S t e v e Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Ok, so I'm pondering what my next electric guitar purchase will be, and I've got an idea of what I want. But I need some help. First off, I want a non-chambered, none-weight relieved guitar. Oh, and I want a Gibson. So, that pretty much leaves me with a reissue LP, as far as LPs are concerned. However, I wouldn't rule out an SG or an Explorer or another Gibby that fits the bill. I do have questions about the SG though since, I am also looking for good sustain. I recall being discussed here that the sg lacked somewhat in sustain, perhaps compared to the LP. And I also want tone from non-chambered none-weight relieved wood. So, what is you guys' advice on this? And I also want BB 2 and 3s, which I will swap in, regardless of what I get... And is the Explorer heavy?..... 'Cos I like them heavy. I don't want to swap my custom's 57s for the BB 2-3s, (although that would be the perfect scenario), because I really like the 57s on that heavy guitar. Perhaps a 61 SG reissue? I donno. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. my GM sig isn't chambered nor weight releived, it's a solid single slab of south american mahogany and weighs a ton!...jus sayin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 The explorer ain't bad. I'll spend my money on other stuff, but for what it is... OTOH, for a solidbody I personally much prefer the SG. Some dislike what they consider to be neck dive precisely because it is relatively lighter in the body. The suggestion of a 335 is pretty good, too. It's a somewhat different sound and I find the body pretty comfortable even as heavy as it is with that block down the middle. I like Gibson/Epi necks regardless, although my ancient Guild SG "clone" the S100c is awfully nice for about any style of music. Is there a reason you are mentioning just solidbodies beyond "sustain" that nowadays is pretty well electronically enhanced regardless? m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Andy, you should write a novel! pippy, there's no real right or wrong here. The neck could have a lot to do with it, too, if you're comparing a fat necked R9 to a slim Classic's neck. Heck, maybe it's the neck joint and not the solid body? (doubt it since the new Standards have long tenon but don't sound the same to me.) I notice the difference most plugged in with low/medium gain. The Rs just have a tone/something to them the others do not. Like I said, more grit. I'm not saying that Rs are "better" or that swiss cheese/chambered LPs are "lacking" something but I do here a difference most of the time. Then again, it's not like all Rs have the same tonal characteristics. I've played a few that were thin and bright sounding...even raising the pickups higher than normal and some still sounded weak. There are a lot of variables that come into play- both wood and electronics. If you believe that wood makes a difference then how can carving holes out of the body not make a difference? my GM sig isn't chambered nor weight releived, it's a solid single slab of south american mahogany and weighs a ton!...jus sayin I don't understand why people think this all the time. "Well, it's heavy; so, it must be solid." Your GM is a Studio with a nice top, or a Standard with no binding. However you want to look at it, both those models from those years are weight relieved and if your guitar is based on those then... Swiss cheesed Les Pauls can range anywhere from the low 8 lb to 12 lb range. I've even held a 2005/6 Standard that was well over 13 lbs. Yes, weight relieved and over 13 lbs. Unless the GM was spec'd to have a solid body, which I highly doubt since the only Les Pauls with solid-bodies since 1993 are the historic reissue line and possibly some limited Custom Shop Standards/Classics (who knows with Custom Shop runs), your Gm has 9 holes cut out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Got the forum error. Triple post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Andy, you should write a novel! pippy, there's no real right or wrong here. The neck could have a lot to do with it, too, if you're comparing a fat necked R9 to a slim Classic's neck. Heck, maybe it's the neck joint and not the solid body? (doubt it since the new Standards have long tenon but don't sound the same to me.) I notice the difference most plugged in with low/medium gain. The Rs just have a tone/something to them the others do not. Like I said, more grit. I'm not saying that Rs are "better" or that swiss cheese/chambered LPs are "lacking" something but I do here a difference most of the time. Then again, it's not like all Rs have the same tonal characteristics. I've played a few that were thin and bright sounding...even raising the pickups higher than normal and some still sounded weak. There are a lot of variables that come into play- both wood and electronics. If you believe that wood makes a difference then how can carving holes out of the body not make a difference? I don't understand why people think this all the time. "Well, it's heavy; so, it must be solid." Your GM is a Studio with a nice top, or a Standard with no binding. However you want to look at it, both those models from those years are weight relieved and if your guitar is based on those then... Swiss cheesed Les Pauls can range anywhere from the low 8 lb to 12 lb range. I've even held a 2005/6 Standard that was well over 13 lbs. Yes, weight relieved and over 13 lbs. Unless the GM was spec'd to have a solid body, which I highly doubt since the only Les Pauls with solid-bodies since 1993 are the historic reissue line and possibly some limited Custom Shop Standards/Classics (who knows with Custom Shop runs), your Gm has 9 holes cut out of it. gibson customer service says that it is not weight relieved in any way and is solid mahogany...as to gary's specs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share Posted February 20, 2011 Going back to basics on the original question; Can I ask why, exactly, you don't want a weight-relieved body? If you want an Historic because of the other differences an Historic brings that's one thing. If you want it because it has a solid body that's a slightly different matter Considering no-one noticed any change in tone or sustain for many, many years after the practice of 'Swiss Chees-ing' was introduced - and when it was discovered it had nothing whatsoever to do with the inherent sonic qualities of any guitar; rather someone saw an x-ray showing the holes and a second person heard 'burgs' rattling around in the body - it seems pretty fair to state that weight-relieving makes absolutely no discernable difference to the tone of the finished instrument - at least as far as the human ear is concerned. I have two of each type and can honestly say that, although they all sound different, I couldn't possibly tell on a 'blind test' which two out of the four were weight-relieved. And that's playing 'acoustically'. Plugged-in it matters even less. If you put this matter of weight-relief aside it opens up the possibility of a Les Paul Traditional which, as I'm sure you are aware, is a very highly thought-of model. Just MHO. P. Pipi, I want to hear more opinions on the matter; solid vs. swiss. I'm glad to hear that's you don't find a difference. I hear so many saying chambered was not the real thing, so I figured anything less than fully solid was "not good enough". And that cannot be totally the case. I truly value your experiences. i agree on the swiss cheese issue. it could be a whole different subject, but trying to be breif here i have played examples that the weight relief ones do sound different, but those have been really, really light. for the most part i think most of them you can't tell. weight has a lot to do with tone, and a 7 lb axe IS going to sound different than a 9 lb axe. but i bet you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between 2 9 lb axes if only one was chambered. besides, if you really want heavy you could buy a chambered one and shoot lead in it. serious tho, it is preference. why rule out a whole group that would fit your preference if they suit you exept for the knowledge they are chambered. now, i noticed you had a link to your music and listened to some (nice by the way) as well as noticed you are a big guy. i must say you handle that little paul with style. also noticed you have 3, THREE les pauls, and while 12 is not too much, going other than paul will not make you lacking in paulness. so, i thought maybe a thunderbird. if you can find one that doesn't take too much a nose dive, i think you may have the frame for it to be comfortable to you, and may appeal to your gibson sense of style. plenty of upper fret access. they have different pups, and really lots of players used to play these axes mostly because of that. i thought of that because listening to your music, i thought it would sound great with the firbird pups snarl, you would problably get a real sonic greasy mean bite from it the way you play. yea, they bite hard, but sometimes you gotta let the dogs out. next, perhaps a 335. upper fret access like crazy. big guitar, but you a big guy, might fit you perfect. tonewise, still very suitable for what i heard you doing, but at the same time might open up a whole new range of tones for you. also, could be something that you gat fit those pups you are thinking, or also allow you to put in the 57 classics and refit your other axe like you mentioned. and they can be heavy, too. here, there is more differences between 335 tones guitar to guitar, so play a bunch. lastly, a goldtop. i'm not really sure if you would like p-90s, but the are extremely fat and snarly, so you might get into them. noisy too. but there is nothing like them and i would not want you to be short the experience of checking them out. another thing is that a gold top will fit mini humbucks just fine without being weird to your gibson sensibilities, and from what i could gather from your music, would be a great choice. they aren't as popular as other pups, but they are truly just as good. they have more midrange and a tighter sound and have a very controllable snarl to them, as well as a very clean tone when played clean. its like clean with no mud, but great dirt that remains smooth yet bright. the other thing is that a gold top eludes a sense of class that i think you could pull off well when you wear your dress shoes for those events when the church calls on you. well, there it is. i don't really know you, but that is from what i could gather from your misic clips and your profile here. Stein, you are right on on your assessment of the sound I play. Your recommendations are golden. Wow. Explorers have a 50's neck style on the first 5 frets and 60's style for the rest of the neck. The most similar neck I have come across was the SG 61 historic VOS. Now THAT iis a plus! I had read something like that(slimmer at the top), and if that's the case it's back in the game. Hmmm. I disagree. Solid-body LPs sound different to me and have something that weight-relieved/chambered ones don't. Call it more grit. I'm sure people in the early '80s did notice a difference but it wasn't like today where they could then post a thread about it. Gibson also had reissues back then; so, I'm sure people asked what the differences were. Tim, I would be a fool to disregard your opinion. I ask for nothin but honesty. Thank you. So you know I'm a "Les Paul's should be heavy" guy too. Nothing to do with the sustain factor one way or the other I just like the way they feel. I like heavy guitars period. I have to admit and agree the Swiss Cheese Holes don't really do much. If you have checked out my rebuild post even re-filling them with some pretty dense Mahogany made no substantial weight difference. The reason being the Mahogany body its self is not very dense and doesn't weigh much. I' m not sure how Gibson grades and uses their mahogany bodies. Since Mahogany varies so greatly in weight and density from piece to piece you could feasibly have a weight relieved Mahogany body that still weighs as much or more than a non-weight relieved body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share Posted February 20, 2011 Man, typing from my phone is a pain. Andy, I'm going to have to read your dissertation again to soak it all in. It makes a lot of sense. Steve, is that so? I may pm you. I'll definitely will let you guys know what I get. It maybe as soon as a month from now to months from now, depending on the dough I'll shell out. You guys will see it before my friends will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Steve, is that so? I may pm you. no point mate...the GM sig is NOT for sale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share Posted February 20, 2011 no point mate...the GM sig is NOT for sale You silly, I was going to ask you about it. A bit touchy eh? But it probably has the 50's neck..... Nothing wrong with that. I'm looking for a slimmer neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share Posted February 21, 2011 You know you want an SG IMO, heavier doesn't always equal better tone. It's your money, but I don't know many SG owners that are dissapointed with their choice. That's very nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share Posted February 21, 2011 I have an 81 E2 explorer you might like.... Hmm, I'm afraid I'd have to be real careful with it since I plan to play a lot. ??? May Pm ya... Tim sorry to add to your post, or, (assuming you want a one of a kind and top notch guitar) and you don't mind it not saying Gibson on the headstock; the best way in my opinion is a guitar made for you by an independent guitar maker. Matt Yes Matt, I want top notch. Never thought of that option, but give up Gibson? Never say never..... But...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Andy, you should write a novel! Yeah I know... Can't help myself. It must have come from all the SOP's and TOP's I have had to write at work. Just trying to help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Me thinks heavy is gooder for tone and me thinks lighter is gooder for substain. Me thinks both has exceptions. Me thinks both fine for club and dragging woman back to cave. Ugah Chugah! Andee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share Posted February 21, 2011 Me thinks heavy is gooder for tone and me thinks lighter is gooder for substain. Me thinks both has exceptions. Me thinks both fine for club and dragging woman back to cave. Ugah Chugah! Andee Andee, you're the bomb! I cannot tell your how much I appreciate your help. And yes, to clear it up myself, I prefer tone. Sustain can come from the tone, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG FAN Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 That's very nice! Thank you kind sir :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrosurfer1959 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Firebird ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrosurfer1959 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I' m not sure how Gibson grades and uses their mahogany bodies. Since Mahogany varies so greatly in weight and density from piece to piece you could feasibly have a weight relieved Mahogany body that still weighs as much or more than a non-weight relieved body. It could be possible that they weigh the blanks and separate a certain weight range for certain models but I'm not sure. Andy Exactly what they do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 If you don't mind buying a used guitar I would suggest a Gibson Sonex or a L6-S...SG's are great...But if they don't appeal to you, well there are many other choices...The L6-S I have played have sustain out the arse. I see that you already have LP's, why not try something else? Ot get a sustain pedal and spend the money you save on a really loud amp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share Posted February 21, 2011 Firebird ? I've been looking at it. Do the mini humbuckers have that fat snarl for, say, Gary Moore blues? If there's anything close to what I want is that sound... And a slim neck. Jaxon, I thought Rocketman was pulling my leg with that diagram.... Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I've been looking at it. Do the mini humbuckers have that fat snarl for, say, Gary Moore blues? If there's anything close to what I want is that sound... And a slim neck. Jaxon, I thought Rocketman was pulling my leg with that diagram.... Ha! i think firebird pups soung more like your sound clips than gary more. more snarl, but less fat. pickups soend wise, i think, would be a strat sound with more of a thicker, smoother, sear to them. altough they are humbuckers. playing wise you seem to like to "cut" more with your lead playing, more like robben ford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 i think firebird pups soung more like your sound clips than gary more. more snarl, but less fat. pickups soend wise, i think, would be a strat sound with more of a thicker, smoother, sear to them. altough they are humbuckers. playing wise you seem to like to "cut" more with your lead playing, more like robben ford. I have a 76 LP Deluxe with ( was ) mini humbuckers. Hated it for bridge tone. Swapped original for Seymour Duncan... Still hated it. Stuck a Pearly Gates Humbucker in the bridge.... Love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Me also think maybe better to get guitar with gooder natural substain and tweak for tone with pikups and EQ. Ezeier to change tone thein ad substain. Me Thinks... Ughh! Still makes for good club! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry-Again Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 What's the Sonex made from? The Sonex had a solid usually mahogany body with a Resonwood coating. No one seems to know exaxtly what the Resonwood coating was made of, but im with rocketman, I have an 81 sonex custom and none of my other guitars come close in sustain. You just cant beat it. I cant believe that the Sonex's never realy caught on. I think too many Gibson fans were up in arms over the bolt on neck. If you gonna get a Sonex, get a Standard or a Custom. the deluxe came with cheaper pickups and pots. Rocketman, Have you tried a Electro Harmonix Big Muff with the sustain pot with the Sonex, You'll laugh how long the combo will sustain. It will hold all day long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted April 2, 2011 Author Share Posted April 2, 2011 Well, since this thread got brought back, if everyone remembers, I ended up choosing a r0 gold top, and posted a thread about it. But it would seems appropriate to post some pics on this thread . So ... And thanks everyone for your posts. Now i'm gassing for a V, and/or an explorer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.