L5S

[drboat]

Does anyone have experience playing one of these? It appears to be an L5 neck on a solid boby. Show it on Ebay for $3500

Thanks
drboat

 

[TomGuitar]

From Wikpedia...
The Gibson L5S is a solid-body electric guitar model produced by the Gibson Guitar Corporation.
Introduced in 1972, the Gibson L5S was essentially a solid-body version of the popular Gibson L-5 hollowbody. Like the L-5, it featured multiple binding on the single-cutaway body, neck, and headstock, and also featured an ebony fingerboard with block inlays. The headstock featured a flower-pot inlay similar to the L-5 archtop and most L5S models featured the L-5 trapeze tailpiece (though some had stop-bar or TP-6 fine-tuning tailpieces). However, the L5S had a thin solid body, whereas the L-5 archtop was larger in size and fully hollow. The L5S was available in various finishes, such as ebony, cherry sunburst, and natural.
Upon its introduction in 1972, the L5S featured two low-impedance pickups, similar to those found on several Gibson Les Paul models of that period, such as the Recording model, the Signature model, the Personal model, and the Professional model. This incarnation of the model was not a success, however, thus Gibson switched from low-impedance pickups to regular humbucker pickups. Though it was considered one of Gibson's more top-of-the-line models, it was still not particularly popular among guitarists. In the mid-1980s, the L5S was dropped from the Gibson line.
In 2004, the L5S was briefly reissued by the Gibson Custom Shop Division; this reissue was partly based on the black-finished single-pickup L5S that Ron Wood and Keith Richards played. However, the model was discontinued by Gibson in 2005.

I played quite a few in the 70's. Nice guitars but a little cold sounding. Ususally very flamey maple body with maple neck/ebony board. Never played the low impedance models, just the humbuckers. Played great if you like an L5 neck. A little neck heavy as I recall.

 

[Leña_Costoso]

From Wikpedia...
the Gibson L5S was essentially a solid-body version of the popular Gibson L-5 hollowbody.

And Wikipedia is full of beans! L5s's came in quite a few variations, including those mentioned. However, there were, at different times, trapeze tail, stop bar tail, and string thru the body tail. I believe the last original version had the stop bar, with string through in between.

Its more of a L6s-meets-LPCustom (with appointments) than anything else. Its very thin, only 1-1/2 inches on the one I've seen, which is about 1/8 inch thinner than an SG.

They're well appointed, sound fairly bright too. Cool flame (sorta matching) maple rear control cover that is HUGE. Thats about it. It was designed as a "luxury" model, along with "The Les Paul" and was considered top-of-the-line solid body along with TLP.

 

[Humbuck]

I've never seen one with a string thru body tail...got a pic?

 

[j45]

Here's a 1974 L5-S i had years ago. It was a special order by a Gibson dealer who collected and wanted a sensational top. His rep hooked him up and I ended up with the guitar in a trade in which I got the L5-S and a 1959 George Gobel L5-CT. The scan does not represent the depth of the flame. There were no vertical lines like you see, that is the scan. The back looked exactly like the front and the cavity cover was matching flamed maple. . I sold it to Buck Sulcer in Arlington 15 years ago for what was crazy money back then. When he saw it, he would not put it down until he got it from me. He had to have it. I bought a mint '57 Les Paul TV Special with what I got for the L5-S. I remember what it played and sounded like very well. It was heavy, stiff, thin and harsh, and felt like somebody strung up a marble slab. It was so heavy and stiff it would piss you off just to play it. It was an awful guitar but I wish I had it back just to look at it again:

 

[TomGuitar]

I've never seen one with a string thru body tail...got a pic?

I don't remember that either. I've only seen TP6 and trapeze tails.

It was heavy, stiff, thin and harsh, and felt like somebody strung up a marble slab.

That's kind what I meant by cold. Just trying not be too harsh, someone out there loves these things.

 

[j45]

I didn't mean to slam the L5-S's in general. Just this one was pretty rude. Gorgeous though... I'm sure there are much better playing and sounding examples.

 

[zekmoe]

I have little experience with these, exept having always wanted one. But everyone I've played in the many vintage shops over the years, has left me cold. Heavy and stiff is a good description. I don't know why. I've wanted to love them ever since I fell in love with the look, I believe from the Guitar Player cover with Pat Martino on it.
I wanted one of those newer ones from the custom shop, but they disappeared as soon as they were annoucned it seemed. I liked the cherry 2 pickup one, but never saw one anywhere.

 

[Leña_Costoso]

I've never seen one with a string thru body tail...got a pic?

Been looking for a pic, it was a shocker to me too. Had the angled string arrangement of the L6s, gold top ferrules, dunno about the back. They normally have a huge wooden backplate but I'm guessing they probably had a gold version of the L6s "cup" back there for the string thu.

I forget if I saw it out on the web, or on eBay. I seem to recall the trapeze ones using several different types too.

 

[Hammertone]

God, these were stupid, bad guitars. They weighed REALLY a lot. The all-maple construction was very bright-sounding indeed.

Gigantic neck volute. Too-narrow necks. Hideously high binding in the cutaway. I was really interested in them in the 1970's until I played a few and they consistently sucked.

I suppose a chambered version with a properly built neck could work. Adjust the binding. Mahogany core. Balance might be an issue. And it would hardly be a reissue, more of an update. Unless that's what the Les Paul Supreme is. Hmmmm...

- Hammertone

 

[Humbuck]

I've had two different ones (still have one) and they are great guitars. Neither was too heavy and neither had a huge volute (I have played them with a huge volute). I've played deluxes, customs and standards that were much heavier. Either one was neck heavy (nothing like some SG's or Firebird's) or overly bright sounding. Great hard rock or metal guitars if you have one with humbuckers. I have no experience with the early low impedence models plugged in.

I've taken one of mine to Europe on tour...I would NOT have taken a guitar that didn't sound great and was too heavy.

Only thing I don't like is the low, wide frets...I replaced mine. Also hated the clowny looking ones. The one I still have is a beautiful brown burst.

Anyone care to host a pic? I forget how!!

 

[Art Werck]

I think Keith Richards used to play those guitars at one time.
He was on the cover of Guitar player magazine '90 ?

 

[Humbuck]

Kieth had a bridge pu only black one...nice guitar. They reissued it a few years ago.

Mark Farner used to wield a nice one too. So did Paul Simon (?) and I think Ray Davies. Of course Pat Martino as well.

 

[Humbuck]

I mean DAVE Davies.

 

[treeofpain]

I used to GAS for one of these in the early 80's. I thought they were so cool looking. I eventually played a couple of them at guitar shows in the late 80's and was pretty disappointed. Heavy as lead, played okay but small neck, and the sound was just not to my liking.

J45, it looks like you did okay on the deal, especially if you still have that Special.

 

[Litcrit]

I remember what it played and sounded like very well. It was heavy, stiff, thin and harsh, and felt like somebody strung up a marble slab. It was so heavy and stiff it would piss you off just to play it. It was an awful guitar but I wish I had it back just to look at it again:

LOL! That describes a LOT of "pretty" guitars I've played over the years, from Fenders to Gibsons to others. That's what happens when cosmetics take over common sense.

 

[rockabilly69]

I remember what it played and sounded like very well. It was heavy, stiff, thin and harsh, and felt like somebody strung up a marble slab. It was so heavy and stiff it would piss you off just to play it. It was an awful guitar but I wish I had it back just to look at it again:

LOL! That describes a LOT of "pretty" guitars I've played over the years, from Fenders to Gibsons to others. That's what happens when cosmetics take over common sense.

Big Laughs Here...I thought I would resurrect this thread as it almost kept me from buying an L5s. For personal reason, I wanted a L5s, and after reading quite a few negative threads, I almost gave up on wanting one, but my stubbornness persisted, and it took 6 years, but I found one that was 9.1lbs, has killer tone, 2 piece top, and a great feeling neck. And yes, I've played some of the heavy dogs, but I just kept on looking. The only negative I find is the closely spaced knobs. On the positive, fingerpicked solo guitar songs sound GREAT with these. And no, nothing like a Les Paul, but I got that covered.

But what's even funnier, is that a few days after I hooked up the first one, I found another with the TP6 tailpiece, so yes, I snapped it up...

 

[chuckNC]

I like the looks of that darkburst! How does it sound compared to the first one?

 

[rockabilly69]

I like the looks of that darkburst! How does it sound compared to the first one?

I'll let you know when it gets here, which should be by Thursday!

 

[eldorado2001]

Very nice, rockabilly69. You've got a pair of real beauties.