guitarhead Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Hello Les Paul nuts, My experience with 3 different chambered Les Paul’s, which made me an anti-chambering guitarist, is the following: In my modest experience the sound that came out of these guitars, especially when playing the lower E and A strings is very concave, void, cold and airy, not at all what you want and expect from a Les Paul that is famous of it's thick, saturated, beefy, chunky fat sound. Let me know if you have the same experience or else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 . No problems with chambering/weight-relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarhead Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 . No problems with chambering/weight-relief. I have no problem with my weight relieved standard either, my issue is with the chambering,.. big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibSinCity Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Guitars are just tools. If a chambered tool isn't for you, then move on to what works for you. I don't get it. As long as something I want or can use is available, I don't care. I think it's a waste of time to to be anti-anything if you're not gonna use it anyway and somthing else you like is available. If you don't like chambered, get a Traditional instead of a Standard. You don't like weight-relief, get a re-issue or historic. If people, including proffesionals weren't buying and using chambered/weight-reliefed guitars for recording or performing, then Gibson wouldn't make them. Everyone's experience and opinions are different. There's no right or wrong answer. The subject has been discussed many, many, many times. Example: Bllly Gibbons of ZZ-Top. A successful pro-musician. He's gone beyond weight-relief/chambering. His guitars are hallow. Not chambered, but hallow. Some have chambered/hallow necks as well. His tools of choice. He can do this because he has a light touch and plays very light gauge strings. In the video, his guitar tech. picks up his Billy's Pearly Gates Replica Prototype #1 with one hand/two fingers at 1:50 into the video. Now weather you like his tone or not, they're his tools of choice, and more power to him. Until they take away my options, I'm not wasting my time being anti-weight-reliefed, chambered, or hallowed-out guitars. And even then, there's always the used market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarhead Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 Hey Gib, I love the video, informative, surprised me nonetheless, abouth the 7 gauge strings and the weight of his guitars, wondering if they are the same ones he uses in the studio, or just live performance!!! ZZ top tone comes from a 7 gauge strings[confused] Guitars are just tools. If a chambered tool isn't for you, then move on to what works for you. I don't get it. As long as something I want or can use is available, I don't care. I think it's a waste of time to to be anti-anything if you're not gonna use it anyway and somthing else you like is available. If you don't like chambered, get a Traditional instead of a Standard. You don't like weight-relief, get a re-issue or historic. If people, including proffesionals weren't buying and using chambered/weight-reliefed guitars for recording or performing, then Gibson wouldn't make them. Everyone's experience and opinions are different. There's no right or wrong answer. The subject has been discussed many, many, many times. Example: Bllly Gibbons of ZZ-Top. A successful pro-musician. He's gone beyond weight-relief/chambering. His guitars are hallow. Not chambered, but hallow. Some have chambered/hallow necks as well. His tools of choice. He can do this because he has a light touch and plays very light gauge strings. In the video, his guitar tech. picks up his Billy's Pearly Gates Replica Prototype #1 with one hand/two fingers at 1:50 into the video. Now weather you like his tone or not, they're his tools of choice, and more power to him. Until they take away my options, I'm not wasting my time being anti-weight-reliefed, chambered, or hallowed-out guitars. And even then, there's always the used market. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6DrxfrbbF8&feature=player_embedded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Hey Gib, I love the video, informative, surprised me nonetheless, abouth the 7 gauge strings and the weight of his guitars, wondering if they are the same ones he uses in the studio, or just live performance!!! ZZ top tone comes from a 7 gauge strings[confused] They call it using the knobs on your amp and guitar...something a lot of people dont know how to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibSinCity Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Hey Gib, I love the video, informative, surprised me nonetheless, abouth the 7 gauge strings and the weight of his guitars, wondering if they are the same ones he uses in the studio, or just live performance!!! ZZ top tone comes from a 7 gauge strings[confused] Not sure what he uses in the studio. Recording tone, as opposed live sound is a completely different situation, so I'm guessing the tools he needs for that are dictated by whatever sound he, the engineer, or the producer are going for. Studios are a safer environment for vintage, and custom guitars, and you're not concerned with how heavy a guitar is because you're not wearing it long enough for a live set. What I found interesting is that his tech said Billy's live settings are very "Heavy Metal". I guess chambered or not, it's what you do with/to signal after the guitar. http://www.billygibbons.com/index.php/guitar-gear/reverend-willy-s-mexican-lottery-guitar-strings-6-set.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketman Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 I've done this test before, but see if you can guess is the chambered one and which one is the weight relieved one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUSD0SPZVtk&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarhead Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 Good day rocketman, I would guess, 2 is the chambered one, however, it is harder to tell with chord strumming and higher gain. It is more obvious with single notes, at medium gain and as I mentioned on the lower E and A strings. I've done this test before, but see if you can guess is the chambered one and which one is the weight relieved one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUSD0SPZVtk&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Natural Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 ...My experience with 3 different chambered Les Paul’s, which made me an anti-chambering guitarist, is the following: In my modest experience the sound that came out of these guitars, especially when playing the lower E and A strings is very concave, void, cold and airy, not at all what you want and expect from a Les Paul that is famous of it's thick, saturated, beefy, chunky fat sound. Let me know if you have the same experience or else. But, I LIKE the concave, void, cold and airy tone....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaff Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Good day rocketman, I would guess, 2 is the chambered one, however, it is harder to tell with chord strumming and higher gain. It is more obvious with single notes, at medium gain and as I mentioned on the lower E and A strings. For some one who is so anti regarding chambered LP`s, I am surprised that you only guess its number 2! I would of though it would be obvious. In my opinion, people go on sites like this and slag off chambered versions to make them self feel better about buying a traditional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Plains Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Ever play a chambered reissue? Play one and then tell me you don't like chambered LPs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketman Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Yes it was number 2. I like the sound of both. Each has its own purpose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 There are lots that feel the chambering sucks, and I have read about frustrations that nearly all are chambered at this time, but to say that a chambered LP sucks is a shallow view as a whole. While the LP is traditionally a SOLID guitar, there have been MANY HIGHLY regarded Gibson's that are not. Namely, the 335 family. I have a chambered LP, and it is a great sounding guitar. Granted, I think it sounds different than a solid LP, but it is better in some regards than a "traditional" LP. Weight has a lot do do with the tone and sound of a guitar, and I think that goes beyond chambered or size. The SG is solid, but it is much lighter, and that is a big part of the difference in tonal qualities. The 335 is "chambered" but yet still heavy. So when you consider all the options of great sounding Gibson's, there is the consideration of the size, the weight, the wood used, and we have a lot of options. I think the chambered LP's are just another option, and one of the best I think. Now, truly, I would not want to say that a chambered LP is the same as a solid one. But I can not see how one can say they suck without saying the 335, 339, or SG also suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 FWIW, Merle Travis' Bigsby guitar looked solid, but was semi-hollow or 'chambered' in a sense. There's no right or wrong here. It's just a matter of tonal preferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarhead Posted August 1, 2011 Author Share Posted August 1, 2011 You know bobouz, you are the 15th reply, and now I am thinking to just remove this post, you are all right, it is a tonal preference and as long as there is an alternative, as someone has replied, why complain, FWIW, Merle Travis' Bigsby guitar looked solid, but was semi-hollow or 'chambered' in a sense. There's no right or wrong here. It's just a matter of tonal preferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 You know bobouz, you are the 15th reply, and now I am thinking to just remove this post, you are all right, it is a tonal preference and as long as there is an alternative, as someone has replied, why complain, The thread is fine and you've got a valid topic for a LP forum. It's too bad there's no longer a regular production solid version for those that prefer solid. Don't forget, you can find some good used prices on historic reissues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarhead Posted August 1, 2011 Author Share Posted August 1, 2011 Do HRI have weight releive holes? And where is the best places to find them? The thread is fine and you've got a valid topic for a LP forum. It's too bad there's no longer a regular production solid version for those that prefer solid. Don't forget, you can find some good used prices on historic reissues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaff Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 The VOS version`s are solid, so you can still buy new. All the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 You know bobouz, you are the 15th reply, and now I am thinking to just remove this post, you are all right, it is a tonal preference and as long as there is an alternative, as someone has replied, why complain, I agree, valid discussion here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kineman Karma Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Yo Guitarhead, Mate don't remove this post...it is a great discussion topic. I myself will take anything that Gibson or Fender throw at me but there are my tone rules that I follow. eg; My 1973 LP Custom is solid and damn heavy and resonates that thick dark chunky crispy tone I expect from a vinatge les paul. My newly aquired Les Paul 60's Tribute Gold Top is the opposite. Between the two I would take the LPC over the LPT but after gigging for 3 hours I am happy to use the Tribute. That is purely for it's chambered weight but surprisingly I have come to really enjoy the chambered tone. I also have my SG's, my standard is heavier than my 61RI..both have awesome tone, but I prefer the cut of my RI. I could go on for days because I have so many guitars I can compare so in conclusion. Solid, Chambered, weight reliefed, Semi hollow, full hollow, I don't care!! My care for any guitar is that it is either TONE WOOD or DEAD WOOD.... A 76 year old muso man once told me, "when you buy a guitar, more wood is good" but on the other side of the coin a local guitar tech told me that "less is best".. The less you have the more resonant mojo = is more tone. Irrespective of what type of guitar it is, my #1 rule is; I want "TONE WOOD" not "DEAD WOOD" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duane v Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 The post will stay. as long as everyone stays cool I'll admit I dig the substantial feeling of my 1980 LPC .... But the present chambered LP's have a nice growley tone to them, and I would bet they would sound even meaner with a Tim Shaw era pup installed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarhead Posted August 2, 2011 Author Share Posted August 2, 2011 The post will stay Kineman, I wonder how a frail Jimmy Page used to slug his boat anchor LP on his shoulder all night performing, Yo Guitarhead, Mate don't remove this post...it is a great discussion topic. I myself will take anything that Gibson or Fender throw at me but there are my tone rules that I follow. eg; My 1973 LP Custom is solid and damn heavy and resonates that thick dark chunky crispy tone I expect from a vinatge les paul. My newly aquired Les Paul 60's Tribute Gold Top is the opposite. Between the two I would take the LPC over the LPT but after gigging for 3 hours I am happy to use the Tribute. That is purely for it's chambered weight but surprisingly I have come to really enjoy the chambered tone. I also have my SG's, my standard is heavier than my 61RI..both have awesome tone, but I prefer the cut of my RI. I could go on for days because I have so many guitars I can compare so in conclusion. Solid, Chambered, weight reliefed, Semi hollow, full hollow, I don't care!! My care for any guitar is that it is either TONE WOOD or DEAD WOOD.... A 76 year old muso man once told me, "when you buy a guitar, more wood is good" but on the other side of the coin a local guitar tech told me that "less is best".. The less you have the more resonant mojo = is more tone. Irrespective of what type of guitar it is, my #1 rule is; I want "TONE WOOD" not "DEAD WOOD" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleCut_Fan Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 My '06 DC works for me......chambered is not a bad thing, just different. I've played a few non-chambered dogs in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPguitarman Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 I love my chambered Les Paul. I think the tone is great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.