Ole Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 I have just purchased a honeyburst 2007 Les Paul standard instead of my 2004 Les Paul standard. The difference that is most obvious is the weight. The old one was around 5 kg more than 10 lbs whereas the new one is just around 3,5 kg. There is some tonal difference but I like the sound of the new one as much as the old one. My question is how the weight is reduced and does anybody have an opinion wether it actually affects the sound. Ole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Gibson started drilling 9 weight relief holes in all the Gibson USA models back in 1982. They said that they had done studies and that the holes did not affect the tone negatively. A lot of people disagree, personally I didn't find that much of a difference if any to the tone. They did this because lightweight, old growth mahogany was getting harder to find and more expensive. In 07 they decided to go further and cut out chambers in the guitar. Gibson has been making chambered Les Paul guitars for over a decade. They were various models, mostly custom shop ones. In 03 Gibson USA brought out the Supreme which was heavily chambered and had a maple back as well. A few years ago, a few dealers ordered historic reissues with chambering and called them Cloud 9's and they were a big hit with a lot of people who always put down chambered LPs. Chambering adds some brightness to the tone, and can make the guitar a bit more resonant. The trick for Gibson USA was to not chamber too much and lose all of the classic LP tone. Apart from my Robot guitar I have not played any other Gibson USA models. I usually buy and play the custom shop models. But I do love the tone of chambered LPs. When you get into the larger chambered models like the Supreme and Elegant you get an guitar that is a blend of classic LP tone and 335 tone. So yes chambering does affect the tone somewhat. The big question is do you like the tone? If you do, then great, that is what matters most of all. There will always be people who put them down and prefer solid body LPs, but unless you have a pre 82 Gibson USA or one of the historic reissues, your LP will be wither chambered or weight relieved. I hope that helps some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ole Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Hey Raptor, Thanks for the information. This is my second and by far best Les Paul Standard. I really like it and I am able to play to full sets without needing a chiropractor afterwards. I wish I was able to afford the customshop stuff, but I already invested in a historic ES 335. Do You know if there are any drawings showing the shape and placement of the chambers? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaphod B Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Guys, I recently acquired a new LP Classic Antique with the 57 Classic / Classic Plus pickups. The guitar is chambered. It sounds every bit a Les Paul to me - as classic as they come. If the chambering is affecting the tone beyond any normal variation between two Les Pauls, I cannot hear it. Even with the chambering the guitar has a very nice heft and feels substantial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibson CS Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Does anyone have a picture of the chambers before the maple top is put on?...Im curious to see what they look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibson CS Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 I found a picture.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 That shows the weight relief holes used from 82 to 06. If you go to http://www.lespaulforum.com/slubarticle/supreme you can see the chambering in the Supreme. I don't recall seeing any pics of the new Gibson USA chambering yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesse92 Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 I Like The Heavy Pauls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 I Like The Heavy Pauls I do too. My Studio is like a boulder and I am used to that. When I got my very light Standard, I felt cheated...almost as if this was a copy or knockoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 FennRx, your 95 Studio is weight relieved too. It has the 9 holes in it. Most people today are not familiar with the 10-14 lb Lesters of the 70s and early 80's. Most post 82 LPs are probably in the 8-10.5 lb range with the heaviest generally being the Customs. Back in the 70's even Strats were heavy and in the 9-10 lb range. There are a lot of players from that era with pinched nerves in their necks and back problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 doesnt surprise me. just sayin that my LP Std seems much lighter by comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I know, I am just pointing that out so you can imagine how heavy it would be without the weight relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I Like The Heavy Pauls Must be a guy thing...I love heavy Pauls too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LesPaul6666 Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 I've had many heavy(11-12 pounders) Les Pauls, but I currently have 2 '78 Customs that are solid, and both weigh a bit over 8 pounds. I'm thinking about having a Custom Shop duplicate of one of them made. I hope they can find me a nice, light piece of *Not-Chambered* mahogany.^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibis Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 Here's a BFG: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibson CS Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 i know a guy with a 69 deluxe its about 15 pounds, and im not kidding but it sounds unreal, but my standard(not solid 6.96 lbs) is way better and sounds just as good so who know if it effects tone, maybe acoustically, but not through the amp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archer993 Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 FennRx' date=' your 95 Studio is weight relieved too. It has the 9 holes in it. Most people today are not familiar with the 10-14 lb Lesters of the 70s and early 80's. Most post 82 LPs are probably in the 8-10.5 lb range with the heaviest generally being the Customs. Back in the 70's even Strats were heavy and in the 9-10 lb range. There are a lot of players from that era with pinched nerves in their necks and back problems.[/quote'] Jimmy Page being one of the higher profile sufferers. It is documented that he had a great deal of trouble in his left arm and back and had a problem leveraging bar chords - you don't see him using many bar chords in concert footage. Makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dispel Posted April 5, 2008 Share Posted April 5, 2008 Don't know if this helps but theres a Gibson Factory tour video on you tube that shows samples of wood at the different stages on the wall before the tour begins and it shows a raw body with the holes drilled in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted April 5, 2008 Share Posted April 5, 2008 Too bad you can't still get the heavy LPs. I'd love a 12+ pounder! Gibson should accept custom orders again and allow you to chose the approximate weight..."Yeah, give me a frickin' brick of a guitar!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.