• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Joe Walsh, EAgles and the Norlin Les Paul

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2003
Messages
3,535
So, I was watching 'The History of The Eagles' last night. There is Joe Walsh wailing away on a Norlin-era Les Paul. This is another testament that not all Gibson electrics from that era are bad guitars....as we all know. I have yet to play a Norlin-era Gibson acoustic that I would buy...except to sell....but the electrics are another story, imho.
 

sonar

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2003
Messages
3,589
I can't stand The Eagles, but if you want to talk James Gang...

http://youtu.be/l_4iQDYDVNo

Yeah, Norlin's can bring it.

It's also great to watch Jimmy Fox, one of rocks most underrated drummers.
 

roycaster

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Messages
316
I miss the ‘70s. When any guitarist could blame his gear instead himself for all of his deficiencies and all of the other deficient guitarists would agree. With even cursory reading you’ll find Gibson has never had an era without quality problems. There hasn’t been a year go by when Gibson hasn’t touted improved quality…
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,537
I don't believe Mr McCarty stayed at Gibson after Maurice Berlin left Gibson in his son's hands. Seems the two clashed. This was before Norlin I believe. I don't think he would down play his tenure or praise his successor under the circumstance.

I was in retail and worked at a Gibson dealeras well as an authorised service/repair tech in the span from 75-88. I was not aware of quality issues at that time. Quite the opposite in fact. Gibson sold way more guitars than any previous time, including under McCarty. There was no increase in warranty claim percentages and Gibson quality far exceeded all other USA manufactured brands in those years.

Body sandwich was more costly for Gibson and not a way to cut corners but to reduce waste, as has been explained in the other thread. I was ended by 75/76. Heavy was consumer driven. It was the fashion then.

Of course, Joe Walsh, Steve Manecki, Neal Shoen, Pete Townsend, Ace, Slash, Buck Dharma.. on and on .. well what did they know.

Just sayin...:ganz
 

djdersh

Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2001
Messages
249
Gibson made plenty of good guitars during the Norlin era. One of the nicest Les Paul's I've ever played is a '77 Standard. It has all the hallmarks of a Norlin era Gibson Les Paul. 10+lbs. Pancake body. 3 piece maple top. Maple neck with volute. I'm guessing it has T-top pickups because they sound great. The only thing it's ever had was a re-fret. If you were lucky enough to own a real Gibson Les Paul back in the 70's (my first was a copy) you likely owned a Norlin. Some were nice. Others not so good. YMMV...
 

oldflame

Active member
Joined
Jan 11, 2004
Messages
1,142
Gibson sold way more guitars than any previous time, including under McCarty. There was no increase in warranty claim percentages and Gibson quality far exceeded all other USA manufactured brands in those years.

Agree. I was frequenting Tottenham Court Road shops in London back in those days right through to the early 80's. There were shops like 'Boogie', Macari's and 'Top Gear'. Gibson was everywhere. Wall to wall brand new Les Pauls in stores like 'Tempo' in West London. Virtually sold themselves.

Weight wasn't an issue because back then the average punter had no idea what the difference was between a heavy Les Paul and light Les Paul. SG was light, Les Paul was heavy, end of story. Weight wise, Fender's were pretty much the same deal.

Of course, about the same time the Japanese joined the party with their original models and gave us bang for bucks.
 

sonar

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2003
Messages
3,589
I miss the ‘70s. When any guitarist could blame his gear instead himself for all of his deficiencies and all of the other deficient guitarists would agree. With even cursory reading you’ll find Gibson has never had an era without quality problems. There hasn’t been a year go by when Gibson hasn’t touted improved quality…

Players (or people who just like to collect really expensive guitars) are still blaming gear to near absurd levels. The Historic Makeover phenomena alone is enough to make most cringe.

I also respectfully disagree about Gibson Quality control during the McCarty era, especially the 50's. Other than a few design flaws I'll argue Gibson, during that time period, produced some of the finest production level guitars ever made.
 

pa-tom

New member
Joined
May 29, 2004
Messages
27
Sorry to ramble on here, but I've had good experiences with Norlin Gibson's. I have '72 and '77 Deluxes. The '72 has a pancake body, but has a great sound anyone who ever played has commented. My '77 isn't pancake, has a maple neck and sounds nice, but doesn't have the vibe of the '72. The '77 has a sunburst on the back too. I also have a '78 3 pu Custom at a tad over 11 lbs. that just sings. Maybe I got lucky.
 

roycaster

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Messages
316
There’s a big difference in noticing a difference between ‘50s and later specs and specs and whining about quality.

Think about the headstock angle. A Gibson is expense; they go through the ‘30s ‘40s and ‘50s ok. In the ‘60s the guitars end up in the hands of teenagers on drugs/alcohol and all of a sudden you are saddled with a reputation of headstock breakages that will dog into the 21st century. What do you do? You take a few degrees out of the headstock to remove some tension. Your guitars are still having an alarming number of headstock breakages, what do you do next? You add some would to help strengthen the weak area, but unfortunately get it wrong. That’s a company responding to the needs of the market, not a drop in quality.
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,537
Pancake was not a way to use scrap. That is overly simplistic and shows a basic lack of information on the subject. It was a way to reduce waste, a very different distinction.I know. I was there I saw the white wood and saw mill at Gibson Kalamazoo. I talked with several employees and sought out the ones from the 50's. Seymour Duncan and I had lunch with Mr. McCarty. I saw how and why they were built.

Market demands and consumer pressure demanded a heavy Les Paul. Again, I sold them I bought and played them and used them. You think we were all Tom Wittrocks? Look at the old mags from then, very few knew anything about 50's guitars. There wasn't a cork sniffin' army of vintage wannabees freakin' out over long gone specs. Heavy guitars sounded better, that was conventional wisdom at that time. Gibson, Fender, Gretsch and Rickenbacker ALL made solidbody guitars that were in the same weight range.

Alembic, Oasis, Kramer,(w/metal necks!), Rickenbacker, Gibson, Fender, Gretsch and many other smaller manufactures ALL used laminate wood construction in an effort to build BETTER guitars.

The Asian copies (Ibeenhads), which are so well regarded as somehow having higher quality were butcher bock assemblies of scrap wood covered in veneers.

The vast majority wanted new electric solid bodies. Gibson like all manufacturers at that time answered the call. Things were done to improve quality and reduce warranty claims. The only USA company to offer LIFETIME WARRANTY on a solidbody as well as all their guitars.

Three piece necks are stiffer and more stable. Three piece maple was only used on Gibsons top models, It was viewed as a QUALITY spec, even in the late 50's.

One only has to pick up and play a well maintained Norlin era guitar to see, feel and hear the quality.
:bigal Flawless finishes, solid hardware and electronics, excellent fit and finish. Yeah, bad quality. They are what they are. What they aren't is a retro cloned 50's guitar, so what? Didn't seem to bother the pro's who used them live and the studio. There is a whole universe of quality that extends beyond 59's, Plexi's and bellbottoms.

Norlin INC was a conglomerate of many companies. Gibson carried them and indeed did not " hemorrage money" another wrong and misleading "fact". Cripes I am so tired of people reinventing history, I lived through and know about, intimately and personaly.

just saying. :ganz
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2003
Messages
3,535
Soulweb, I agree that there were some heavy Gibsons in the pancake years....I have owned a few. They ring for days, don't they? However, I have also held some recent builds that were as heavy if not heavier than anything form theNOrlin era that I have held in my hands. I have set-up an Angus Young SG that had to weigh 11 pounds give or take a bit....and that is with that thin SG body. I have set up new Customs that have that 'Norlin era' kind of weight. I can't condemn the entire productin of modern Gibsons just because some of them are heavy.
And...as Big Al notes...there is a reason why some folks like heavy guitars. Those players are in the minority, but they are around. I didn't start this thread to get folks caught up in the never ending Norlin bashing. But....the trap was there I suppose...unintentionally. Sorry you stepped in it, soulweb.
 

Soulweb

Active member
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
1,827
Pancake was not a way to use scrap. That is overly simplistic and shows a basic lack of information on the subject.


A bunch of self searving elitist bullshit. Don't presume to lecture me on quality.

just saying. :ganz

Now, I'm a big man and this is my last post to this thread as it's turned into a waste of time...having said that -

You're joking right? :2zone I've been called a lot of things, but "elitist" is a new one on me. That's pretty far from the mark. But then, how could you know that?

In my personal opinion, pancake bodies are terrible for more reasons than I have the time or desire to list. You like em, that's great. Rock on. I especially enjoyed my 76 LPC. But frankly my 2013 R9 blows the doors off it in every respect. Again, just my opinion.

My Norlins were piles of dog feces. The ones I sold elicited the same opinions. Quite unanimously in fact. I'm only relaying my own personal experiences - just as you have done. We have different experience/memories/experiences with Norlin era guitars. Nothing I can do about it and your feelings don't change the past.

Now, you can rant and rave and waive your arms all you like. But - Sometimes you just gotta pull up them boot straps and just let people have an opinion. Even when you think they're wrong or don't agree. This is again, just my opinion, not a lecture. "just sayin'"

You're a good read Big Al. Always make me laugh. Takes a lot of brass to be so crass and still have integrity. That's a genuine compliment by the way, not sarcasm. Felt the need to explain. :dude:
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,537
Bullshit! You felt you just had to come on a thread that was about some guy some of us like, playing cool music with guitars some of us like, just to tell us all how shitty they are. You seem to really feel that need because you twist facts, state muths and falsehoods as proof, and wrap it up with how you're too discriminating to use such horrible guitars. Then you try to hide behind the ol' "it's just my opinion".

Well, not liking the guitars is your "opinion", using untrueths as facts is not. That is known as bullshit. You need to question why you even made the posts, here in the Sunburst Pub where we can talk about such matters not obsessed with all things 59 Burst. You didn't just come in and say, "Well Joe sounds OK, but I just don't like them.""

Nope you felt the need to rant and WAVE your arms with pretzel logic, twisted alternate realities and history and wrapping it up with the "opinion" blanket when you get called on it.

Honestly, don't you get it? I don't know your source, but brother trust me, there is a world of misinformation printed in poorly researched books and online jibberjabber, no one bothers to source their information, and when relying on repeated myths or legend, sourced from the same book or artical it becomes a fact by default.

I also am a student of American Revolution History. I quickly learned how misunderstood and overly simplified History becomes when the legend or myth is accepted as truth.

If I have any integrity it is in not relying on such source material. Having a pretty extensive first hand experience certainly helps.

just sayin..
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,537
:fc :bigal someday I'm gonna snap, and playstation will feel my wrath, 2X :headbange
 
Last edited:

roycaster

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Messages
316
Now, I'm a big man and this is my last post to this thread as it's turned into a waste of time...having said that -

You're joking right? :2zone I've been called a lot of things, but "elitist" is a new one on me. That's pretty far from the mark. But then, how could you know that?

In my personal opinion, pancake bodies are terrible for more reasons than I have the time or desire to list. You like em, that's great. Rock on. I especially enjoyed my 76 LPC. But frankly my 2013 R9 blows the doors off it in every respect. Again, just my opinion.

My Norlins were piles of dog feces. The ones I sold elicited the same opinions. Quite unanimously in fact. I'm only relaying my own personal experiences - just as you have done. We have different experience/memories/experiences with Norlin era guitars. Nothing I can do about it and your feelings don't change the past.

Now, you can rant and rave and waive your arms all you like. But - Sometimes you just gotta pull up them boot straps and just let people have an opinion. Even when you think they're wrong or don't agree. This is again, just my opinion, not a lecture. "just sayin'"

You're a good read Big Al. Always make me laugh. Takes a lot of brass to be so crass and still have integrity. That's a genuine compliment by the way, not sarcasm. Felt the need to explain. :dude:







There is nothing wrong with not liking pancake bodies, and there is nothing wrong with not liking heavy Les Pauls. Just say that and everything is fine.

But when you say, “My Norlins were piles of dog feces.” that is Elitist. And it begs the question why were they so bad? Which leads into the question of if they were so bad why did you buy them in the first place?
 

kharrison

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
4,225
I think it is safe to say that there were good and bad guitars throughout all years at Gibson. I've seen Joe play his 59 and his 70's LP. He sounds great no matter what he plays.
 
Top