NeoConMan Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 I was talking to a guy with Gibson today about an unrelated issue. I threw a few questions at him about the new "Standard" or "Experimental" as it's been referred to here. They were actually just released a couple weeks ago, they are indeed brand new. As the conversation turned to chambering, he gave me a few facts. Beginning in 1983, all Les Pauls were drilled or weight relieved - even the Customs. I did not know this. All I can figure is the increased density of the available wood made it something they thought necessary. This was the beginning of what is known as the Swiss cheese holes.... Fast forward to October of 2006. Almost all Les Pauls are now chambered. This includes Studios, Standards, etc. The ONLY exceptions were the Customs BUT they kept the Swiss cheese holes as before. Edit; The new Traditional joins the ranks now with Swiss cheese bodies, these are the only two models. The ONLY unchambered guitars are the Historic reissues, simply to be period-correct in their manufacture. I'm gonna assume their wood selection is more critical for those guitars, density being a prime concern. Some of you guys may already know all this, but I kept hearing conflicting opinions and questionable facts thrown around. There it is, as a public service, from your humble forum member. Love, Neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mash94 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Even the customs?!?!?! that's weird Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Deadhead Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Great info Neo. Maybe this will put an end to some of this BS "I think they used a 35/64 drill bit on my Custom instead of a 1/2 because it sounds holoow and my standard dont" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverbursted Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Was 1983 the end of the Norlin era? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 So the Historics are not chambered, OR swiss cheese, correct? Name the models that are neither, please...... Thanks. Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mash94 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 R2 R4 R6 R7 R8 R9 R0 Murph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 What, am I a f-ing encyclopedia for you??? :-) Seriously, anything made before 1983 didn't have Swiss cheese holes so why would a Historic? That's the way I understand it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 Murph, I'm just giving you sh!t... No harm done, Buddy! Henry and his Harvard buddies bought Gibson from Norlin in 1985. Same year Fender almost went under before the employees bought 'em out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrosurfer1959 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 What' date=' am I a f-ing encyclopedia for you??? :-) .[/quote'] More Like Wikipedia helpful but still has a warning label about possible content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mash94 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 More Like Wikipedia helpful but still has a warning label about possible content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Fast forward to October of 2006. Almost all Les Pauls are now chambered. This includes Studios' date=' Standards, etc. The ONLY exceptions were the Customs BUT they kept the Swiss cheese holes as before. [b']The ONLY unchambered guitars[/b] are the Historic reissues, simply to be period-correct in their manufacture. I'm gonna assume their wood selection is more critical for those guitars, density being a prime concern. So the Traditional is chambered? I thought it was swiss cheesed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadCase Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Thanks for the info. Yeah, you're right, the "conflicting opinions and questionable facts" are confusing the whole issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 DOH! Surfpup busted me! How embarrassing, I was trying to make you all believe a lie.... Let me go back and edit my initial post. Good catch SP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 I do what I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 I guess the short supply of light mahogany also adds to the cost of the reissues, so that makes sense. The most interesting revelation is that Customs are swiss cheesed. We all thought otherwise of course. Surely some extra weight comes from the added bindings and larger inlays, but I wouldn't think much, and they are generally a bit heavier than the comparable (swiss cheesed) standard it seems, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 In a thread based on facts, funny how quickly we get back to opinion and speculation... My assumption is the weight difference is still in the wood. The wood guys sort out what they get and grade it, with density still being one of the criteria. The good stuff goes here, the really good stuff goes there, the badass stuff stays right here with me... The acceptable but unremarkable wood goes into the main building for regular production. I'm sure this is still the case, with particular attention paid to anything going in the Custom Shop. My guess is they still reject wood in the CS once they start machining, it if they find a flaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazzboy Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Was 1983 the end of the Norlin era? No 1987 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mash94 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 No 1987 beat me to it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 1986 was the end of the Norlin years, 1987 is the first year of non Norlin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mash94 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 1986 was the end of the Norlin years' date=' 1987 is the first year of non Norlin.[/quote'] same difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 So, 1960 was the last of the original Les Paul. Norlin bought Gibson in the mid sixties if I recall. The Les Paul came back in 1968, so it was a Norlin from the start. 1983 it got Swiss cheese holes. Late eighties Gibson was getting back on track, but STILL doing Swiss cheese. I suppose the Traditional can rightfully bear its name, following a 40 year tradition that includes substandard pancake, then drilled-out bodies. I have trouble believing the build quality is not better now than ever. It's settled. As much as I would love a new Traditional, I'm gonna go back to the Historic models for my next 5 Les Pauls. Reissues of the 56, 57, 59, 60, 68. And none of this VOS crap either, I want it to SHINE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Makes sense... back in the day they werent pulling out as many guitars as they do now or did 20 years ago... good wood (the one used on reissues) is not so easy to come by... most of it is in coutries where forests are protected... so, I guess gibson had to make a choice: use liwer priced wood that happened to be more dense and heavy. So they had to drill holes in it (then started chambering it). At least thats how I always saw it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCI Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I find it hard to believe; my 91 Custom weighs over 10 lbs. What's the point of drilling them up if they still bust your back at that kind of weight? Who was the person you talked to? Was he a technician or some guy hired to answer the phone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted August 9, 2008 Author Share Posted August 9, 2008 Some guy hired to answer the phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.