- Mar 17, 2017
- Reaction score
Current Standards and Classics have weight relief chambers. Traditionals do not have any relief chambers. They are like the old original LP's.
Probably belongs in the GC bankruptcy thread more than here. But, I'll go down you diversion path with you a little since it might be on-topic for the OP finding another LP he likes.First thing to make sure you do in GC is find a tuner. I went in a GC yesterday and tried pickup up a guitar to play. it wasn't even remotely in tune at all. I mean a lot of stores tune things down a step to make the guitars on the wall fell soft and loose and easy to play which i think is a mistake and only want to hear something in standard tuning. and it was definitely not just because of humidity changes at this degree. but this was like they just loosened all the strings like your going to ship something and then hung it on the wall. I picked up another and same way. also they both needed a set up badly. The whole store was a mess and ratty looking. I don't know if it is because of the restructuring or if this store just had issues but it was pretty ridiculous. They also had anything made by Gibson locked in the guitar wall hanger so you had to ask to unlock anything and anything that was even reasonably nice was up by the ceiling where i couldn't even read the price with my old eyes much less try to check the thing out at all. Do yourself a favor and go to a shop/chain that cares. Most cities of any size have stores that are more mom and pop and will take better care of the stuff on the wall so you are impressed enough to walk away with something.
Hello and happy new year everyone. Sorry for being out of subject, what program do you use for viewing xrays? can you please send me?! Thanks !I have made my own little study of Gibson Weight relief. I own an xray machine and I have xrayed many Gibson Les Pauls (if anyone wants to come to Nashville, Ill xray yours). One thing that I have learned is that vastly most of the online experts are simply wrong about the definitions of the different forms of weight relief and the variations of different forms of chambering and weight relief. Especially "Ultra Modern". Below are 2 Guitars with "Ultra Modern" weight relief. One a 2002 Custom Shop Class 5 Standard and the other a 2006 of the same model. See for yourself and try to find one of the keyboard warriors with the correct photos or schematic. I never have seen an online article that is correct. View attachment 504652 View attachment 504654
And then a completely made up "explanation" which is somehow supposed to validate the equally made up "theory" is brought forward (Penn and Teller could learn something from this, namely that the anal cavity is a great place to hide hombrewed "explanations" until they are needed):It seems to me that a big part of the problem with Gibson's weight relief is the long, wide diagonal wiring channel between the switch cavity and the control cavity. I would guess that this completely negates the advantages of the set neck and long tenon.
Impressive "explanation"!Sound travels best along the grain of the wood, and putting a deep wide moat between the neck and the bridge-tailpiece region is probably the reason a lot of these guitars are not pleasing to players.
There was also a Les Paul Less Plus, circa 2015. What I find intersting on the Less Plus is that the spec still says that it's 9-hole weight reduced! I think there have been a few slimline models over the years, possibly including some of the Norlin era "The Paul" models (from vague memory)Wasn't that called the Les Paul Lite?
Quite correct. I hope this website stays up - all the information you need on Traditionals is here: Gibson Les Paul Traditional (gibsontraditional.com)This is not true for all Traditional‘s. Some were infact Swiss cheesed or chambered depending on the year and run.
For the record, this is not my own theory. Paul Bigsby, Travis Bean, the people at Alembic and Carvin Guitars, Ted McCarty, LTD Guitars, and an unknown number of other builders have believed that it is important to have as much solid, resonant material as is practical between the nut and the bridge of an electric guitar. And if you don't accept that sound travels best along the grain of wood, why do people go to the trouble of selecting quarter-sawn tonewood for fine guitars. I don't trust that you know what you are talking about when you purport to know how wide and deep the wiring channel is on 1950's Les Pauls. The reason I doubt your knowledge is the fatuous and sarcastic argument you make that, if I am correct Norlin-era LPs sound better than vintage goldtops and bursts. I think you know better than this, what with the sandwich bodies of the Norlin era, and the lightweight Honduran mahogany that was readily available back in the 1950s, and the softer, lighter Eastern red maple that was the primary carved-top material back in the 1950s. If you are not aware of these factors, then I doubt that you know a thing about Gibson's routing back in those days. And suppose you are right about the wiring channel? Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. You are shockingly uninformed about a lot of other things, and to me you sound like an unhappy, low-esteem person who is trying to make yourself feel better by sharpening his claws on somebody else. I am not your scratching post.Always good to start out with a home brewed theory (almost as good as having your own meth lab in the woods):
And then a completely made up "explanation" which is somehow supposed to validate the equally made up "theory" is brought forward (Penn and Teller could learn something from this, namely that the anal cavity is a great place to hide hombrewed "explanations" until they are needed):
Sounds like you really know something about the topic
Just a little problem with it... ermmm... according to your little "theory" the 50's LP's suck (tone) as well, since they too have a big fat rectangular wiring channel in that locaton...
... there goes the value of those '58's... They sucked all along, and we just didn't know it.
And all you guys, just remember, the only LP's that didn't have this tone sucking rout were in fact the mid 70's "norlin" LP's, which had a smaller (round) drilled wiring channel.
From this we can therefore deduce that LP's made between appr. '75 and '81 have far more tone than LP's of any other era.
I like this way of thinking
Just having fun with it... as was my original statement. Maybe I need a /s more often.There are no issues with interpreting your statement. I’m just pointing out that since most original 59s fell under 9 lbs, your statement implies that the most iconic and well regarded LPs are wrong.
Well, since you implied science being a factor, he's actually, generally (factors like the wood type being tested being uniform) correct:And then a completely made up "explanation" which is somehow supposed to validate the equally made up "theory" is brought forward...Sound travels best along the grain of the wood, and putting a deep wide moat between the neck and the bridge-tailpiece region is probably the reason a lot of these guitars are not pleasing to players.