I don't think Gibson can win...

[Tim Plains]

Think about it...

 

Weight-relieved bodies

Gibson came up with these bodies with swiss cheese holes & short neck tenon in the early '80s because people complained their Les Pauls were too heavy. So, this was the answer. I still find it funny how every once in a while, you come across a guy who owns (let's say) a 1988 Standard and doesn't believe it's weight-relieved. These people are almost in denial about it. "No, no, no...my guitar is solid !!" No, it's not...get over it, buddy.

 

Solid body reissues

The historic line up. True solid bodies with long neck tenon...just like they made them back in the '50s, right? I love how people use the word "wrong" when comparing them to the originals. Les Paul historians rip these apart because they have the wrong fretboard species, the truss rod is wrong, the tailpiece is in the wrong location, the inlays are wrong, the tuners are wrong, etc...

 

Chambering

I'm sure this single one word has created more uproar than any other in the guitar world. Carving out the inside of a Les Paul to keep the weight down.

 

No matter what Gibson does, changing the Les Paul formula will undoubtedly upset somebody.

...no wonder they can't satisfy everybody.

[Zeus]

I dont even own a Gibson yet but I hear where your coming from. Gibson should stop trying or people should stop moaning.

[dem00n]

I dont even own a Gibson yet but I hear where your coming from. Gibson should stop trying or people should stop moaning.

[Zeus]

 

[DrJustice]

It's great that Gibson do make such a wide variety of Lesters (and other models). Add to that the plethora of used ones, and there ought to be one for every taste. I guess it's a case of both win & whine, depending... :-p

 

To think that development didn't stop at T-Fords, oil lamps and outhouses. Horrible thought innit?

 

DJ

--

[bubba_leon]

I approached the chambering issue with an open mind.

Here are my results : at high gain the chambered les pauls start to howl. Just like any other semi hollow body guitar would. Did Gibson not think that this would happen? Air space creates feed back, any bozo who knows anything about acoustics knows this.

 

And now after a year of properly storing my Les Paul in its case, the finish has started to crack. A chambered body will expand and contract more dramatically than a non chambered one.

disappointed to say the least.

 

Why not just offer it as an option rather than experimenting on their customers?!!

[BigKahune]

...at high gain the chambered les pauls start to howl.

 

Hmm... I have a chambered LP that doesn't howl' date=' even with the gain cranked all the way.

 

...And now after a year of properly storing my Les Paul in its case' date=' the finish has started to crack. A chambered body will expand and contract more dramatically than a non chambered one.[/quote']

 

Interesting argument against chambering I haven't heard before. Sorry to hear that's happened to your LP.

[Thundergod]

Yes I agree... they should have stayed with acoustics, whose stupid idea was to make an electric guitar anyway?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*sarcasm*

[Madguitarist78]

Well all I have to say is that complaining is pointless unless something gets accomplished...

 

People complained about the weight of their lesters so they carved them out.. I know many people that think that this was a good thing, others that call it "heresy" I personly LOVE my chambered Lester, and yet I LOVE my swiss cheese Custom...

 

Gibson probably didn't offer it as an option because people are afraid of new things most of the time and Gibson felt that everyone should give chambering a chance...

[RichCI]

A lot of guys are into historically correct reissues or going for what is traditional and I can totally understand where they're coming from and feel similarly. I have a 57 RI Strat and a 52 RI Tele and a large part of the reason why I bought reissues is that I wanted guitars like what my guitar heroes play. Fender offers so many variations on those models (particularly the Strat) that it becomes a pain in the *** to figure out what would work best for me; going with reissues greatly simplified the proces as my thought was that they were probably the closest as to what my heroes played. Fortunately, they just happen to be really good guitars that work for me as, ultimately, all I really want is a good guitar.

 

I think Gibson has been heading down the same road as Fender in that regard - offering a ton of variations of the Les Paul model. I already own an awesome Custom but, if I decide I have to have a burst or something, aside from loving trans amber, I might just look at one of the reissues or one of the weight relieved ones just to save my back some work.

[GuitarJunkie]

I approached the chambering issue with an open mind.

Here are my results : at high gain the chambered les pauls start to howl. Just like any other semi hollow body guitar would.

WTF?!?

 

How about a 2007 Standard faded through a Z Maz 38 with a Fulltone OCD' date=' and for a volume boost for leads, a Fulltone FatBoost2. Zero feedback.

 

 

Yes I agree... they should have stayed with acoustics' date=' whose stupid idea was to make an electric guitar anyway?[/quote']

George Beauchamp and Adolph Rickenbacker.

 

[Tim Plains]

I dont even own a Gibson yet but I hear where your coming from. Gibson should stop trying or people should stop moaning.

Good thinking! Gibson should just shut 'er down and stop making guitars.

They achieved perfection in 1959 and have been ******* up ever since!

 

Why not just offer it as an option rather than experimenting on their customers?!!

Umm...isn't that what they're doing? It's an option' date=' you don't have to buy it.

Chambered, weight-relieved & solid are all still available.

 

A lot of guys are into historically correct reissues or going for what is traditional and I can totally understand where they're coming from and feel similarly.

I can see where they're coming from, as well.

 

I have a 57 RI Strat and a 52 RI Tele and a large part of the reason why I bought reissues is that I wanted guitars like what my guitar heroes play.

That's as good a reason as any.

You don't compare your RI Fenders to the originals and bash all the differences' date=' though...do you?

That's the difference.

 

I already own an awesome Custom but, if I decide I have to have a burst or something, aside from loving trans amber, I might just look at one of the reissues or one of the weight relieved ones just to save my back some work.

You already have a weight-relieved LP, why not go for a reissue?

Trans Amber & Lemonburst are sort of similar

[DamienAzrael]

Why not just offer it as an option rather than experimenting on their customers?!!

 

I've been wondering that ever since they decided to chamber all the USA models....It amused me how they ran out and released the Traditional to try and make things right.

[deepblue]

Gibson is crafty.

Take the '59 for example.

They could easily take a 1959 Lester, duplicate everything down to the last detail. Using lasers for measurements

and such. But have they done that in the past?

 

No.

 

Every year of the "reissue" they do a few more things to the guitar to get it ever closer to the look and feel

of a real burst. They never do it all at once.

 

Why?

MONEY!.....this way theyll sell more guitars every year baiting us to thinking we are almost there, and this years

model is the closest yet.

 

I dont feel sorry for poor Gibby. They know what theyre doing.

[bubba_leon]

When I mean high gain, I mean Soldano SLO 100 at 5 volume ,and no pedals at a decent sized indoor venue like the Hemlock in SF. I have the same exact guitar in the bullion gold and it can handle the volume. I believe my goldy is swiss cheesed, however the holes are not not significant enough to create the feed back. The honeyburst which is chambered sounded great at the guitar center when I bought it, but playing it live and loud is a whole different monster.

[Mad Rax]

playing it live and loud is a whole different monster.

Yup. A totally different monster. I believe my current Les Paul moans more than the one I had before, and yeah this one is chambered where as the other one wasn't. I only realised it going live, though it wasn't to bad. I cant compare them cuz they stole my old Paul and I'm not really sure. The difference isn't to bad as so far as tone or feedback, but the solid body version certainly had more sustain.

[Kurt]

No matter what Gibson does' date=' changing the Les Paul formula will undoubtedly upset somebody.

...no wonder they can't satisfy everybody.[/quote']

 

I would be perfectly fine if they offered 3 versions of every Les Paul. Solid, swiss cheese and chambered at the same price. Everybody could pick the one he/she likes and good.

 

But wait! Who would buy the overpriced V.O.S. models then?

 

Long tenon on the other hand is something that really requires more work, so this may be reserved for V.O.S. and other stuff. But solid with holes drilled into or chambers needs as much wood as solid without.

 

Greetings

Kurt

[RichCI]

You already have a weight-relieved LP' date=' why not go for a reissue?

Trans Amber & Lemonburst are sort of similar :- [/quote']

 

I'm not sure about that. Mine's a '91 Custom Shop Custom and it's pretty heavy (around 10 lbs, according to the bathroom scale). BUt, if it is weight relieved, I'm a big believer in weight relief as it's an exceptional guitar.

 

Actually, I like the Lemonburst better but every LP I've seen with that finish has been uber expensive.

[RichCI]

You don't compare your RI Fenders to the originals and bash all the differences' date=' though...do you?

That's the difference.[/quote']

 

I see little reason to do so. In the first place, I'll most likely never get my paws on an original. Second, those old guitars were built much less consistently than they are today so it'd be pretty unfair to compare a reissue to an original unless comparing it to the original that was used as a model for the reissue.

[pippy]

As far as the 'Swiss-Cheese' LP models go I can't see any problem. If most of the mahogany available today is too heavy to make a 9 lb Les Paul then remove some wood in such a way as to make next to no difference in tone. This is what Gibson says they did. The fact that no-one noticed for years seems to back up the 'No Difference in Tone' argument. When the process was finally discovered it wasn't the sonic qualities of the guitar which were called into question - it was overlooked debris rattling about in the holes.

 

The fully chambered models I tried didn't even make it to the 'through an amp' stage of testing as they were so body-light/neck-heavy I couldn't get them to balance comfortably. This is just my individual preference and I'm not about to denigrate what may be a marvellous instrument for someone else.

 

My LP happens to be solid. However; if, tomorrow, someone were to x-ray it and say "Fooled You! - All this time it was 'weight-relieved' after all!" I'd still be as happy with it as I am today. No question. No difference.

 

 

Second' date=' those old guitars were built much less consistently than they are today so it'd be pretty unfair to compare a reissue to an original unless comparing it to the original that was used as a model for the reissue. [/quote']

 

 

As far as RichCI's Strats go; I played a '64 Strat for 24 years and it sounded absolutely wonderful. The regular Strats I had from the '70s and '80s didn't have the same 'vintage' sound as Fender were, in those days, fitting hotter and hotter pups on their guitars.

 

The Re-issue Strats which started to become available in the early '80s did get close to the original Pre-CBS tone with one important exception; they used a 5-way selector switch. With the original 3-way switch it was possible to get many different out-of-phase tones, depending on where the switch was jammed; not just the two you get in positions 2 and 4 on the 5-way.

 

As far as I am aware they are still using the 5-way switch.

 

In my opinion this is a mistake.

 

The build quality of the USA re-issue Strats I've tried has always been higher than my original.

[RichCI]

The Re-issue Strats which started to become available in the early '80s did get close to the original Pre-CBS tone with one important exception; they used a 5-way selector switch. With the original 3-way switch it was possible to get many different out-of-phase tones' date=' depending on where the switch was jammed; not just the two you get in positions 2 and 4 on the 5-way.

 

As far as I am aware they are still using the 5-way switch.

 

In my opinion this is a mistake.

 

The build quality of the USA re-issue Strats I've tried has always been higher than my original.[/quote']

 

The reissues ship with a three way installed. I replaced the switch in mine with a five way as I got fed up with the switch jumping to just one pickup while playing (I tend to flail around like a mental patient when I play though).

[Eracer_Team]

Are Nine.. you missed one..

 

"My Les Paul is made with one piece of wood"

 

From all the videos of the factory tours I've seen the main body is made up of two or three pieces of wood and have been for a very long time.

 

(note to you strat lovers,,, a strat is also made up of more than one piece of wood in the body.)

[deepblue]

Historics are made from one piece of light weight Mahogany.

I asked Gibson, they said it to be true.

[GingerSG]

I don't really care what they do to their guitars providing the quality, tonality and overall workmanship doesn't slip otherwise it would seem Gibson are doing all this just to cut a few corners or keep costs down which doesn't sit right by me. If I wanted a poorly constructed, low quality guitar I would pay for one; When I buy another Gibson I pay for good quality or else I might as well just buy a PRS (which I might do, I'm getting bored of Gibsons now...)

[pippy]

The reissues ship with a three way installed. I replaced the switch in mine with a five way as I got fed up with the switch jumping to just one pickup while playing (I tend to flail around like a mental patient when I play though).

 

Thanks for the info, RichCI., I'm glad to hear it. Sorry that it didn't work out for you, though.

 

Perhaps I should try one out again!

 

Was the 3-way in yours stiffish? The one I had was such that when it was placed anywhere between-positions it wouldn't slip but that may just have been down to old age. (It's; not mine. At least not at the beginning.....)