WAL Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Hi Guys, Just bought a Les Paul Studio model from the USA. When I tried it I noticed that it was as heavy as a Les Paul Standard I tried. However, when I tried another Studio (same colour and same hardware) it was seriously lighter (and consequently thinner sounding). The second (brand new) guitar had no labels or marks to distinguish it from the 2006 model (which I eventually bought) and nothing to suggest that it was a "lite" model. Can anyone throw a light as to what the difference in the models is? I'm sure that the salesman said something about the newer one having a cavity in the body, but his Deep Southern accent made it hard to get quite what he said? Regards WAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Newer guitars have been chambered to cut down on weight. I don't know the specifics of when this started and on which models it has been done. I know that my Les Paul Standard is a 2007 and it several lbs lighter than my 1995 Studio. Gibson says that their research shows that chambering does not affect tone, but some people disagree. You could always go back to the store and get the serial number and then identify the model that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneBaron Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 They started chambering the Les Pauls about a year ago. Chances are that if it's 2007 or newer, it's chambered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturn Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I know this topic has been brought up many times and I still don't know what is right. I've read before that Gibson started putting weight relief holes (some call these Swiss Cheese holes) in Les Pauls way back in the early 80's. My Studio weighs almost 10 lbs which seems heavy compared to what I have read from most others who claim thier LP weighs anywhere from 7.5 to 9 lbs. It seems solid but if I tap on the back it sounds as if there might be some hollow places. I even asked one of the "knowledgable" guys at GC to try and set me straight. I was with him when he said that Custom Shops were the only ones that are completely solid now, but I find his claim that solid LPs weigh 17 or 18lbs hard to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarJunkie Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 If LPs weighed 17 or 18 lbs., nobody would play one standing up. I can't picture Page in "The Song Remains the Same" playing "Whole Lotta' Love" sitting on a stool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAL Posted January 24, 2008 Author Share Posted January 24, 2008 Thanks for the info guys. The weight really DOES make a massive difference. The new "chambered" version I tried, sounded like a cross between a Strat (fitted with a humbucker) and an SG (but nearer to an SG). The guitar I bought matched the Les Paul Standards and Classics that I tried for both weight and tone. The difference was in the mids which were far fatter. I ran a serial check on the guitar and the date came back as March 25th 2006, so it would appear to confirm the comments about the year when the build of the guitars changed. 17lbs for a genuine full body Standard though? I don't think so. My bathroom scales say about 9 or 10 tops for my Studio which weighs about the same as some of the 70's Les Pauls I'ev tried in the past. Infact, the Epiphone doubleneck 1275 Page copy I have is only a couple of pounds more and that's a brute to play live and needs a big fat bas guitar strap to be anywhere near comfortable (especially with the awful neck heavy balance). At 17lbs for a Les Paul you would definitely finish up with a hernia. LOL Regards WAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 He is talking through his hat. Back in the Norlin years, through the 70's and early 80's 10+ lbs was not uncommon. I had a 12lb Custom, but the heaviest I have ever seen anyone post about was 14lbs. Most were in the 9-11 lb range I think. At the same time (late 70's early 80's) even Strats were known to get up to the 9-11lb range fairly often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoya Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 If LPs weighed 17 or 18 lbs.' date=' nobody would play one standing up. I can't picture Page in "The Song Remains the Same" playing "Whole Lotta' Love" sitting on a stool.[/quote'] That's funny!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarJunkie Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Weighed my new 2001 (non-chambered) LP Classic yesterday. Exactly 9 lbs. It feels pretty hefty when you pick it up, and that's not just because I'm used to my '07 faded Standard. Other guitarists that have picked it up commented on the weight. It's not too heavy, it's just that when you pick it up you know you're holding a solid chunk of wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dmac Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 I've got a 91 studio the was suppose to be a pre- studio lite ( released in 92 ) BUT:: actually has extra body routing with added balsa, and it's not a lite model. Go figure. You can tell if yours is a weight reduced body by looking inside the toggle cavity ( you will see an extra wide routing with a lighter wood (the high density balsa ). Also looking in the control cavity you will see an extra routing running from the lower edge toward the neck cutout and a slot going towards the pickups were their use to be just a hole for the bridge ground wire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarGod319 Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 If LPs weighed 17 or 18 lbs.' date=' nobody would play one standing up. I can't picture Page in "The Song Remains the Same" playing "Whole Lotta' Love" sitting on a stool.[/quote'] i have that movie in the collectors edition.i personally think its the best movie ever.:D/ but for all of you who have seen it,i don't get the beginning with the gangsters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayPW Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Our local music shop just recently got a heap of 2007 VOS LP stock in; including, 54s 57s, black beautys, 59s, 60s, 2 58s and 3 58 chambered; there was nearly 20 LP in all i think. which i played them all. I find that the chambered instruments to be real hit and miss. there were two in particular which were consecutive in production, numbers CR87XX4 and CR87XX5 and they were so different in terms of weight and sound. The 87XX4 was the best instrument there, even better than the 59s, has best resonance and sustain i have EVER herd out of a new LP, it felt like i was playing the gary moore/peter green 59. Yet the 87XX5 (which was feather weight, even lighter than strats) sounded like a $150 epiphone LP and I would really feel sorry for the person who bought this guitar. Whether the weight was the difference i dont know. I guess my point is that the chambered LP seem to be more variable than the solids which are much more consistent sounding; however they can be much better or much worse than solids as i found out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Our local music shop just recently got a heap of 2007 VOS LP stock in; including' date=' 54s 57s, black beautys, 59s, 60s, 2 58s and 3 58 chambered; there was nearly 20 LP in all i think. which i played them all. I find that the chambered instruments to be real hit and miss. there were two in particular which were consecutive in production, numbers CR87XX4 and CR87XX5 and they were so different in terms of weight and sound. The 87XX4 was the best instrument there, even better than the 59s, has best resonance and sustain i have EVER herd out of a new LP, it felt like i was playing the gary moore/peter green 59. Yet the 87XX5 (which was feather weight, even lighter than strats) sounded like a $150 epiphone LP and I would really feel sorry for the person who bought this guitar. Whether the weight was the difference i dont know. I guess my point is that the chambered LP seem to be more variable than the solids which are much more consistent sounding; however they can be much better or much worse than solids as i found out.[/quote'] Every guitar, chambered or solid body has it's own characteristics and tone, so I don't think that you can make any blanket statements about one being more consistant than the other. There are gems and tone turds in both chambered and solid bodies. When did you play the Peter Green burst? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayPW Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Every guitar' date=' chambered or solid body has it's own characteristics and tone, so I don't think that you can make any blanket statements about one being more consistant than the other. There are gems and tone turds in both chambered and solid bodies. When did you play the Peter Green burst?[/quote'] G'day raptor, i know that there are nuisance differences in all guitars, my comment was that from the limited number of chambereds i have played, they seems to be much more tonally different from one-another.....dramatically! otherwise i would not have made such a bold comment. The peter green LP was not a peter green burst, i was refering to the LP 58 VOS chambered i played had the sustain and overall timbre i get when i listen to gary moore tear up his 59 tone for days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flamed Froggy Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Hey, Hey, Hey guys. You are meaning that all new LP Made in USA are chambered now ? That's it ? Before they had some relieved holes, it wasn't enough ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.