Elias Posted October 17, 2008 Author Posted October 17, 2008 well, that`s why "Only a Gibson it`s a Good Enough" hehhe.. Well, mine sound like This.. This is a little video that i recorded, playing a solo of my favorite band, Guns n Roses.. Solo Estranged Guns N Roses, played by me
GuitarGuy503 Posted October 19, 2008 Posted October 19, 2008 so the 2008 it´s chambered.. and does it sound different in a bad way or in a good way??.. or it just sound different and sounds just like a Gibson should sound?? It's all a matter of personal opinion. Some say the weight relieved LPs sound better compared to the chambered and some say the chambered LPs sound better compared to the weight relieved LPs. They did weight relieved LPs for years so having said that the weight relieved ones are how a Gibson LP should sound. The chambered LPs are more of a newage LP to me as they sound quite different and introduced a new idea when they started chambering LPs.....
GuitarGuy503 Posted October 19, 2008 Posted October 19, 2008 To me all Les Pauls' date=' except an extremely light one I once played (probably chambered and weight relieved!), sound good. The 2004 seems like it's got a slightly warmer tone to it, while the 2008 seems to have a bit more bite. It's tough to really explain but there is a difference to me. It's all good though... [/quote'] Gibson has never combined both weight relief and chambering (it's not even possible). Someone posted an xray of a chambered body and there is not enough room to chamber a body out and make weight relief holes.
rocketman Posted October 19, 2008 Posted October 19, 2008 Gibson has never combined both weight relief and chambering (it's not even possible). Someone posted an xray of a chambered body and there is not enough room to chamber a body out and make weight relief holes. I've seen that xray. This LP I played was a real Gibson at GC and it literally felt like air in my hands. Honestly, it was just as light as my strat; certainly much lighter than any normal chambered ones I've played. I didn't get a chance to ask about the wood used though, so it may be a function of that too...
GuitarGuy503 Posted October 19, 2008 Posted October 19, 2008 Alright guys.... Heres a visual of the difference between weight relieved LPs versus chambered LPs...... Weight Relieved (1982-2006) Chambered (2007-present)
Elias Posted October 20, 2008 Author Posted October 20, 2008 wow..since 1982?? really long time... so the sound that i love about gibson, has been always with weight relieved holes.. Nice. just like my guitar
GuitarGuy503 Posted October 20, 2008 Posted October 20, 2008 wow..since 1982?? really long time... so the sound that i love about gibson' date=' has been always with weight relieved holes.. Nice. just like my guitar[/quote'] Yep... Weight relief has been done since 1982 which is why I don't understand why Gibson started chambering. They were successful with the weight relieved guitars all this time with a few complaints here and there about how LPs were to heavy. They should have continued weight relief and released a limited edition chambered Les Paul Standard model to test the waters and see if the chambering was going to be in high enough demand to add it to the normal production line. If they were making both weight relieved and chambered LP's there would be no fuss and everyone would be happy....
rocketman Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 Alright guys.... Heres a visual of the difference between weight relieved LPs versus chambered LPs...... Wow, big difference. No wonder I can hear it. According to Gibson's website the 2008 Standard is chambered while the Traditional has weight relief holes.
Wolff Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 Hooray for Gibson USA! A belated welcome to the forum Elias.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.