Your feelings on guitar weight?

[jamester]

I've always been very picky about a guitar's weight; there's a point where I consider a guitar "too heavy", and any guitars I've owned which cross this line I've eventually gotten rid of, regardless of how much I may have liked them otherwise. It goes without saying I won't touch a Les Paul! ;-)

 

I own two 335's: My black 335 Dot is a beast, and my 60's Block is nice and light. So physically I like the 60's Block the best, BUT I can't help but notice the heavy black one really has the better (electric) tone - real fat and authoritative! Contrastingly, the Block (which also has a thinner neck) has a light and airy tone. Both are very nice, but I find I prefer the Dot's ballsiness, while I prefer the Block's feel on my back and shoulders. So I'm kind of torn between the two!

 

How are you guys when it comes to guitar weight? Is tone the ultimate deciding factor? Do you not even give the weight a second thought? Or are you picky like me, considering weight/feel equally as importantly as tone?

[cdntac]

I like the feel and sound of Les Pauls but their weight kills my shoulder after a while.

 

Other than a LP, I've never come across a guitar where weight was somewhat of a concern to me.

[DeVeeWee]

I like the feel and sound of Les Pauls but their weight kills my shoulder after a while.

 

Other than a LP' date=' I've never come across a guitar where weight was somewhat of a concern to me. [/quote']

 

It's all things together I'm searching in a guitar: it's body, it's sound, it's playability, it's features and yes, weight as well. But with the latest LP editions(weight relieved or chambered) you shouldn't have a problem with weight. My LP Standard 08 body is chambered and causes no problem at all when playing for hours.

My Duesenberg TV Player is a semi-hollow body, but weights even more than my LP(because of the massive block in the middle) and is one of my favorite guitars due to the extraordinary sustain it produces, but it's killing me after hours...but I continue. So, it is the balance between things that counts...and that's personal.

[Murph]

I gigged a '72 Les Paul Recording for 14+ years, and it was the old solid one, BUT. I was younger then.

 

I love my 339, but wanted a semi, and weight wasn't a factor.

 

Four sets in a bar does tend to weigh on ya though.

 

Murph.

[L5Larry]

Weight has never singularly been a deciding factor for me, or I certainally wouldn't have bought my LP back in '75. I do believe that weight in itself does have a great affect on the sound of a guitar.

[Murph]

I do believe that weight in itself does have a great affect on the sound of a guitar.

 

I'm questioning that, since buying the ES-339.

 

And gigging it in loud bars since Sept, '08.

 

I would have never thought, a semi hollow could be so bold. I bought it for a bluesy, jazzy tone.

 

But.

 

Ala Ted Nugent, ect. This SOB will cover it all.

 

I gigged a '72 Les Paul for 14 years, and it was never the tone machine this 339 is. My SG will rip yer head off with a Marshall, but it'll never touch the tone of the 339.

 

Just sayin'......

[jamester]

It's inteteresting... From my experiences, heavy guitars sound better but lighter guitars feel better. Of course "better" is all relative; what I really mean by that is more sustain, thicker lows and an overall solid punchy tone. Lighter guitars tend to have a lighter tone...more pop and jangle, less sustain but more articulate.

 

There's always exceptions too, and maybe some would flat out disagree, but it's generally what I've experienced.

 

As I said before, I always rule on the side of comfort. For me personally, when I become aware of the pulling on my neck and shoulder, my music making is affected, both physically and mentally. I've passed on or sold some great tone machines just because they made me sore after gigs. The more "invisible" the instrument, the better I play...

[RJLII]

Light = Good in my book. My ES335 is nice and light and has great tone. I had a 40th Anniversary Les Paul that was a log and sounded sterile. Surprisingly, my '58 Reissue Les Paul (not chambered) is lighter than my ES335 and not suprisingly sounds fantastic.

[AlanC]

Weight worries me now that I've got older. I have a '74 LP custom which is extremely heavy. When I bought it new, the weight didn't matter but now I hardly ever play it. Every time I pick it up I notice the weight and I quickly put it down for something else.

 

I have an LP R7 reissue which is not that heavy but has a fat neck and the tone on it is as good if not better when compared to the much heavier LP Custom.

[cdntac]

I once had an early '80s Les Paul Custom. Was it ever heavy!

[spitball]

My '67 ES-335 is both the lightest and the best-sounding (yeah, that's subjective) Gibson I've had out of about 10 of them. I believe it's actually under 7 and a half pounds. It really does have an open, airy tone as jamester mentioned. I suspect that the trapeze tail is a big reason why. It does not sound as compressed or sustained as some other stop-tail semi-hollows I've had. It is definitely less "Les Paulish", if you will. But the voice of this guitar is to die for.

[Notes_Norton]

I played Fender P-Bass for a couple of years, THAT was heavy.

 

Now I'm into light guitars. Between 6 and 7 pounds is ideal. I have a 330, Epi Casino, and LTD/ESP LP-ish retrofitted with GFS Mean 90s and a Varitone (about 7 pounds - the Gibby and Epi are closer to 6).

 

My band-mate has a Parker, and it sounds great, also just shy of 7 pounds.

 

Tone is subjective. As long as your tone is "in the ballpark" for the kind of music you are playing you are fine -- the audience can't tell the nuances of tone. And what is good tone? Hendrix? Pass? Bonfa? EVH? Slash? Benson? Gale? Hetfield? Carlton? Walsh? Kath? Clapton Gibson? Clapton Strat? Page? Beck? and so on.

 

IMHO Once your tone is in the ballpark, the most you can do to make your music better is improve your technique and artistic instincts.

 

Notes

[Murph]

And, I'd like to add, a "ton" of your tone is in your hands, and in your amp.

 

I can put ( and did for over a year) my Tele in that Blue Angel

 

<<-----------------

 

and you won't notice much difference if you're at the bar.

 

Best to ya.

 

Murph.

[jamester]

Tone is subjective. As long as your tone is "in the ballpark" for the kind of music you are playing you are fine -- the audience can't tell the nuances of tone. And what is good tone? Hendrix? Pass? Bonfa? EVH? Slash? Benson? Gale? Hetfield? Carlton? Walsh? Kath? Clapton Gibson? Clapton Strat? Page? Beck? and so on.

Yeah I definitely agree the audience isn't noticing anything like what most players obsess about way too much! lol

 

I want to say though, that there is a difference between a players "sound" and an instrument's inherent acoustic "tone". I was definitely reffering to the latter in my comments about light vs heavy guitars...

 

When I try out an instrument at a store, I try to take it into the acoustic room (if there is one) and just listen and get to know it acoustically. That's the instrument's true voice. I could give a crap about the pickups or what it's like plugged in. I'll check that out at home through my rig if I love its natural tone (and playability) enough to buy it. Sometimes sales guys are like, "don't you wanna plug it in?" Nope.

[jamester]

This thread compelled me to do (yet another) serious listening test last nite, between the 60's Block and the Dot. They are so different, night and day 335 tones; my heavier black Dot is really very Les Paulish...fat but a bright attack, with that slightly compressed sound. The Block is really open and airy sounding, with more acoustic snap. If anything the Dot has the "jazzier" tone, but I keep coming back to the Block because it's lighter and maybe more "natural" sounding, if that makes sense...

[Volt]

I don't play for a living anymore but I used to. Back when I was gigging, for a heavy guitar I would get a wider guitar strap and all was good. If I love a guitar's tone, it's weight is not important - there must a wide enough strap for it out there somewhere. :-

[esch]

In fact I love a heavy guitar. My honeyburst LP is the heaviest of all I own and it just seems like it has such mojo for that. You know you're holding a serious axe and the weight seems to make it more stable while playing.

But isn't it interesting that I like the sound of my Goldtop better, which is chambered, and weighs quite a bit less...I actually put a couple of lead weights in with the electronics so it would have a similar feel as my Honeyburst , is that odd? LOL

[Murph]

Yep.

 

You're an odd one.....

[jamester]

...I actually put a couple of lead weights in with the electronics so it would have a similar feel as my Honeyburst ' date=' is that odd? LOL[/quote']

That's so funny - I was contemplating a way to do this with my new 330, because it's so freakishly light! But I think I'm gonna go with a Bigsby...added weight in the back for better balance, and added functionality as well so it's a win-win!

[spitball]

That's so funny - I was contemplating a way to do this with my new 330' date=' because it's so freakishly light! But I think I'm gonna go with a Bigsby...added weight in the back for better balance, and added functionality as well so it's a win-win! [/quote']

 

I played a '65 ES-330 with a Bigsby; one of the nicest sounding/playing guitars I've had the pleasure to play. I think it was a B-3 model (the one with a single bar) which the owner swore by as being the better, more stable choice.

[axuality]

I owned a 335 most of my life, traded for a Les Paul, then traded back for a 339. I think

that those of you who think a Les Paul is so uncommonly heavy should get a scale,

and weigh a 335, a "solid" Les Paul and a chambered Les Paul. I believe that the 335

is heavier than a chambered, and as heavy as all but the very heaviest solid Les Paul.

I may be wrong but I don't think so. I think I've even seen that Gibson reports

the weight of the 335 to be up with the Les Pauls.

 

My 335 was very HEAVY.

[axuality]

I owned a 335 most of my life, traded for a Les Paul, then traded back for a 339. I think

that those of you who think a Les Paul is so uncommonly heavy should get a scale,

and weigh a 335, a "solid" Les Paul and a chambered Les Paul. I believe that the 335

is heavier than a chambered, and as heavy as all but the very heaviest solid Les Paul.

I may be wrong but I don't think so. I think I've even seen that Gibson reports

the weight of the 335 to be up with the Les Pauls.

 

My 335 was very HEAVY.

 

Long live Gibson.

 

P.S. I HIGHLY recommend the 339. A Custom Shop guitar for a low Gibson USA price.

Only $1799. And is that mother smooth! I owned a 1960 335 for 30 years, so I know

what quality is, and in my opinion this 339 has it.

[jamester]

I believe that the 335

is heavier than a chambered' date=' and as heavy as all but the very heaviest solid Les Paul...

 

My 335 was very HEAVY.

[/quote']

The truth is that 335's can vary greatly in weight...moreso than Les Pauls from my experience, but admittedly I don't have a lot of experience with LP's. I own three 335's, and they span the gamut from featherlight to fairly heavy. When I was shopping around this last time I played a bunch of them, and they all weighed/sounded different.

 

I almost bought a sunburst that was possibly the heaviest guitar I've ever felt of any make/model, which would generally turn me off but I swear this was the best sounding electric guitar I'd ever heard! It was a 335 that sounded like a fine archtop....freakishly good tone. Didn't keep it though, the weight was just too much and I wasn't crazy about the flametop. It does seem that the new Dots are all fairly weighty across the board compared to other 335 models, but even still there is significant variation from piece to piece...

[jamester]

So I had the shop weigh my black 335 Dot today (the fairly heavy one), and it's nine pounds exactly.

 

Now I'm curious what the typical weight of a Les Paul is, and the difference between a regular LP and the new weight-relieved models...

[qblue]

So I had the shop weigh my black 335 Dot today (the fairly heavy one)' date=' and it's nine pounds exactly.

 

Now I'm curious what the typical weight of a Les Paul is, and the difference between a regular LP and the new weight-relieved models...[/quote']

 

My favorite guitars are the heavy ones; specifically the 8.8 lb Telecaster and the heavier ES-347 (which I have not formally weighed). I have no issues about weight, because if the guitar sounds good, the weight doesn't matter. Both guitars are well-balanced. I have played a 50's LP that I would consider too heavy to play, but it was seriously unbalanced (bottom heavy) and I didn't like the tone it had; all I could think of was the weight and when I could take it off. It had 3 pickups.

 

I have since done a workout program and that seems to help my stamina to play. But really if the guitar sounds good I'll play it for a long time with no ill effects. The guitar straps I use are up to 3" in width and that really helps.