Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Gibson Les Paul Chambered Bodys any good?


MrAwesome

Recommended Posts

Do you think the Chambered Mahogany Body. For the 2008 Les Paul Standard is good in terms of sound compared to the Older Solid Body, I know the benefit is it being lighter, but does the Solid Body and Chambered body sound the same? which one would you prefer? What will the difference be in sound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think the Chambered Mahogany Body. For the 2008 Les Paul Standard is good in terms of sound compared to the Older Solid Body, I know the benefit is it being lighter, but does the Solid Body and Chambered body sound the same? which one would you prefer? What will the difference be in sound?

 

Hi. Bringing back the old debate ! Well, in my opinion, it's pretty hard to say which kind of body sounds better. To me, it depends more on the pick ups than the body. I have a chambered 2009 Standard ( with burstbuckers ) and it sounds amazing, better than my ''swiis cheese'' 1993 Standard. I guess the best compromise would by the Traditional pro : this guitar is weight relief body and has the burstbuckers pick ups.

 

And don't listen to those who complain to much about chambered body. I think Gibson just made a marketing mistake by keeping the name ''Standard'' on the truss rod cover of a guitar with so many changes : the Classic Antique is also chambered and I never heard anyone complaining about it...

 

I suggest you go try a few Les Paul in a store and choose the one you fell more comfortable with. By the way, a swiss cheesed Les Paul is pretty heavy on the shoulder but the sustain will get better every aging year. The chambered one, like the 2008-now Standard has an amazing neck, it's light weight and the pick ups are very precise and powerful. I just love it, but it's a bit expensive I must admit !

 

But, again, it's just my humble opinion.

 

 

Nic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will not sound the same, unplugged or with the same pickups. But the question of which is better is highly subjective, much like "Which is better-- blondes, brunettes, or redheads?"

 

As Nik said, go listen to and play (preferably for an hour or so) several combinations and see what feels and sounds right to you. If you don't like it, it doesn't matter what anyone else says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are those who will say that the chambered bodies resonate better and give a more 'acoustic' tone, like a semi-hollow body. There are those who claim that chambering, or 'weight relieving' thins the sound and hurts sustain. I'm not sure I really believe either side has any real proof to back up their claims. As is usual with these things, it's all very subjective. I have had chambered bodies that sounded incredibly rich and sustained for days. I have also had 'Standard' bodies that sounded dull and lifeless.

Because of the variety of sounds I've experienced within these types in the last 40+ years, the only 'conclusion' I've reached is that the primary benefit of chambering is exactly what you'd expect - a lighter weight guitar. That lighter weight is just what the doctor ordered for me, literally! Because of a motorcycle accident and multiple back surgeries, playing even a short set with a non-weight relieved Lester can be very painful. Up to about 9.5 lbs works well, under 9 is better. The more comfortable I am, the better I play. That's a real benefit, no matter how you cut it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Between the 2006 Standard and 2009 Standard, they both have the same pickups. The 2006 is 9 lbs, the 2009 is 8 lbs. I've been A/B-ing them and the 2009 Standard (Chambered) has the sweeter tone to my ears and it's a bit more woody and organic sounding as well. Whether that's due to the chambering or the clearer electronics I don't know but I think the 2008+ Standards definitely deserve to be "The Standard" from this point on. The locking TOM, neutric jack,and grovers don't hurt either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the chambered one.

 

That's pretty much what I'm hearing when I A/B, whoops the broken record is playing: the chambered has more of a woody, organic tone, slightly clearer, slightly more sustain. Whether that's due to the Bourne pots and the PCB I don't know, but the tone is clearer maybe that lets more of those qualites come through? Tone is so subjective, maybe the first guitar's tone floats more boats??

 

That PP Standard is gorgeous, btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will not sound the same, unplugged or with the same pickups. But the question of which is better is highly subjective, much like "Which is better-- blondes, brunettes, or redheads?"

 

As Nik said, go listen to and play (preferably for an hour or so) several combinations and see what feels and sounds right to you. If you don't like it, it doesn't matter what anyone else says.

 

It's redheads. Just sayin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

@ovohm ... you keep complaining about this guitar in this and another post and that you are trying to get a new guitar or get your money back. How much time are you spending on this effort? Why not just consider it a "lesson learned" put it on eBay and get rid of it and save your time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the market place ever since there was a market place, it has been "Buyer Beware".

 

I think both guitars sound pretty similar in the end, it depends on what kind of music you may mostly play.

They like the chambered guitar for blues and jazz, and tones like that not for hard rock, distortion, or that kind of music.

Well, that covers both then.

Depends on the music you play, and perhaps the amp you use in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Gibson introduced chambering for two reasons:

 

1. To keep weight down where selecting a light piece of mahogany is a preserve of the custom shop.

 

2. Because chambering automatically results in a resonant, sustaining instrument where that cannot be guaranteed with a guitar made from solid wood.

 

It's my opinion that chambering adds top end bite to the tone of a LP. You lose some of that LP fatness and move more towards the "snappy, biting" tone of the thin bodied SG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like my chambered Les Paul's. The weight of the solid body kept me on the SG and Gretsch G6120 road. I have two Les Paul's both chambered and I love their sound. Real rock n roll nasty and sweet. They are a little rough around the edges, frets can be high, I feel that even though there's no binding there is a lack of craftsmanship going into the studio brand. A lack of astetic details like keeping the stain off the fret board, small stuff that can all add up.. Quantity over quality to sum it up seems to be priority. I Love the sound and weight, gibson just needs to pay more attention to finish work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me tell you my experience, my first Les Paul was a 77 Standard, no weight relief of any kind and I owned that thing for over 20 years and of course, that was my bench mark for how a Les Paul should play and sound, I sold that guitar a few years back and was in the market for another Les Paul, I played the new chambered ones and told myself, it doesn't feel right, I tried looking for another Les Paul like my old one and that was an exercise in futility, the Gibson advertised the 50's Tribute model and I said to myself, excellent price, people like the P90s go for it,so I bought it, the 50s style neck took some getting used to but it feels great now, and the chambering has absolutely no ill effects on tone, my brother played it in a gig last night, he used for almost everything that he didn't drop tune for and I can tell you in a gig situation you can't tell the difference between chambered,swiss cheese or non weight relieved, and to be honest if you use a noise gate to get rid of the 60 cycle hum, the p90s keep up with the humbuckers just as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...