Why didn't Les Pauls have tremolo bar?

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   When thinking about 70's classic electric guitars there are 2 clear protagonists, the Fender Strat and the Gibson Les Paul. Each one had its own personality, both sound-wise and looks-wise.
But one thing that always intrigued me, in terms of playing versatility, the Strat had a tremolo bar while the original genuine Les Paul didn't.
Many Les Paul players fitted tremolo bar bridges in their guitars (i.e. Steve Hackett) but the question remains, why did not Gibson fit a tremolo bar as standard in the Les Pauls?

The Les Paul was an amazing guitar, in some respects possibly better sounding than the Start, but being able to do only upwards pitch-bends but no downwards pitch-bends seems a stupid limitation for such a great guitar.

Anyone can throw some light on this question?

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Gerinski Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: February 10 2010 Location: Barcelona Spain Status: Offline Points: 5154	Posted: January 18 2013 at 09:51
	When thinking about 70's classic electric guitars there are 2 clear protagonists, the Fender Strat and the Gibson Les Paul. Each one had its own personality, both sound-wise and looks-wise. But one thing that always intrigued me, in terms of playing versatility, the Strat had a tremolo bar while the original genuine Les Paul didn't. Many Les Paul players fitted tremolo bar bridges in their guitars (i.e. Steve Hackett) but the question remains, why did not Gibson fit a tremolo bar as standard in the Les Pauls? The Les Paul was an amazing guitar, in some respects possibly better sounding than the Start, but being able to do only upwards pitch-bends but no downwards pitch-bends seems a stupid limitation for such a great guitar. Anyone can throw some light on this question?