sounding wood.

[St_Genesius]

Interesting equation. Does that mean that the heavier and darker a guitar is, the higher the perceived quality for you?

Speaking from experience, the LP Studios I played some years back felt lighter and sounded thinner (similar to an Epiphone) than the Standard I had. \

[DrNewcenstein]

Depends. For Poplar, which is easily separated from Alder due to its slightly greenish tint, you can do it visually. Same with Lacewood, Korina, Ash, and I'm sure there's a great visual difference between Indian and Honduran mahogany.

I've heard of this "tap test" but once a blank is cut and reshaped (and in some cases joined to other pieces from other blanks), you're changing the whole thing. For a 5-piece body, it doesn't matter if the one section came from a really vibrant piece when it's mated to 4 others that did not come from similar quality. If anything, someone's going to play hell trying to match pickups and amp settings to it, and it will spend its life bouncing from owner to owner.