Thundergod Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I agree with Are Nine, I also think it would be nice for gibson to offer (at least) their highest selling dealers the option to have one guitar of each with all the exact features (neck shape, pickups, hardware, finish, electronics, and everything else, down to strap buttons) so that people can feel and hear the difference based on the body only. Same as they have done in the past with pickups. They don't make/sell any guitar that is exactly the same but with a different body routing tho, so it would not really help. (but it would be nice of them to do) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgary Flametop Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 The only thing I would be worried about with the chambering is how the guitar ages. With the chambered body the maple is glued to just an edge with just a bunch of air underneath it. This will make it easier for seperation at the edges, as well as, possible cracking in the cap. Most of this would probably show up first in the finish, especially the outer edges. I had a custom built guitar from the 70's that had routing done to the center slab. It wasn't the same as the x-ray in this posting, but the amount of wood at the edges was similar none the less. It first started to get a crack in the finish where the maple cap was glued to the slab and then even got to the point where the maple cap was slightly indented from the slab. If the maple cap is glued to a solid center slab there is no way it could do this. I wish I still had the guitar as I would put a picture up. I still think that having a 7 lb Les Paul is great, especially for those 3 encore nights, but I have a feeling that 40 years down the road when these are as old as a 59 is now they will at minimum have cracks in the finish around the edges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dROK83 Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 since someone else already posted a year later i don't feel bad asking. does anyone know if chambering did start in 06 like was stated in one of the earlier posts? and if so, was it for all of 06' or just then last half or quarter of the year? just curious to know, i have a studio made in 06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainNemo68 Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 Technically speaking, chambering started before 2006. Here is my 2000 LP Standard Lite, which is chambered: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgary Flametop Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Hey dROK83, just weigh your guitar. If it weighs around 7 it is chambered. If it weighs 8.5 to 10 it is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 That doesn't work. I have a chambered 2008 Standard which weighs 9lb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eracer_Team Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 I guess since Les Paul (the man) had tried everything in the making of a guitar; including a steel railway track... I guess you could fill a chambered Les Paul with anything you liked to experiment with Les never stopped experimenting, why should you (or Gibson) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgary Flametop Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 Hey DaveS. Either your scale is broken or your 2008 Standard is not chambered. I talked to my bud at Gibson last night and he said that no chambered Standard should way more than 7 1/2 pounds. Your Standard must be from before August 1, 2008 which has the swiss cheese holes. All Standards from the early 80's till then had these holes drilled in them. They did this because the wood stock became heavier and it was needed to do this to keep the weight relative to what it was before. I have a 70's Paul without holes and a 90's paul with holes and they both weigh almost the identical weight. Anyways, if your scale is not broken your guitar is not chambered. My bud said it is possible for a guitar dated after August 1, 2008 to not be chambered, as well, if your guitar is dated later than that. I have copied the specs for the 2008 Standard below. 2008 Standard (2008-) Gibson's new version of the Les Paul Standard. Released August 1, 2008, it features built-in lock on strap buttons, larger neck tenon, an asymmetrical neck profile to make for a comfortable neck, frets levelled by Plek machine, and locking Grover tuners with an improved ratio of 18:1. With the 2008 model Gibson has introduced their "weight relief" chambering, which includes routing "chambers" in specific areas of the mahogany slab body as specified by Gibson R&D. Before August 1, 2008, Les Paul Standards were "swiss cheesed." In other words, it had holes routed into the body, but it was not chambered like most of Gibson's Les Paul lineup now is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 10, 2010 Author Share Posted April 10, 2010 ^ Chambering began in late 2006 and yes, chambered Les Pauls can weigh 9 lbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 Hi Mine is definitely a 2008 Standard with all the locking stuff. I'll check my scales.... From the serial number - it was made in December 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgary Flametop Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Hey Are Nine. I just e-mailed my bud to find out when the chambering thing started on Standards. I copied those specs from the gibson website. If you google the first line from the 2008 Standard specs I copied above you will find those specs on thousands of other sites as well. I thought, however, to verify this that I would search for 2007 Standards and Chambering on the net. I found dozens of people with 2007 Standards (that are not Traditionals) that are not chambered, but I also found dozens of people with 2007 Standards that say their's are chambered. I would have asked my bud about this before when I asked about the weight if I knew there could be a discrepency. As far as the weight thing goes, however, I can find no reason to doubt what I was told. I found over 20 references to weight on chambered Standards and none were more than 7.5 pounds. Can you give me some references to chambered Standards that weigh more than 9 pounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgary Flametop Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Hey DaveS. You don't by chance have a 2008 Traditional Standard do you? As far as the weight thing goes for the chambered Standards I found over 20 references for them on the net and none of them weighed more that 7.5 pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 12, 2010 Author Share Posted April 12, 2010 Calgary Flametop, chambering starting in late 2006 - around October. Every regular Standard since then is chambered (not including any special orders by certain dealers). The '07 Standards are the same as previous years with the exception that they're chambered. Gibson introduced the "new" Standard in mid 2008. That's the one with all the new features - long neck tenon, asymmetrical neck, locking tuners, etc. Those are also chambered. Have a look at this thread; I created it a while ago. It's on a Les Paul forum and has 35,000 hits right now; don't you think somebody would have brought it up if the info wasn't correct? http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/gibson-les-pauls/50210-gibson-les-paul-101-a.html Weight - Just a few I've tried at L&M that were well over 8 lbs. One was a tank and felt like 9 lbs. A few forum members here and at MLP (I think they're long gone, though) have also said their chambered LPs were fairly heavy. My own '07 chambered reissue is about 8 lbs. Not a Standard, I know, but goes to show that chambered guitars do exceed this 7.5 lbs you feel is the max limit. "I found dozens of people with 2007 Standards (that are not Traditionals) that are not chambered" This means absolutely nothing. The problem with this statement is people don't know. Some people still think ALL Les Pauls are completely solid. Others think there's no way a 10 or 11 lb Custom has any weight-relief. People don't have the ability to just pick up a Les Paul and tell what type of weight-relief it has just based on its weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 12, 2010 Author Share Posted April 12, 2010 Hey DaveS. You don't by chance have a 2008 Traditional Standard do you? He mentioned it has all the locking stuff. It's a Standard. Please tell me what a Traditional Standard is. There's the Standard, which is chambered and the Traditional, which is weight-relieved. Those are the only two models. There's no "Traditional Standard" model. Websites like guitarcenter.com combine the two to confuse people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepblue Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 He mentioned it has all the locking stuff. It's a Standard. Please tell me what a Traditional Standard is. There's the Standard' date=' which is chambered and the Traditional, which is weight-relieved. Those are the only two models. There's no "Traditional Standard" model. Websites like guitarcenter.com combine the two to confuse people.[/quote'] Even Gibson themselves dont tell the whole story... If you read the online spec sheet for the historic Les Pauls youll get the "Bumblebee caps" as a list of selling points. They fail to say they are fake Bees made to look like the real thing. I think now they are the real deal, but a few years ago they were not. I know you know this Tim...Im putting it out there for the masses. hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 12, 2010 Author Share Posted April 12, 2010 Around a year ago, I asked Gibson if the '09s had real PIO Bees and the answer was no. I doubt they made the change for '10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 12, 2010 Author Share Posted April 12, 2010 Speaking of errors on Gibson.com, they also had a line up, which said the 50th R9s were weight-relieved. I emailed them and it was indeed an error on their website. Weight-relieving the 50th R9s would have been the most monumental F up in Gibson's history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallen Posted April 27, 2010 Share Posted April 27, 2010 My LP Custom is 1989 - is it drilled, chambered or solid? It weighs 10.12 lb . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 My LP Custom is 1989 - is it drilled' date=' chambered or solid? It weighs 10.12 lb .[/quote'] It's almost certainly weight-relieved. Don't worry. No-one in the world could tell the difference beween a solid- and a weight-relieved- instrument without the help of an X-Ray machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eracer_Team Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Speaking of errors on Gibson.com' date=' ........and it was indeed an error on their website. [/quote'] What ever happened to Mike [at] Gibby.com? I sounded like he was hired to fix all the web issues here. but the new sales site at Gibson.com is awful, it's tricky for people to figure out how to select All, or Gibson USA or Custom, plus Epiphone's are listed there (note Epiphone doesn't list Gibson..) So were has Mike gone to in 2 yrs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallen Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 It's almost certainly weight-relieved. Don't worry. No-one in the world could tell the difference beween a solid- and a weight-relieved- instrument without the help of an X-Ray machine. Has anyone then got a non-weight releaved LP Custom? What would it weigh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Has anyone then got a non-weight releaved LP Custom? What would it weigh? All the Customs built before weight-relieving was introduced in 1982 (read first post on this thread for accurate info) were solid and the Historic Customs should all be solid as well. The Historic re-issues use the lightest available mahogany body-blanks and this is one reason cited for the hike in price over a normal Custom - the lighter wood comes at a price premium as there is far less of it about. Some of the mid-late '70s Customs have been listed as weighing over 13 lbs. But as I said earlier; don't worry about it. The weight-relieving activity supposedly only came to light (literally!) when someone saw their LP going through an airport X-ray device and this was many, many years after the process was introduced. No-one had ever noticed any change in tonal characteristics or quality. Tim Shaw ( highly esteemed Gibson honcho) is quoted as saying; "I don't think it made a bit of difference to the sound. The holes were too small to act as resonant cavities." Henry Juszkiewicz (Gibson President and the man most responsible for saving the company after the disastrous Norlin years) said; "It didn't make any difference to the tonal characteristics of the model...The maple top is solid, of course, and a lot of the tonal characteristics come from that. So we were making a better guitar : it was more comfortable, and it still sounded good." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucketbot Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 I have a new 1957 LP Custom 2 Pickup VOS which according to the Gibson site has a completely solid Mahogany body which is not weight relieved. I also recently got a Buckethead Les Paul. I stuck both Guitars on the scales & both weighed in at around just a shade over 10 lbs. Obviously the BH Les Paul has a much larger body & is also chambered hence the weights being the same. As expected the sound of these 2 Guitars is as different as Night & day. I love both!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lespaulj45 Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 2006 Gibson Les Paul Std 2007 Gibson J-45 MC Stop! enough already! My Les Paul sounds great and I dont care if its got holes or not! I didnt buy it or any of my other 5 guitars to be museum pieces-I bought them because when I played them thru a amp they sounded great. I have owned guitars and amps since the 1960's and some of the cheapest no name stuff has given me the sound I was after and some of the high end stuff was not all that great but as I advanced in skill I became better at selecting eqpt . Dont assume that "brand" equates quality- I have had some $50 Danelectro's that were awesome and some $2500 big brand guitars that were not- play em and if you like em buy em Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Stop! enough already! Not when forum members ask for specific advice. play em and if you like em buy em I couldn't possibly agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.