Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Rant warning: Chambered Les Pauls?


Winston Psmith

Recommended Posts

I was looking over the new Gibsons recently, and it seemed that all of the current Les Paul models are chambered guitars, what Gibson is calling "weight relief". Some of them weigh as little as Teles!?!?!?! I was wondering what other players think of this move?

 

I may be mistaken about this, but my impression was that the body mass of the original LP design added sustain. In one story, I'd read that Les experimented with different combinations of woods, and different thicknesses for the top, until he'd achieved a 28-second sustain on a ringing open string. I wonder if you still get that with a chambered guitar?

 

It strikes me that you would not only lose body mass with the chambered guitars, but you also have less overall contact between the mahogany body and the maple cap. I'm not a physicist, but I think that would substantially affect how the guitar transferred the energy from the vibrating strings.

 

I can see where many players would appreciate having the LP sound and feel without the added pounds, but I'm not there yet. If I want something lightweight, that's what the SG is for. If I'm reaching for a Les Paul, I expect it to feel like a sledgehammer, when I pick it up. Anything less is just . . . a guitar.

"Monsters are real, and Ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes, they win." Stephen King

 

http://www.novparolo.com

 

https://thewinstonpsmithproject.bandcamp.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I had a Les Paul Deluxe many decades ago and played in a country rock band. My only complaint about the guitar was the weight. It got heavy standing up on stage for 4 hours at a time. Our Roadies were a couple of real cowboys and one of them made up 3 matching guitar straps made out of horse saddle cinches in red with leather ends. They looked really cool with 2 guitars and a bass on stage with cowboy hats and sun glasses (I think we kinda gave old Hank Jr the idea LOL!). More importantly, the straps distributed the weight so well that it made holding those guitars a breeze...no more complaints...

 

A few years ago when they came out with the chambered LP bodies, I thought maybe I'll give one a try and buy a new Les Paul. I tried one at the local GC thinking this is gonna be utopia, but it just didn't seem to feel and sound the same and I decided to pass on the concept. I think it was a good concept and I may try one again some day. I'm not sure if it was my imagination or if the heavier wood made that big of a difference? :idk but I'm willing to revisit the scenario some day! :cool:

Take care, Larryz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

weight relief and chambered Les Pauls are not really new. this has been going on for awhile. weight relief is usually a series of holes done before the top is added, and chambered are channels designed for tone enhancement.

 

Gibson will never please everyone with this. there are those who believe the weight is important to the tone and some sellers include the weight in the specs.

Some people don't want the weight.

then there is the factor of mahogany, Honduran is lighter and African is heavier.

 

i had for a short time a BFG Les Paul and it didn't suffer for being chambered. i have seen xrays of chambered Pauls and there was quite a lot of wood removed in a pattern that that was every where except the neck, pickup and tail piece area.

 

personally i guess i would prefer a solid body to be solid. but i would reserve my final decision on a Paul based on it's playability and tone if i was picking one up because that is what i consider the deciding factor for me.

 

my take on the whole thing is that Gibson is probably using heavier cheaper mahogany on certain price points and weight relieving those. pricier models are probably free from this modification.

 

there are so many models and specs for a Les Paul it isn't funny, yet they generally look the same, i think Gibson is pretty open on which models are weight relieved and chambered so i doubt there is any effort to trick anyone.

 

in guitar construction all things are important like type of wood, grade of wood and construction. but none are a guarantee to tone. i would probably say IMHO construction is most important. great tight neck attachment and overall tight tolerances and workmanship would speak to me more that the chance of hidden holes existing under the top.

Now if i picked up a Paul and it sounded like a hollow body i would pass.

i guess i am saying that some weight relieved or chambered Pauls may rock and some may suck but it may not be the wood removal that is the culprit. it may be the wood and or construction in combo with the loss of wood.

so ultimately i would pick my guitar by playing it and specs would only be used to give me an idea of what i am going to find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking over the new Gibsons recently, and it seemed that all of the current Les Paul models are chambered guitars, what Gibson is calling "weight relief". Some of them weigh as little as Teles!?!?!?! I was wondering what other players think of this move?

 

I may be mistaken about this, but my impression was that the body mass of the original LP design added sustain. In one story, I'd read that Les experimented with different combinations of woods, and different thicknesses for the top, until he'd achieved a 28-second sustain on a ringing open string. I wonder if you still get that with a chambered guitar?

 

It strikes me that you would not only lose body mass with the chambered guitars, but you also have less overall contact between the mahogany body and the maple cap. I'm not a physicist, but I think that would substantially affect how the guitar transferred the energy from the vibrating strings.

 

I can see where many players would appreciate having the LP sound and feel without the added pounds, but I'm not there yet. If I want something lightweight, that's what the SG is for. If I'm reaching for a Les Paul, I expect it to feel like a sledgehammer, when I pick it up. Anything less is just . . . a guitar.

 

I'll just say that anything about Les Paul designing the Les Paul guitar is just myth... the guitar was already designed (it's just a shrunken, solid-body version of the Gibson "electric spanish" single-cutaway body style that had already been used by the company for hollow body electrics for decades by that point) and his only contribution, aside from lending his name to it, was insisting on that strung-under trapeze tailpiece that everyone else in civilization hated and refused to use, causing the company to quickly swap it out for a bridge and stop tailpiece. This is according to George Gruhn and dozens of others who've done research that I've read.

 

Second is that if you've ever played one of the Les Pauls that Les directly dictated to his specifications, like the 70s Les Paul Recording models that he played onstage until the end, with low impedance ceramic pickups and effects mounted into guitar necessitating a big cavity and control plate... well, they have no sustain. Sustain wasn't part of his sound.

 

They are heavy though.

 

My favorite quote:

 

A guy met Les and said "I have some of your guitars, but I don't play 'em much, they're just too heavy!"

 

and Les said "Oh, you think they're heavy? Before I made my living with a guitar I made it with a shovel. They don't feel so heavy to me!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hole-filled or completely solid, they're all gonna differ somewhat from one to another to begin with- that's just the nature of, well, nature-made materials, that is, wood. ;) Some will be better than others, and everyone will pick different specimens from a given bunch as the "best". I wouldn't worry about whether a particular Les Paul was chambered, weight-relieved, or fully solid- I would simply judge whether it was right for me in how it played, felt, and sounded.

 

As 'Zan pointed out, Gibson has been doing this for a long time- some "chambered", some "weight-relieved", with perhaps some being a combination of their two holey approaches here. Leaving much of the area surrounding the bridge and tail unmolested has been said to be crucial in retaining the sustain, fullness and and punch that are characteristics of a good Les Paul.

 

I would not be surprised if my '96 Gibson Les Paul Classic Premium Plus was either weight-relieved or chambered, even though it IS a bit on the heavy side. It seems to have enough of the essence of a classic "Les Paul" to satisfy me, no matter what an X-Ray might reveal- sustain is not lacking, the tone is full and fat and chunky, with some bloom in the harmonic-overtones.

Ask yourself- What Would Ren and Stimpy Do?

 

~ Caevan James-Michael Miller-O'Shite ~

_ ___ _ Leprechaun, Esquire _ ___ _

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hole-filled or completely solid, they're all gonna differ somewhat from one to another to begin with- that's just the nature of, well, nature-made materials, that is, wood. ;) Some will be better than others, and everyone will pick different specimens from a given bunch as the "best". I wouldn't worry about whether a particular Les Paul was chambered, weight-relieved, or fully solid- I would simply judge whether it was right for me in how it played, felt, and sounded.

 

As 'Zan pointed out, Gibson has been doing this for a long time- some "chambered", some "weight-relieved", with perhaps some being a combination of their two holey approaches here. Leaving much of the area surrounding the bridge and tail unmolested has been said to be crucial in retaining the sustain, fullness and and punch that are characteristics of a good Les Paul.

 

I would not be surprised if my '96 Gibson Les Paul Classic Premium Plus was either weight-relieved or chambered, even though it IS a bit on the heavy side. It seems to have enough of the essence of a classic "Les Paul" to satisfy me, no matter what an X-Ray might reveal- sustain is not lacking, the tone is full and fat and chunky, with some bloom in the harmonic-overtones.

 

Giggity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to buy into the resonant guitar that sound good unplugged thing is the way to go but I don't anymore. Loud unplugged guitar can be less effecient because the ressonance is allowing energy to escape through the body instead of staying in the string and and over the pole pieces. Les Paul solid body mechanics 101. That was the idea of all that mass. Now they just make hotter pickups to cover up for bad guitar design.

 

 

"It doesn't have to be difficult to be cool" - Mitch Towne

 

"A great musician can bring tears to your eyes!!!

So can a auto Mechanic." - Stokes Hunt

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 70's Swede doesn't sound much when not plugged in but through the rig it is great. I used to be a SD JB and Jazz guy but the Dimarzio ToneZone and Bluesbucker combo is pretty nice.

"It doesn't have to be difficult to be cool" - Mitch Towne

 

"A great musician can bring tears to your eyes!!!

So can a auto Mechanic." - Stokes Hunt

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original Les Pauls were made of very light weight mahogany. Lower weight actually became a selling point on reissues, along with hyper-flamey tops. The mass=sustain formula didn't really come along until the 70's, and like all such formulas, has been replaced by the idea that a lower mass body has more resonance, which makes a guitar sound better. Hence, the chambered bodies.

Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing: at a certain point, mass/density in the body of a Les Paul adds, enhances, and tightens low-end; while being a bit light and resonant enhances blooming "3D" harmonic-overtones and sustain while playing with enough gain and volume and close proximity to an amp's speakers to cause the guitar's neck, body, and strings to acoustically interact with the sound from the speakers, ranging from an increased liveliness to controlled sustained musical feedback.

 

That "just-right" Goldilocks-zone of light-enough/dense-enough is the key to a "good" electric guitar in the classic sense based on the way the playing and the music of the electric guitar developed and evolved through the '40s, '50s, '60s, and '70s.

 

The "right guitar" with the "right amp" puts the potential for that "magic" in a player's hands, if the player has the "touch".

Ask yourself- What Would Ren and Stimpy Do?

 

~ Caevan James-Michael Miller-O'Shite ~

_ ___ _ Leprechaun, Esquire _ ___ _

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the woods make a big difference on acoustics and the pickups make a big difference on electrics (discounting the talent of the players of course)...I think this story is one of the greats in the history of guitar making with regard to wood tones, density, quality, etc.,:

 

"The Pallet Guitar...It's a cult favorite among Taylor fans, but what might seem like a cool one-off novelty guitar was actually crafted to make a more profound statement. Bob Taylor was responding to the growing commentary that an exceptional supply of tone woods was the secret of Taylor's great sounding guitars. Making a guitar out of a distressed discarded shipping pallet demonstrated that strong design and craftsmanship can transform virtually any materials into a guitar with great playability and quality tone."

 

This story always enters my mind when talking about guitar woods... :crazy:

 

ps. https://www.laguitarsales.com/pages/3157/Taylor_Custom_Shop_Pallet.htm <---here's a sample of a used one with pictures and more of the story... :cool:

Take care, Larryz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya gotta love the Lift Truck inlay! :D

 

I see Warmoth offers chambering on it's Strat bodies. Does it change the tone or sustain? Dunno, but the idea weight/relief tone chambering seems to be a selling point in the market, even though it's not really a new thing.

 

I friend of mine built a Strat clone out of a solid slab of red oak. Yeah, talk about a heavy guitar! I didn't think it sounded better or worse than a standard alder or ash body. But the weight... :freak:

Dan

 

"I hate what I've become, trying to escape who I am..."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Studio is weight relieved. It is actually lighter than my ash Strat. I wouldn't want to play a whole gig with a totally solid LP. My V has a maple cap, and is likely the heaviest axe I own. It also doesn't see nearly as much stage time as my lighter solid bodies. Love the guitar, but it does get heavy at a gig.
Never a DUH! moment! Well, almost never. OK, OK! Sometimes never!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: feeling the weight of heavier guitars through a longer playing session/gig: I have found that extra-wide, comfy straps can help quite a bit with Les Pauls and other such heftier axes. Less pressure is felt in the shoulder, with the weight distributed over a wider area... Straps that easily slide back-and-forth through a shoulder-pad as you move around also make it all the more bearable, as the strap doesn't catch and bind-up on ones clothing as much.

Ask yourself- What Would Ren and Stimpy Do?

 

~ Caevan James-Michael Miller-O'Shite ~

_ ___ _ Leprechaun, Esquire _ ___ _

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind, the LP was marketed as a Jazz guitar, and Jazz players of the time tended to sit down. Having the guitar rest on your leg, with a decent strap (as Caevan suggests) to take off some of the weight, is much less tiring than standing all night with a nylon strap right on top of the nerve bundle in your shoulder.

 

Rock guitarists tend to stand while performing (if not attempting some form of gymnastics at the same time), thus the need for a lighter guitar, with the same aesthetic, and the same sound.

"Monsters are real, and Ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes, they win." Stephen King

 

http://www.novparolo.com

 

https://thewinstonpsmithproject.bandcamp.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dean Zelinsky's Zenyatta models might be what you want, then. They have the LP shape, but use the same thin-body design he traduced in the DBZ Imperial & Royale.

 

https://deanzelinsky.com/guitars/zenyatta-standard

https://deanzelinsky.com/guitars/zenyatta-custom

https://deanzelinsky.com/guitars/zenyatta-z-glide-custom

 

They average between 7-8 lbs.

 

The hollowbody Strettavita is a LP-style hollowbody that weighs @5lbs.

 

https://deanzelinsky.com/guitars/strettavita-hollow-body

 

Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: âNinety percent of everything is crapâ

 

My FLMS- Murphy's Music in Irving, Tx

 

http://murphysmusictx.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's bad enough they put his face on a guitar, but why didn't they airbrush out the blackheads?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh wait, those are KNOBS! Nevermind.

Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: âNinety percent of everything is crapâ

 

My FLMS- Murphy's Music in Irving, Tx

 

http://murphysmusictx.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder what it would cost to get that tattoo removed? What were they thinking? I mean if you take a perfectly good LP and do something like that to it, you should get fired on the spot! :mad:

 

Let's see - what a great marketing move! Let's offer a model named (and imaged) after a little pop-star shitbag who has probably never been within 500 feet of an actual guitar in his LIFE.

 

GREAT! CALL THE PRODUCTION MANAGER! MAKE IT HAPPEN! :freak:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally, I'm not in favor of 'relicing' any guitar. However, in this case, I'd be willing to make an exception, even an example. If someone would please pass me the propane torch . . .

"Monsters are real, and Ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes, they win." Stephen King

 

http://www.novparolo.com

 

https://thewinstonpsmithproject.bandcamp.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are clips on Youtube of Justin playing guitar and singing. Mostly just two chords to a song. But, that doesn't [Justinfy] wrecking a perfectly good LP! At least the Fender autographed $2,000 models used a Squier instead of a real Strat... :facepalm:

 

Ps. It would be fun to chamber that LP with a few holes from the chambers of a 357...

Take care, Larryz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...