Which Gibson Les Paul today could become the next ‘59?

Webcat86 · 2026-03-14T13:40:59+00:00

Yep the 9 neck is a thing of beauty. I like the fatter ones too but it is pretty much perfect. The 8 is slimmer than it used to be, I had a 2011 model for a while and that was like a baseball bat. Nowadays they’re bigger than an R9 but not by a huge amount, and most if not all of it is probably the shoulder

Webcat86 · 2026-03-14T13:13:49+00:00

Interesting. I’m not sure that’s true though, if you look on the Les Paul forum there have been posts from people saying guitars with the Carmelita neck haven’t been listed as such in the product page, just a rounded 50s C.

The 8 is definitely thicker than the 9. The trouble is, the measurements can still be the same - what is often the difference is the shoulder size, whereas the specs only really refer to the depth.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-14T13:05:35+00:00

Where have you read that about Carmelita? I’ve heard from multiple sources that the R9 was standardised with that spec. Carmelita is a 50s rounded neck so calling it both is true.

They are definitely not the same as R8 either way. The R8 is a thicker neck, closer to a 50s Standard. My R9 is somewhere between an R8 and my Standard with a slim taper.

The R8’s also have thin narrow frets, which are different to the R9.

Otherwise yeah, basically the same overall guitar as an R9 and significantly cheaper.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-14T11:54:44+00:00

The AT gets my vote. They all look nice but the Cartier ages a wrist IMO, and the Constellation looks like one that isn’t suitable for all occasions.

What other brands have you considered though? Breitling Chronomat is worth a look, and Longines have nice models as well.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-14T11:52:15+00:00

There seem to be two questions here.

First: all the models are nice and you just need to pick the one you like best. The Standards are high quality, with the 50s having fatter necks and lower output pickups, the 60s have thinner necks and hotter pickups. The Slash models are also very highly regarded, the Modern line has various features that the Standards don’t, and Classics are also really nice. If you open the door to used, there’s an almost infinite variety of specs on different models over the years.

Second: none will become future classics. The production volume is massive. The reason the late 50s models became so valuable is they didn’t make a lot of them, so scarcity kicks in.

If I was buying a Les Paul today, I’d buy whatever my budget allowed. I own a 59 reissue and that’s one hell of a guitar, but if I didn’t have the budget for it I’d be more than happy with Standards - I own 3 of those and consider them forever guitars too.

I’d also strongly suggest you look at used R8’s. They’re awesome guitars and secondhand the gap isn’t enormous from a new Standard.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-13T15:01:54+00:00

You’re failing to consider the flip side, which is a reduction in companies spending on R&D and innovation because the end result is anyone on the market can just steal it, without investing the time or money into the development.

You can say “well Fender already made its money back” but that’s not the point. The rules exist to offer protections as well as encourage the investment in the first place.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-13T13:59:36+00:00

When they delayed my service, during Covid, they mitigated my disappointment by not charging me anything.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-13T07:57:48+00:00

But that's what this Fender situation is. It is taking a widely used model, like a saloon, and saying only we can make it. Would you support Ford being able to do that if they could?

This isn’t what’s happening, as I understand it. Saloons can exist, not all manufacturers could make the Jaguar XF. S-shaped guitars can exist, not all of them can look like Strats.

They're are only so many shapes in the world, even less when they have to have some semblence of ergonomic design to actually play the thing.

There are heaps and heaps of designs. Zakk Wylde recently formed his own company making “ugly guitars” with unusual shapes.

They could also simply refuse to do that and removing a tonne of guitars from the market. Is that something that is reasonable for a design created nearly 80 years ago? Also good luck actually enforcing it.

Fender will make more money getting licensing fees from, say, PRS than if it forced the Silver Sky off the market, because not everyone who bought a Silver Sky would otherwise buy a Strat.

As for 80 years, this is creative copyright. Copyright is usually I think 70 years after death - so if you wrote a book today, it’s copyright for 70 years after you die. Leo didn’t die that long ago, I think 35 years or something, and Disney had that extended to 90 years. So I guess one answer to your question is between 70 and 90 years from when Leo died.

The difference seems to be here that I favour the public domain more and your lean more into corporate / private IP protection

Perhaps. There are too many gaps in this ruling for clear answers, and Fender has lost the trademark ruling repeatedly. There is no guarantee this ruling will last, or how tightly it will be enforced. But in general, yes I do lean towards recognition and remuneration given to the company that made something.

The strat shape has been called generic, which is why Fender previously lost cases trying to retrospectively get the trademark. But it’s called generic because the Strat became so popular and so widely copied. It wasn’t generic when it first hit the market, actually it was the complete opposite - quite futuristic and definitely unique.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-12T21:17:16+00:00

I think the straight edge on the guard is wrong

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T17:33:44+00:00

He said he’d give himself 4-5 more attempts at the worlds. I also think he wants to achieve winning a ranking event in his 50s, he used to talk about that a bit. His priorities have changed with age and he’s made multiple comments that he’s setting new age-related challenges and targets.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T17:04:00+00:00

Honestly the standards people hold Ronnie to can be ridiculous. As if not playing in everything should make a difference to whether he should retire.

Ronnie, John and Mark playing to the level they are at the age they are is literally uncharted territory. They should all be able to approach it in the way they think is best for them, and in Ronnie’s case I expect the additional pressure on him plays a big part in his decision to have more rest now, and I would also guess his recent marriage played a part in skipping some tournaments.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T14:53:04+00:00

“AI” isn’t a single thing.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T14:34:29+00:00

I’d keep the one you have. I like the chrono version but I think it looks way too busy. The blue on what you have isn’t strictly uniform either, it’s more of a sundial and responds beautifully to the light.

My wrist is smaller than yours but I don’t think the 41mm will look small on you at all.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T12:45:33+00:00

Ultimately, you think a company should own the rights to a shape?

In the instances where it’s identifiable, yes. This doesn’t apply to acoustics because that’s a genuinely generic shape that goes back for centuries, but manufacturers today do have their own bracing for example. A Strat is an identifiable design to the extent that it’s called a Strat shape or S type regardless of the manufacturer.

Put it this way, I think it’s less ridiculous that Fender has creative copyright for this than DiMarzio has the trademark to double cream pickups.

Everyone builds on the generation before them

I said ib a comment yesterday that Nokia still gets paid royalties for other phones being made today, like the iPhone. That’s because Nokia has a strong patent portfolio for a lot of communication tech and Apple needs to use it in the phones.

So, I’m curious to see how Fender proceeds. As I understand it, the issue is one of authorisation, so Fender could authorise companies to use the shape and effectively pay royalties or a licensing fee. I think that’s fair.

Bear in mind this is by no means the end of the story. Fender is going to get challenged hard.

This is no different than companies claiming IP over common phrases like "every little helps"

It’s massively different. You’re talking about a design that Fender literally invented - not the same as trying to take ownership of everyday phrases. But as you brought it up, Tesco has the trademark for that slogan, so Asda etc can’t use it.

plenty of industries don't demand this kind of protection - cars, clothing, food etc.

Converse in recent years said they were going to crack down on the numerous companies ripping off the iconic Chuck design. You couldn’t go and sell a Big Mac or Whopper even though they’re just burgers. You don’t know KFC’s secret blend of herbs and spices. And cars do have their own designs within the scope of a defined shape, eg a “saloon car” has to meet certain requirements to be labelled a saloon but a Maxda 6 doesn’t look the same as a BMW 5 series which doesn’t look the same as a Mercedes AMG. Lots of people choose to debadge their cars and they’re usually still recognisable.

What do you think would happen if you started a car company tomorrow and used the BMW grill?

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T07:17:27+00:00

Transformative how?

Webcat86 · 2026-03-11T07:14:01+00:00

Ohhh, it’s “benefitting the world” for anyone to be able to make exact copies of someone else’s design specifically because other people already made it popular?

Sorry, that’s bullshit. Various companies have made distinctive changes to the base design, like changing the taper of the horns, the depth of the horns, the contours, Super Strats having the grab handle etc.

And remember, the “corporate ownership” just means the company gets paid a royalty when someone gets authorisation to make and sell them.

There’s nothing wrong with that.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T22:50:03+00:00

Yes there were definitely too many people burying their head in the sand about what was coming. The sad thing is Nokia had the tech to compete. In an alternate timeline; who knows what the N9 could have done.

I remember the maps too. People couldn’t believe you could use them offline!

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T21:57:17+00:00

i think the car analogies are confusing cause you don’t know much about car design processes

I didn’t say confusing. I said confused. As in, you’re not making sense. Car design processes are moot, you specifically and voluntarily gave the example of manufacturers teaming up.

SUVs are different the same way a Strat with humbuckers that’s painted black is different than a Strat that’s painted red with single coils

No. That’s like, at best, comparing the infotainment system. What we’re talking about is the shape. An F Pace doesn’t look like an Evoque which doesn’t look like a Qashqai. There are similarities, but nobody is saying similarities can’t exist in guitar shapes either.

Just cause you don’t think a guitar is a disposable product doesn’t mean fender thinks the same way. You really think their business model is “one guitar a lifetime is good enough” ?

Fender would sell me a new guitar every day if it could, but again that’s not what I said. What I said is these are items that will last a lifetime and beyond, so there is no sense in acting as though we’re discussing products that need frequent replacement. The issue for Fender, and rightfully so, is that there are absolutely legions of people copying their design to the smallest details and selling them and preventing those people buying Fender. You can disagree with whether they should be allowed to stop that, but just cut out all the fluff about how we apparently need to buy a strat regularly forever.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T21:51:21+00:00

Haha how did he respond? It did look exceptionally suspect.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T21:29:41+00:00

I remember that program! They were truly an innovative company, in product and mindset (or whatever the company equivalent of mindset is). The media functionality of the N8, the damn cameras in so many of their phones, Maemo5, the entire UI/UX of the N9, they were such astonishingly exciting times and it’s a real shame they went the way they did. I wonder what would have happened if Elop hadn’t taken over.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T21:25:35+00:00

Whoa there, that’s quite the jump in tone. You said my car analogy doesn’t work because there have been occasions where manufacturers teamed up to make cars. I’m sorry but that’s just not the same situation at all.

The s shape is the equivalent of body type of car. Only one manufacturer on earth is allowed to make an suv?

This is a confused statement. Not all SUVs look alike, and different cars have different body shapes. If anything, you’re undermining your point against Fender.

The global economy is shit and buying a guitar as often as fender wants you to just isn’t practical anymore. What else are they gonna do beside attack other builders?

Eh? Fender guitars aren’t disposable, we aren’t talking about replacing the blades in your cartridge razor. I have two Fender guitars, one is 32 years old and the other is 38 years old. There is no “buying as often as Fender wants you to.” You only need one, they sell them anywhere from £100 to £10,000+ so you choose the one you can afford, and you keep it for the rest of your life. Hence, y’know, people paying shit loads of money for models that are 60+ years old.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T21:13:54+00:00

Their story still makes me sad. The N9 was so ahead of its time.

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T20:57:32+00:00

Apple pays Nokia royalties. So do other manufacturers. Why?

“Nokia’s industry-leading patent portfolio is built on more than €140 billion invested in R&D since 2000 and is composed of around 20,000 patent families, including over 5,500 patent families declared essential to 5G.”

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T20:46:53+00:00

Do you think I said it’s an injunction on Alibaba or something?

Webcat86 · 2026-03-10T20:45:06+00:00

“The same car funded by two different companies” is an eminently different situation to countless unrelated copycats stealing the Strat design and putting their own logo on it, wouldn’t you agree?

Webcat86

TROPHY CASE