#Reverb lp reviews serial number#
#Reverb lp reviews code#

It certainly looks lovely, with a beautiful deep top carve, perfect open-book headstock, and period accurate details such as body binding that does not obscure the cheeky little peek-a-boo from the maple cap in the horn’s cutaway, which for some reason is reassuring to see.

#Reverb lp reviews serial number#

The Edwards E-LP-98LTS I have here, an ’08 if the serial number is to be believed, is based, like most Edwards Les Pauls, on a ’59, widely appreciated as the zenith of Les Paul production.

Do you care about tone, feel and quality alone, or do you also care about a name? How about origin? The Physical

Every Edwards Les Paul discussion thread is packed with Gibson players who’ll put their Eddies up against anything short of a Historic, and always holds a handful of lifetimers who’ve sold up their ‘real’ Les Pauls after finding Edwards, citing comparable playability and tone that made having an extra $2,500 tied up in each Gibson seem needless. The Edwards line, by ESP, is not the most forensically accurate of the lot - although it is closer to a ’59 than Gibson now makes - but their quality has made them the most prominent models currently produced, relatively easy to obtain for guitars not legally for sale in the US, and let’s be clear: Westerners snapping these up love them ecstatically. Greco, Orville, Burny, Tokai… there are many beloved, high grade versions.

#Reverb lp reviews code#

If you seek that classic Les Paul configuration of woods, cut and controls, but balk at Gibson’s blue moon quality control that makes finding a good one a random event, or its absurd why does that zip code have a dollar sign pricing, then you want to look at the Les Pauls of Japan, past and present. This history explains why stunning, dead-on copies of Les Pauls continue to be made and sold in Japan, and not of course in the US, where Gibson maintains its copyright and will kill you with knives and acid if you produce an LP copy.

Amid so many unchallenged copies, Gibson’s design became recognized as a standard, general template for electric guitars, and the Gibson Les Paul is not seen as the source of this but simply as one implementation of it among versions from dozens of manufacturers.

Consumers, the court says, can tell the difference between Gibson and domestic brands - they are not being hoodwinked into thinking they’re buying a Gibson just because it’s the same shape as a Les Paul, as Gibson alleged.

Gibson waited too long to complain, as over 30 brands had been cranking out Les Paul copies in Japan for more than 20 years before they got around to having a moan in 1993.

If reams of legal waffle, even about electric guitars, cannot appeal, then the salient results of the case are these: If only to read a stiff, sober Japanese legal account of rock and roll, which “allows musical expression in a lively manner,” and how this genre made possible the electric guitar solo, driving the instrument’s iconic status (and thus sales). Intellectual property law is not the sexiest of subjects, but the committed are invited to read the court’s decision (and some helpful commentary) in this PDF. When Gibson sued Fernandes for trademark infringement, dilution, and unfair competition for selling Les Paul copies in Japan (under the Burny brand), the Tokyo High Court ruled, on February 24, 2000, in favor of Fernandes, finding that the form of the Les Paul had become, by this point, generic.