T-Rev Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Gotta say, kinda disappointed. So many of the right features on the new 2016 Traditionals - and then Wildwood posts the specs on their stock, and it's Traditional weight relief. I was so hoping these were non-weight relieved like the 2013's. That's what I expect out of a Traditional. The only other gripe is the tone robbing tune-o-matic with the hex key adjustment and titanium saddles. Gibson if you are watching these forums... Why did you do this??? Probably the most popular guitar in your lineup and you took a step backwards. A traditional should be a 50's neck normal width and non-weight relieved. Does this bother anyone else? http://www.wildwoodguitars.com/products/160004742.php?CategoryID=533&n=5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant7629 Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Thats a shame. I thought they'd realised the error of their ways, although the pics of that guitar look amazing. I could live with the hex screw on the bridge though, My 2014 came with them for some reason and they are very useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobK Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 I actually like weight relief. Do not hear any difference in tone or sustain and it doesn't give me a neck or back ache! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Maybe???, they do it to better mimic the lighter weight wood, of the original 50's and 60's Les Paul's??? A lot of the old Les Paul's weren't that shoulder caving heavy. They weren't weight relieved, but the wood density was a bit lighter. And, lighter still, once they "dried out!" But, who knows? It certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker, for me, if I found one I really liked/loved, that's for sure! CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Honestly, I'm disappointed. The massive body has been the finally decisive point when I bought my 2013 Traditional new then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. C.O. Jones Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 That's the main reason why I choose a 14 Trad. over the same years Standard model. The other point's why I decided against in this order: 50's vs. 60's slim taper 59's vs. Burst Buckers Kluson's vs. Min-ETune Normal controls vs. Push/Pull coil tap On the top grading win's the Standard with one more A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 They don't make all solid bodies for the Traditionals because the CS line does that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeman Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 It's impossible to tell the difference so I don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1all's Pub Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 It's impossible to tell the difference so I don't care. Exactly... I have (and have had) one of each. The only difference is... you guessed it, weight. Any variation people think they hear in tone between a solid body and a traditionally weight relieved body is purely just the natural variation in each given guitar (ie, some guitars are just better than others). I've played both side by side in stores (ie, a 2011s and 2012s with traditional weight relief and a 2014s with a solid bodies)... and it just depended on the guitar. Some of the traditionally weight relieved 2011s and 2012s sounded better than the solid bodied 2014s... and vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabeck5 Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 SO glad I got the 2013, why even call it a Traditional, if I wanted weight relief I would buy something other than the Traditional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGolf Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 It really is amazing! You can please some people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time! I think Dylan said that. 2016 isn't here yet and the critics are out early. My 2015 is now devalued by the comments that came last year and I wonder what will happen to the 2016? Cheers, Dr Golf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pesh Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Gotta say, kinda disappointed. So many of the right features on the new 2016 Traditionals - and then Wildwood posts the specs on their stock, and it's Traditional weight relief. I was so hoping these were non-weight relieved like the 2013's. That's what I expect out of a Traditional. The only other gripe is the tone robbing tune-o-matic with the hex key adjustment and titanium saddles. Gibson if you are watching these forums... Why did you do this??? Probably the most popular guitar in your lineup and you took a step backwards. A traditional should be a 50's neck normal width and non-weight relieved. Does this bother anyone else? http://www.wildwoodguitars.com/products/160004742.php?CategoryID=533&n=5 You're not alone in this; it irks me also. I'd have loved it to retain the full-weight LP from '13, '14 and '15 (one thing they got right). I've seen that it also features a "late '50s" neck, but I've got a worry that it won't be the nice baseball bat that I've felt on the '14 Traditionals. I want it to be that fat thing it was then. The bridge doesn't both me that much, as I'd be adding a TonePro's unit with some nylon or GraphTech saddles to the beast; sod the titanium! I'm happy about the GraphTech nut as standard, and that some 'bursts are the newer edge-burst pattern, while some are teardrop-bursts; it seems that they've had a good think about which 'burst shape compliments each 'burst finish and come out with a good finish line. Although no Manhattan Midnight :( boo, Gibson. Boo. I think the removable pickguards should have been kept on, even though no strictly 'traditional'; it's criminal to hide a lovely flame finish, and punish but leaving holes in it should you wish to see it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaygl Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 "My 2015 is now devalued by the comments that came last year and I wonder what will happen to the 2016?" No offence Dr. Golf but I think it was more than the comments that devalued the 2015's....maybe had they slowly introduced a change a year say, but it was too musch too soon. I like the traditional weight relief myself, no tonal difference, but my shoulder can tell after and hour plus set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1all's Pub Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 SO glad I got the 2013, why even call it a Traditional, if I wanted weight relief I would buy something other than the Traditional. I think it’s important to understand just what the Les Paul Traditional is supposed to be and what “tradition” it is meant to honor/emulate. Many people erroneously assume it’s meant to harken back to the 52-60 Les Pauls (particularly the 57-60s with the humbuckers)… but that’s actually not the case. Those models (the 52-60s) are honored and emulated by the Reissue guitars of the Custom Shop (e.g., R7, R8, R9, etc). The Gibson USA Traditional model is and always has been meant to be harken back to the Les Paul Standards of the post-Norlin era of the 80s and 90s. That’s the “tradition” the Traditional model is supposed to be honoring… and many of those Les Pauls (i.e., the post-Norlin era Standards) had traditional weight relieved bodies (i.e., Gibson began weight relieving LPs in 1983!). So in reality, once we know the facts and genesis of the Traditional model, having one that has traditional weight relief (aka 9 Swiss cheese holes) is actually not “incorrect” by any measure. And, since the Trad’s inception (2008) only 3 of those 9 years of production featured non-weight relieved bodies (2013, 2014, 2015)… so having weight relief is actually more common as well. Now, a person my still not “like” weight relieving… and that’s fine... but again, if we look at the facts surrounding its history it becomes pretty clear that putting weight relief in the Traditional model is no real deviation from the norm at all… in fact, it is the norm. That said… I have a 2014 Trad with no weight relief. It weighs 9lbs 12oz… sounds fantastic (I give a lot of credit to the awesome 59 Trib pups it has though). And I have a new 2016 Trad with traditional weight relief... it also sounds fantastic (with 57/57+ pups). It weighs 9lbs even… and let me be honest… that ¾ of a lb is noticeable and noticeably nicer to bear on the 2016. Both guitars are equally resonant unplugged and if Gibson didn’t tell us about the weight relief (and/or people didn’t X-ray their guitars, LOL), no one would have ever known (in fact, Gibson built weight relieved guitars long before they let it be known and in fact people didn’t know or know to complain). So I’ll reiterate what I posted earlier in this thread… any variation people think they hear in tone between a non-weight relieved body and a traditionally weight relieved body is purely just the natural variation in each given guitar (ie, some guitars just sound better than others, irrespective of weight relief). I've played both side by side in stores (i.e., 2011s and 2012s (& 2016s too now) with traditional weight relief and 2013s/2014s/2015s with non-weight relief)... and it just depended on the guitar. Some of the traditionally weight relieved 2011s/2012s/2016s sounded better and were more resonant than the non-weight relieved bodied 2013s/2014s/2015s... and vice versa. There's just way too many more variables involved in individual guitars to try to lay it at the feet of those 9 Swiss cheese holes of traditional weight relieving. And remember, I have one of each (i.e., a non-weight relieved Trad and a traditionally weight relieved Trad)...so I am not biased...just dealing with the facts as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGolf Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 "My 2015 is now devalued by the comments that came last year and I wonder what will happen to the 2016?" No offence Dr. Golf but I think it was more than the comments that devalued the 2015's....maybe had they slowly introduced a change a year say, but it was too musch too soon. I like the traditional weight relief myself, no tonal difference, but my shoulder can tell after and hour plus set. I agree with your point about the number of changes all at one time. Spot on! Mine still won't stay in tune! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1all's Pub Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Double post...oops...sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.