GPD comments on the G-200 vs LP

[Craig]

[From a post on the G&LDP:Lemme throw in a few comments...if you don't mind. by
GPD on February 25, 2007 in response to this post:
The Trials and Tribulations of a G-200 posted by Dark Horse on February 25, 2007]

However, I must say that if you've never played a G-200, don't be so quick to discard its wonderful tonal pallet.
It's not like anything you've ever played. Just my 2 pesos.

This is a good point, because very few of the folks that post on this board (or anywhere else for that matter)
have actually seen a G-200 in the flesh let alone actually played one.

The G-200 is very worthy of the cult following it now enjoys. Let me run down the specifications again because
it seems a lot of folks don't really realize how close to a Gibson Les Paul they really are.

Scale length: 24.75" (Identical to a Gibson Les Paul)

Body wood: Honduran Mahogany (Same as most every Les Paul produced minus the maple cap). Remember,
the vast majority of any Les Paul is Mahogany...sure, there are some oddities and in the 70's maple necks came
into vogue but if you were to actually study a Les Paul you would quickly realize that the vast majority of this
guitar model is mahogany. In the case of the original Les Paul Custom...they were all mahogany minus the
fingerboard and headstock veneer.

Body shape: Very similar to a Les Paul with a double cutaway minus the carved top. There is a forearm and
belly contour. Kinda like a Les Paul Special though double-cut.

Neck: 1-piece maple with thin veneer ebony fingerboard. It is affixed to the body with three sheetmetal screws.
It has a six-per-side headstock. This is the most radical departure contruction-wise from the Les Paul. A Les Paul
uses the ancient but effecitve tenon/mortise attachment method. It works, it ain't anything special and any
monkey can build one. It is actually considerably cheaper to build this type of neck joint compared to the
G&L 3-bolt joint. Don't buy into the myth that this type of neck attachment is "superior" in any way. I have nothing
against either method of attachment and each has its own effect on how a guitar will sound. A bolt-on neck joint
can afford comparable resonance transfer to a glue-in if it is executed properly. Problem is, most aren't.

Fingerboard: Ebony and 24.75" scale length with a 1.625" nut width and a 12" radius. Same as a Les Paul Custom
with a slightly narrower nut width. Most Les Paul's have an Indian Rosewood board...a more porous, softer and
"sticky" species.

Pickups: Large MFD Humbuckers. These are radically different as compared to the PAF style humbucker.
They utilize considerably less copper and a significantly stronger and more efficient magnetic structure.
The efficiency of the coils dictates how these bastards get such a hot signal with so little copper on board.
They are likewise physcially smaller and sense a smaller length of string as compared to the PAF. These pickups
produce a significantly stronger signal across a broader resonance as compared to most any PAF. The resonant
peak is likewise higher meaning you will hear more treble frequencies than a Les Paul player will be used to.

Circuit: Same basic concept as a Les Paul with individual volume/tones and a 3-way toggle selector. Leo took it a step
further and threw in his G&L L1K bass splitter switch that allows for both single and humbucking possibilities with a very
slick passive bass boost setting that is extremely useful. Pots are 250K Audio Taper which are better suited for the
peaky MFD's...the additional load plays heavily into presenting a very wide resonance to the signal...something no
full-sized bucker Les Paul will ever enjoy. Most Les Pauls have either 500K or 300K potentiometers for the control circuit.

Bridge: Saddle-Lock...actually, the G-200 was the first G&L to get this version of the Saddle-Lock bridge now commonly
found on all hard-tail G&L guitars. This is a well conceived and built device that is ergonomically friendly, affords
outstanding sustain and full adjustability to accomodate different tunings, string gauges and fingerboard radii.
The Les Paul uses the 1950's design Tune-o-matic...another good and timeless fixed bridge design though certainly no
better than the Saddle-Lock from any perspective.

Keep in mind, I grew up a Gibson guy...played them for many years exclusively. When you A/B a good Les Paul to a
G-200 you actually can hear a lot of common ground. While the guitars feel completely different to your hands and
body, you can actually cop a traditional Les Paul sound and vibe though it will require rolling back the tone knobs to
muddy things up a tad. I can really feel the difference of the short Gibson scale length on the G-200...the bass strings
have that floppy Les Paul thing going on unless you bump up the gauge. Chord shapes that are normally a bit of a
stretch are somehow much easier to chord. With everything wide open, the G-200 has a clean and clear voice.
There is that typical humbucker strong low-end and midrange reponse and that compressed sweetness characteristic
of a humbucker is present. What also is present is quite a bit of treble but there is no absence of spank.
The G-200 is a more punchy sound as well. I won't go into the split sounds...as this realm of possibilities is outside
the realm of any standard Les Paul. Suffice to say, the G-200's split sounds are extremely useful (unlike just about
any split PAF guitar) and varied. My personal G-200 (a cloudplate) sustains as well or better than any Les Paul I've
ever owned or played including several of the fabled and worshipped late 50's models. So much for the <censored word>
theorty that a set neck is required for massive sustain.

I have no trouble doing the Les Paul thing with my G-200. Gary Moore, Ace Frehley, Slash, Clapton...you know what
I'm talking about...the Les Paul into the Marshall sound...it is very much in reach with the G-200.

It is no secret that I'm a single-coil guy...and my favorite Les Paul models are the 53' through 56' Standards and
Customs (not the reissue versions which are a lame approximations).

Be assured, the G-200 is a marvelous guitar. The G-200 is a considerably more versatile guitar as well. This doesn't
take anything away from the various PAF equipped Les Paul models out there...they are fine guitars too. If you love
the sounds of a Gibson Les Paul, then you most positively will love the sounds of a G-200...a G-200 can do the
Les Paul thing...no problem.

This doesn't mean you'll necessarily love the looks of the G-200 and that's OK...everybody has their poison.

Too bad most of you will never get the chance to play a G-200.

It really is a shame.


Gabe