Old thread...I know. But I do have something to contribute.

I played the best LP I ever touched and the best guitar I ever touched (CLD) inside of 2 months from each other. My best bud now owns that LP and I own the CLD. They are different. A CL is NOT a LP. NOT. LPs are more aggressive, gnarly, thinner and hotter sounding. At least in my experience- and I've played 6 CL's in the past 2 months.

The guitars also sound different when played dry. We've sat in the same room and played dry as well- we even use the same picks and switched guitars.

Bottomline- I say if you want the LP sound then do not buy a CL.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing, Jujo. I'm assuming your use of the word 'dry' is the same as unamplified. Did you happen to A/B a Grosh setneck vs. the CLD in your travels? If so, please share your experience. (or anyone else who may still be listening to this thread)

In my collection, I have a 1968 Black Beauty LPC, a 2007 CLD, and a mahogany body 2007 fat strat. The CLD is midway between the the LP and the HSS strat (using H pup on the strat). IOW, the CLD is not even close to a LP sound, no midrange honk at all. The fit and finish on the CLD is hands down the best... the strat is a B-, the LP an A, and CLD an A+. The fat strat and my Godin LGX are closer to each other than the CLD is to the LP.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: maunakea,

quote:

Originally posted by Jujo:
Bottomline- I say if you want the LP sound then do not buy a CL.

+1

quote:

Did you happen to A/B a Grosh setneck vs. the CLD in your travels?

Never played that one. And yes, I meant unamplified.

Of course A CL is not a LP. That is a good thing. Les Pauls have been done, and I am glad Collings puts something out there that has some tone options different than a LP, despite a similar body shape. Like a Collings D2H is not a Martin D28, and in my opinion it blows away a D28, 50's or other wise, in terms of tone, clarity, and volume, that give that signature Collings sound. Comparisons could be made, as they share similar
body shapes, yet the Collings is a clearly different guitar. I am curious why a lot of players compare the CL so closely to the LP, when It seems clear Bill Collings doesn't copy anybody when it comes to tone and that patent Collings sound? Just curious. I mean with acoustics, it's self evident you buy a Martin if thats the sound you want. Thanks for letting me share my 2 cents

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dredpicker,

quote:

Originally posted by Dredpicker:
Of course A CL is not a LP. That is a good thing. Les Pauls have been done, and I am glad Collings puts something out there that has some tone options different than a LP, despite a similar body shape. Like a Collings D2H is not a Martin D28, and in my opinion it blows away a D28, 50's or other wise, in terms of tone, clarity, and volume, that give that signature Collings sound. Comparisons could be made, as they share similar
body shapes, yet the Collings is a clearly different guitar. I am curious why a lot of players compare the CL so closely to the LP, when It seems clear Bill Collings doesn't copy anybody when it comes to tone and that patent Collings sound? Just curious. I mean with acoustics, it's self evident you buy a Martin if thats the sound you want. Thanks for letting me share my 2 cents

The CL was built upon the classic design of an LP. That's very clear when you first see it. So the comparisons are inevitable. In my case, I wanted everything about the LP tone, but in a package that's better constructed and, most importantly, one with Collings playability. The Lollars in the CL do not sound like any of my LPs - they're more refined - and that's certainly fine, but it didn't satisfy my search for the Rolls Royce of Les Pauls. My fault, yes, but the CL is still an amazing guitar. I just don't play it very often (although the I-35 is to blame for that fact).

One thing I've mentioned before if the option of using LP's BurstBucker pickups in the CL. I'm dying to know what affect that will have on the guitar overall. I have two sets collecting dust (I think one might be a '57, not a BurstBucker) and could easily make the swap. This might be just the weekend to do that.

elambo, et al: As a former I-35 owner who has never stopped lusting for a chance to get back into Colling electric ownership, I'd considered a CL, being, as it is, about 1500 less than an I-35. I've owned Pauls, including a real 1960 standard, then a 67 Custom. I liked 'em a lot; my heros all played Gibsons then- Eric, Bloomfield, BB, Albert King- but, eventually I thought the Paul was a one trick pony- a helluva trick, but not the "one guitar for the whole gig" guitar I need. The 35 was so good it didn't matter what style I played. But the descriptions here of the CL make it sound somewhat sterile, as if there were EMG's or Lace Sensors involved; you know, tone that sounds as if it's waiting to be processed. My ideal, yet to be achieved, one guitar, one cable, one amp. The Grosh retro classic I play is amazing, but during my brief fling with the I-35 it never left the case. Not close. So, am I correct in concluding that, if I can't get back to a 35, to skip it? I never really thought about another Les Paul, even for nostalgic purposes, until Bill came out with his. I figured if anyone could nail (glue) it, it would be that man. Side note: as far as blues tone, which is the non-negotiable bottom line in an electric for me, there a clip of Clapton playing his red 335 on 'Have you Ever Loved A Woman", on youtube, about eight minutes of orgasmic tone bliss (can I say that here?). What say you all? Seek mental health care? Take out a loan and buy a 35? Get real? thanks tom

CL=Rembrandt
LP=Picasso

Both incredible, both different.

Rembrandt is realism taken about as far as humanly possible. Picasso... well, there's something wrong - organized chaos - but you love it.

You'd never ask one to paint in the others' style.

More specifically, in my opinion, if you feel that an I-35 is tone nirvana (just as I do), don't take any other road. Nothing else will lead you there. Not a CL.

Damn. I figgered that. I'm more an Andrew Wyeth guy, but let's not start down the arsty road like we did with movies. I know a lot more about art than I do about movies (although, imho, Deneuve still qualifies as both). Picasso, yes. Pollack? No thanks. Warhol? Only on drugs. Two of my good friends are artists (christensenstudio.com and jimlambstudio.com), and I almost married one artist, and did marry the next (thank God!), so I"m way into it. Almost I-35 into it. So, crunch time. I'm gonna have to sell the CJA if the CJ varnish is the feline's nightwear. If it's not, I'll have most of a 35 in hand. Who needs two CJ's? Don't answer. thanks tom

Tom, the CLs I've played have done nothing for me. They're pretty and the workmanship is great, but I think the problem is that I keep expecting them to sound like a LP. And they don't. Not remotely. They're a lot smoother and wetter to my ear, if that makes any sense, and don't have the drive.

Obviously the pickups are different, which explains it. But still, there does seem to be a bit of a disconnect for me there.

The I-35 that I have, however, is amazing. And it sounds more like I think it "should" (only better). I think it MIGHT be fair to say that an I-35 sounds like a really, really, really, really good 335 SHOULD sound when the planets are aligned, etc., ... but a CL is not going to sound like an LP at all (again, to my ear).

That's not a cut on the CL, mind you. It's just a different beast. I like Eric's idea of trying Burstbuckers on a CL. If he does that test and loves it, I might make an effort to pick up a (relatively) cheap CL and hotrod it (shhhhh!) with Burstbuckers. Failing that, I think I'd just go with a VOS LP.

My two cents,

Thanks. with your two cents, and about 4500, I might be able to snag a used I-35. Whatever guitar I get, I don't wanna mess with whatever formula Bill came up with. If I wanted to swap out pickups, I'd buy a used Heritage or G&L. Too late. Already played that game years back. The Grosh would actually do a sane person for the duration. Not applicable here. thanks tom