Guest Farnsbarns Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I think you should post a video of you playing your solid Les Paul so we can all hear how amazing it sounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanHenry Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I think Les Pauls have been weight relieved for a longer period than they (mostly) were solid. I have three Les Pauls, two weight relieved and one solid, I don't think the weight relief makes any difference to the sound, most is down to the pickups etc. I used the solid one for a charity gig on Saturday night and I've now got an appointment with a physiotherapist next Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 Macmutt, what kind of Les Paul do you have anyways? Maybe it was already mentioned but I didn't read all the replies. If you own a solid Traditional, you don't have long tenon. If you own an older reissue, you have a truss rod sheath and no Brazilian. If you have a 2013/newer reissue, you still don't have Brazilian. Long tenon, Brazilian roswood, no truss rod sheath. These are equally as important as solid mahogany if you want to stay true to the original Les Paul formula. So, I'll let you in on a little secret. Unless you have a Les Paul made before 1962, or a replica, your guitar is as equal flawed as the ones you are bashing. The following was written by a new American guitar company called CMG Guitars, and frankly i could not have put it better myself, it says it all and proves the point i'm trying to make, and to answer your question i own a 2015 Gibson Les Paul Traditional, feel free to check the specs on their website. While some companies are innovating just to create a new product to sell, we innovate only when it benefits the player. You won’t see us change the spec on a guitar to accommodate bad technique. Instead, we innovate the instrument to make it subservient to the player. The guitar should feel like an extension of you - you shouldn’t have to fight it to get what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I know 2015 specs quite well. Wider fretboard, flat neck, short tenon, robot tuners, horrible headstock front and back. That's more of an abomination than 9 holes that make no difference and that you can't see. This is hilarious. Weight relief or contoured heels are bad in your mind but a historically wrong wider fretboard and short tenon is acceptable? What you call innovation I call garbage. You're calling everything but a pure '50s LP crap yet you own the farthest thing from a real one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 Here is a Spec list from these CMG guitar guy's LOL i love it i might have to buy my next guitar from these guy's, they continue to make my argument for me. Specs include: Nut Width 1-11/16th inch, 24.75" scale Indian Rosewood Fretboard Radius: 12" Nut Material: GraphTech NuBone Back body comfort contour Grover 18:1 tuners Natural wood binding NO tone killing swiss cheese holes NO printed circuit boards- hand wired like a late 50's LP, Bourn Pots NO silly auto tune- "Ya gotta tune it yourself." From a CMG Ashlee model for sale on Reverb.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanHenry Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Here is a Spec list from these CMG guitar guy's LOL i love it i might have to buy my next guitar from these guy's, they continue to make my argument for me. Specs include: Nut Width 1-11/16th inch, 24.75" scale Indian Rosewood Fretboard Radius: 12" Nut Material: GraphTech NuBone Back body comfort contour Grover 18:1 tuners Natural wood binding NO tone killing swiss cheese holes NO printed circuit boards- hand wired like a late 50's LP, Bourn Pots NO silly auto tune- "Ya gotta tune it yourself." From a CMG Ashlee model for sale on Reverb.com Well they would say that wouldn't they, there them. Regarding 2015 Les Paul Traditional, the best part of that guitar in the 59 Tribute pickups which were only used on the 2014 and 15 models. The 2014 is far more like the Les Pauls your seeking. Also I feel I have to take issue with you for criticising other members (Hotoss) new guitars is a little snide, even if you were lucky enough t own a genuine 50's Les Paul, it's just not Cricket. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanHenry Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Here is a Spec list from these CMG guitar guy's LOL i love it i might have to buy my next guitar from these guy's, they continue to make my argument for me. Specs include: Nut Width 1-11/16th inch, 24.75" scale Indian Rosewood Fretboard Radius: 12" Nut Material: GraphTech NuBone Back body comfort contour Grover 18:1 tuners Natural wood binding NO tone killing swiss cheese holes NO printed circuit boards- hand wired like a late 50's LP, Bourn Pots NO silly auto tune- "Ya gotta tune it yourself." From a CMG Ashlee model for sale on Reverb.com Well they would say that wouldn't they, there them. Regarding 2015 Les Paul Traditional, the best part of that guitar in the 59 Tribute pickups which were only used on the 2014 and 15 models. The 2014 is far more like the Les Pauls your seeking. Also I feel I have to take issue with you for criticising other members (Hoross) new guitars is a little snide, even if you were lucky enough t own a genuine 50's Les Paul, it's just not Cricket. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 I know 2015 specs quite well. Wider fretboard, flat neck, short tenon, robot tuners, horrible headstock front and back. That's more of an abomination than 9 holes that make no difference and that you can't see. This is hilarious. Weight relief or contoured heels are bad in your mind but a historically wrong wider fretboard and short tenon is acceptable? What you call innovation I call garbage. You're calling everything but a pure '50s LP crap yet you own the farthest thing from a real one. The wider fingerboard is an improvement over the older narrow one that you couldn't even bend up or down on the high or low E string without going over the edge, as for the Geforce tuning, it's been replaced with locking Grovers, as for the short tenon it's not all that noticeable to me, by the way you forgot the zero fret adjustable brass nut which i happen to value above all other nuts since you can adjust the action with a mere turn of an allen wrench. I did not bash all innovations i have been bashing the removal of good hard wood from a beautiful instrument because it simply wasn't necessary. all i can say is, play one for yourself. I wasn't sold by looking at the guitar or reading about it on some website, i did my research on the specs, read and watched countless reviews and then i went and held and played it for myself, and it was a mind blowing experience, and now i have the best of both worlds a guitar with the exact innovations that i love such as the wider fretboard and titanium saddles, and zero fret nut, with 59 reissue pickups, all combined with a SOLID body through and through and it looks, plays and sounds great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Here is a Spec list from these CMG guitar guy's LOL i love it i might have to buy my next guitar from these guy's, they continue to make my argument for me. Specs include: Nut Width 1-11/16th inch, 24.75" scale Indian Rosewood Fretboard Radius: 12" Nut Material: GraphTech NuBone Back body comfort contour Grover 18:1 tuners Natural wood binding NO tone killing swiss cheese holes NO printed circuit boards- hand wired like a late 50's LP, Bourn Pots NO silly auto tune- "Ya gotta tune it yourself." From a CMG Ashlee model for sale on Reverb.com Well, you sure showed us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 Well, you sure showed us... What it shows is, that luckily there are still people out there that believe that it's pointless to drill or router holes in a flawless hard wood guitar body. Gibson used to know that, and it would be hilarious if someone like these CMG guitar guy's or another start up guitar maker came along and utilized all the old school traditions that luthiers of 50 plus years ago used to, before preprogrammed cnc machines came along and removed a pound of wood, and new guys like these surpassed Gibson in sound and build quality, then maybe the big boys would see whats really important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Do you know anything about guitar components and wood tones and variances in sustain ?, The guitarists abilities has NOTHING to do with the tone of their guitars, yes now a days you can get an FX station or pedal board and EQ setup and get just about any tone you want regardless of what guitar your using, but that's not what i'm saying. YES, I know about wood and guitar components as I have been studying it and building them for about the last three years... Mahogany and Maple are very hard dense woods, and when combined they produce a warm rich and long sustaining tone that is unmistakeable when directly plugged into any amp. WRONG, mahogany is not particularly hard or dense.. and the original genuine Honduran or Cuban mahogany is some of the lightest in the species...in fact the old original solid body 50s LPs came in at about 7lbs which is why they introduced weight relief as they had to start using different types of heavier mahogany The exact original design, shape and thickness of the Les Paul brought out the best tonal quality and sustain from that wood combination, more so than any other guitar maker has been able to do when using the same wood, which is why a PRS with a mahogany and maple body and it's dual humbuckers does not sound like a solid Les Paul. Nonsense..... you mention nothing about pickups, caps or pots used, these will change the sound of a guitar way more than any weight relief. It was perfect just the way it was, and it still can be, if they just stop taking chunks of wood out of it. that's up to Gibson, not you.. if you are so bothered why don't you start your own guitar company on these principle that you state and see how many you sell And to some of your other comments... Im also over 40 and have been playing since I was 11 with my first Gibson bought in 1992 so I do have some experience.. I also spent several years as a sound and video engineer in various recording studios so I know my sound. just so you know. What I find most funny is you pick on this one aspect of an electric guitar and the example you state as being a REAL Les Paul is less like a real Les Paul than any other they have made, probably EVER (a 2015 model)... Apart from the solid body EVERYTHING else about it is different.. and the 2015s are probably the worst received Les Pauls ever made since they stopped making them early and they slashed the price in half in like six months of their initial release.. that's proper rubbish..... yet that's ok because its got a solid body and you have decided they are the only real Les Pauls even though the spec is NOTHING like the original... And your ONLY proof of all this is the recordings of some famous guitarists who would sound good playing anything, and as I said before, what about the other factors that made those recordings good like all the mics, amps and sound equipment used let alone the player skills (which DOES give a player part of their tone)...What about all the amazing recordings made on a 335 or a Fender or whatever, are they all rubbish cos they wernt recorded with a solid body Les Paul, does Jimmy Page sound bad cos he used a Telecaster?? what nonsense... What other proof do you have other than your anecdotal evidence? because if that's all it is its your opinion and nothing more... and of course you are entitled to your opinion as we all are.. but to sit there and make stupid sweeping statements saying that any other Les Paul is inferior is just well, stupid... Show me some other proof???? anything.. and maybe then I can look at that and agree with you, but I somehow doubt it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Gibson used to know that, and it would be hilarious if someone like these CMG guitar guy's or another start up guitar maker came along and utilized all the old school traditions that luthiers of 50 plus years ago used to, before preprogrammed cnc machines came along and removed a pound of wood, and new guys like these surpassed Gibson in sound and build quality, then maybe the big boys would see whats really important. Save yer guffaws there chief. They've already lost both dealers below NYC and above Baltimore, so most of the east coast can't even see these guitars. They've made, according to them, 500 guitars. I'm sure they are spiraling into that rabbit hole of bankruptcy as we speak. See, for as long as I've been playing guitars, which you don't seem to want to get into, companies have been coming and going, attempting to best Gibson, Fender, and CFMartin. Many many companies have come and gone, and there are three that are still here, still the targets of all them that are going to best them, which still hasn't happened. Enjoy your new guitar, I hope it makes you very happy. Maybe someday you'll see the folly of such stupid statements as guitar players have nothing to do with their sound. I hope you get to where I am, because it is a really really good guitar place to be. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 ...the weight relieved model is one pound lighter than the solid one......Think about that, a WHOLE POUND of wood cut from the guitar, why ? for what ?... ...before preprogrammed cnc machines came along and removed a pound of wood... You obviously missed my previous questions about specific weights of specific guitars so I'll ask again but a bit louder this time so you don't have any excuses about not hearing the questions; First question; How heavy is your non weight-relieved guitar? Second question; How heavy (on average) do you think the 'original' '58-'60 Les Pauls were? Looking forward to reading your answers. Pip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Scales Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Breathe in Twist knickers in opposite direction Breathe out Better? Back to it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 ...I own a 2015 Gibson Les Paul Traditional... This is hysterical! So nothing like (according to you) a 'real' Les Paul at all, then? Here is a Spec list from these CMG guitar guy's LOL i love it i might have to buy my next guitar from these guy's, they continue to make my argument for me. Specs include: Indian Rosewood Fretboard Radius: 12" Nut Material: GraphTech NuBone Back body comfort contour Grover 18:1 tuners Natural wood binding So no Brazillian 'board; no nylon nut; a Back Body Contour??? WTF???; No Klusons; Wood Binding??? Yup. That sounds JUST like a REAL Les Paul...according to you. Please buy one of their guitars. PLEASE!!!! No-one deserves it more than you. Although I'm really doubtful that they deserve you. Pip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparquelito Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 This has become a decidedly mean-spirited thread. And for the record, I disapprove. That said, I'm glad it's MacMutt you are heaping it on, and not me (after my expressing my notorious opinions regarding fake guitars and Chinese counterfeits). Just sayin'........... Thank God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio-T Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 CMG guitar guy's LOL i love it i might have to buy my next guitar from these guy's, If you want to buy scrap wood put together with Elmer`s glue, that is your choice. I will buy a real Gibson Les Paul every time! Sales slow and not taking off? A-lot of scrap wood laying around? OP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 The wider fingerboard is an improvement over the older narrow one that you couldn't even bend up or down on the high or low E string without going over the edge, as for the Geforce tuning, it's been replaced with locking Grovers, as for the short tenon it's not all that noticeable to me, by the way you forgot the zero fret adjustable brass nut which i happen to value above all other nuts since you can adjust the action with a mere turn of an allen wrench. I did not bash all innovations i have been bashing the removal of good hard wood from a beautiful instrument because it simply wasn't necessary. all i can say is, play one for yourself. I have played many 2015s and can't stand the wider fretboard. Just doesn't feel right to me and I have spent a considerable amount of time trying them in the store. I don't have a problem with strings going over the edges and I think any guitarist with good vibrato and bending techniques would say the same. The short tenon isn't noticeable to you but 9 holes are? Short tenon is a cost cutting measure. Why doesn't that bother you? Your thought process here is flawed and quite laughable. Long tenon is it is a better wood-to-wood joint that is supposed to result in better sustain. Now, your short tenon Les Paul may have good sustain but it could theoretically be better if you had a proper neck joint. Something you will never know and can never prove. It's funny. You came on this board bashing other people's guitars for something stupid, guitars they like and spent their hard earned money on, because they aren't to your liking. I look down my nose at your 2015 the same way you look at look at theirs. It's not a true Les Paul no matter what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eracer_Team Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 and it would be hilarious if someone like these CMG guitar guy's or another start up guitar maker came along and utilized all the old school traditions that luthiers of 50 plus years ago used to, umm there is. http://heritageguitar.com/history/ and I can tell you that Seymour Duncan has at least one of the pickup winding machines form the old Gibson plant and does custom pickups on it even to this day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eracer_Team Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 duplicate post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 You obviously missed my previous questions about specific weights of specific guitars so I'll ask again but a bit louder this time so you don't have any excuses about not hearing the questions; Looking forward to reading your answers. Pip. i haven't put my guitar on a scale if thats what your asking, but my guess would be 7 to 9lbs at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 If you want to buy scrap wood put together with Elmer`s glue, that is your choice. I will buy a real Gibson Les Paul every time! Sales slow and not taking off? A-lot of scrap wood laying around? OP I have a real Gibson Les Paul, and by the way when i say real i mean REAL not chambered or weight relieved in any way...i doubt you can say the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio-T Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 I have a real Gibson Les Paul, and by the way when i say real i mean REAL not chambered or weight relieved in any way...i doubt you can say the same. That was not a very good response, Troll... Or should I say shill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 I have played many 2015s and can't stand the wider fretboard. Just doesn't feel right to me and I have spent a considerable amount of time trying them in the store. I don't have a problem with strings going over the edges and I think any guitarist with good vibrato and bending techniques would say the same. The short tenon isn't noticeable to you but 9 holes are? Short tenon is a cost cutting measure. Why doesn't that bother you? Your thought process here is flawed and quite laughable. Long tenon is it is a better wood-to-wood joint that is supposed to result in better sustain. Now, your short tenon Les Paul may have good sustain but it could theoretically be better if you had a proper neck joint. Something you will never know and can never prove. It's funny. You came on this board bashing other people's guitars for something stupid, guitars they like and spent their hard earned money on, because they aren't to your liking. I look down my nose at your 2015 the same way you look at look at theirs. It's not a true Les Paul no matter what you think. My Les Paul is a TRUE SOLID BODY GUITAR, it doesn't have any holes drilled in it nor does it have routered chambers, but others here have to try and find something about it to tear apart so they mention the wider fretboard being a bad thing. I don't exactly know how having more room to bend strings turned into a bad thing but, i guess the same cry babies that originally whined about the old Les Pauls being too heavy have made their ways into this forum, and now have nothing better to do then tear apart my guitar, but hey whatever. Facts are facts and they can't be changed if anyone here has a Les Paul with traditional or modern weight relief then it's not a true Les Paul...sorry, but you don't need my approval so why do you care so much that you want to tear down another players guitar? If your enjoying your Gibson then thats all that matters. All i've done is voice my opinion in the hopes that someone from Gibson will read it and maybe second guess the whole weight relief thing some day, but i don't think that'll happen now, because i'm easily out numbered by younger gen guitarists who don't care about build quality anymore, so what are you guys whining about ? you won, but my opinion will never change and thats my business you play what ever you want. Just keep something in mind there are semi hollow and hollow bodies in Gibson's line right now with weight relieved bodies....ok...the guitars are already hollow, what the heck are they doing ?..and if you still won't admit that their cutting corners with that, then i give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmutt Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 That was not a very good response, Troll... Or should I say shill. Hey whatever man, you want to resort to name calling go right ahead, but i'm not, i'm just a guy that loves good ol' fashion craftsmanship and i express my self passionately about it, sometimes too passionately, but hey whatever, we all love playing what we play, but this post was directed at Gibson in the hopes they would some day change things, not individual guitar players that bought weight relieved guitars, i don't care what others play, like i said if it makes you happy that's all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.