Les Paul education

[boost]

So why is a chambered Les Paul not a good thing? I played one unplugged. Liked the weight and it rang nice acoustically. I didn't see a downside, but I did not plug it in.

Now a Gold Top Standard 50's neck with Rio Grande humbuckers for a good price pops up. It too is chambered. 2008. I think the guitar must have been bright to go with the BBQs which the owner confirmed. He also said it rang loud unplugged.

So is the only downside to chambering that the guitar is brighter?

I have a LP Special but have always been a Fender guy. I want to join your world but would like to get it right the first time. This would be my first Standard. I know there are dogs and good ones and I need to try some more out. Looking to not go over $1500 so an R8 and such is out of the question.

 

[Ventura]

Valid question.

It's a purist thing.

Originally, a good, resonant, quality Les Paul came from a slab of mahogany. Maple cap on Mahogany for most models, Mahogany on Mahogany for the '57 Black Beauty. I know little of the other varieties other than the customs and the reissues - sorry.

So anyway, the lineage came from quality wood that offered resonant sonic aspects....it should hum. It should feel alive. Interestingly enough, the lesser dense mahogany (therefore lighter) was preferred (let's not get into energy transfer and sustain here). The cheaper mahogany, has more mass, and is typically, less desirable.

Lesters became heavy guitars - sure, there were some heavier guitars back in the day too, but the use of lesser quality mahogany increased as time went on, costs went up, and profit margins needed to be maintained. If you want a "true" Les Paul, you'll seek the solid body versions and varietals. Is there anything WRONG with the chambered models? Probably not, but they're not the real deal in the opines of many. They're not true to form. Same as the weight relieved models - lower grade wood, drill some holes in it, cap it, sell it. At least with chambering, they're trying to say "it's a good thing" due to sonic quality enhancement and lower weight.

But at the end of the day, true Les Paul enthusiasts want the real deal - slab, no extra holes, and high quality tone woods.

 

[Stramm8]

Purist ideals aside; if it plays good and sounds good it is good My concern would be resale. I don't follow LP pricing too closely but if chambered guitars are less desirable I would go for a solid one. That is based on my history of gassing for a les paul, getting a les paul and selling said les paul They look so cool, play so good and sound great but I always go back to strats

 

[Ventura]

Purist ideals aside; if it plays good and sounds good it is good My concern would be resale. I don't follow LP pricing too closely but if chambered guitars are less desirable I would go for a solid one. That is based on my history of gassing for a les paul, getting a les paul and selling said les paul They look so cool, play so good and sound great but I always go back to strats

Exactly. And what does this tell you? It says that the demographic who know Les Pauls know their preference towards solidbody resonant Lesters over the non-solidbody axes. They probably have their reasoning, purist ideals aside

Just sayin'

 

[mindseye]

I was shopping for a Lester a few months ago and someone tipped me off to the Fadded standards from 2005, no chambering or weight relieving. They came in 50's and 60's necks.
I love mine, found it NOS for around what they sell for used.
After 2005 they started weight relieving them.
Some don't like the Fadded look but I dig it and love the way it feels!!

 

[Steinmetzify]

This could potentially help you out a lot, man. Happy reading. There is a TON of good info just in the first post. I've had a few. Never had a problem selling any of them, chambered, weight relieved or not. Currently I have a custom built LP that's a solid body like the Historics, and a Classic Custom with a baked maple board that's weight relieved. Both great guitars that get equal playing time.

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/gibson- ... 101-a.html

 

[ericsabbath]

I was shopping for a Lester a few months ago and someone tipped me off to the Fadded standards from 2005, no chambering or weight relieving. They came in 50's and 60's necks.
I love mine, found it NOS for around what they sell for used.
After 2005 they started weight relieving them.
Some don't like the Fadded look but I dig it and love the way it feels!!

that's actually weight relieved, like the traditionals
after 2005, they started chambering
they do the weight relief since 1986 or so

best les paul I ever played was a 2005 standard faded with the slim taper neck
also, it looks cooler than any post 80's les paul standard
wish it had better pickups

 

[LukeCurd]

The paul I want is a 70's custom model with the walnut neck that is 10 lbs. I have played a few and they don't feel anything like the new ones. Most people that pick up a les paul I think have a sound in their head of 50,60,70's the golden les paul era. Which gibson is now doing away with.

Here is an example of a washburn chambered guitar les paul style. The body plank is bigger to weight the same as a non chambered les paul,and the chambers are there to add resonance.

 

[Les Zombie]

Im not really a fan of chambered les pauls, i noticed the lows had more bloom and a looser feel and less chunky mids, very nice for lower gain and clean stuff with a piano like tone, but for metal i wasnt a fan. Maybe it was just the guitars i played and somebody will disagree but thats what i found thru my experience with the chambered body.

I like weight relieved better, i owned a bunch of weight relieved and they sound different to me.

 

[richardt4520]

I've played lots of Pauls and out of the ones that were good and had that bark and roar, they were always the non-chambered ones. Not to say that weight relieved or chambered can't sound good. It's just side by side, they always lost a little of that characteristic that the good non-chambered ones had.

 

[richardt4520]

I was shopping for a Lester a few months ago and someone tipped me off to the Fadded standards from 2005, no chambering or weight relieving. They came in 50's and 60's necks.
I love mine, found it NOS for around what they sell for used.
After 2005 they started weight relieving them.
Some don't like the Fadded look but I dig it and love the way it feels!!

Those are awesome. My ex-girlfriend has one she bought off Bruce Kulick a few years back that really sounds good.

 

[boost]

I have a '88 Strat Plus. This was my main guitar for many, many, years. Sounded really good up against other strats I had or played. These got a bad rap because of the swimming pool route they had. I didn't see it as a bad thing. All I saw was a good sounding and playing guitar, which it still is today. It seems people are liking these guitars more today and realize that they are good instruments regardless of the route. This is one reason I questioned the chambering of the LP's. Guitar players tend to be very 'traditional' and don't like change for the most part whether good or bad. This is why we play with tubes and guitars that are basically unchanged since the 50's. I needed to know if people were against chambering just because it was 'different'.

Looking at the x-ray pics of the chambered LP's - Holy hell! That's practically a hollowbody. I had no idea they took that much wood away.

Bottom line is the guitar I'm looking at is a good deal, not worried about a return, I know I wouldn't lose any if I decided to sell. Modded already with things I would do (this is a plus fror me, minus for some) and I'm a sucker for Goldtops. I'll probably go check it out this weekend. If it plays and sounds good and I can bond with it, I'm good to go. If not I'll walk and keep looking. At least now I have a better understanding of the differences between all of them and the opinions of people that have owned them.

Thanks everyone. Much appreciated.

 

[Anonymous]

The most important lesson in owning Les Pauls is, Knowing your gonna spend too much money in the search for a good one...

 

[mindseye]

I was shopping for a Lester a few months ago and someone tipped me off to the Fadded standards from 2005, no chambering or weight relieving. They came in 50's and 60's necks.
I love mine, found it NOS for around what they sell for used.
After 2005 they started weight relieving them.
Some don't like the Fadded look but I dig it and love the way it feels!!

that's actually weight relieved, like the traditionals
after 2005, they started chambering
they do the weight relief since 1986 or so

best les paul I ever played was a 2005 standard faded with the slim taper neck
also, it looks cooler than any post 80's les paul standard
wish it had better pickups

Oops I guess I was miss informed on the weight relieving on the 2005 ones.
I would have never guessed it had it because it's got a nice weight to it and sound every bit as full as my older custom.....I was not in love with the Burst Bucker Pro pickups at all so I ended up with a 490 and a 498 in it that just rock in it!

The really sad part is when I was playing a bunch of Paul's this Standard had a better feel and set up than some of the CS stuff I played.

 

[reverymike]

I much preferred the days of when there were really only 3 choices when it came to Les Pauls (Studio, Standard, or Custom).

Here's my '89 Standard. Refretted with stainless steel 6100s, Aldrich pickup in bridge, and a Fishman piezo Power Bridge

 

[petejt]

Both my guitars are Les Paul copies: ESP LTDs at that.

One of them is agathis (cheap version of mahogany?) capped with maple, and is a very heavy guitar. And it's a bolt-on maple neck with rosewood fretboard. It's one of the lower end LTDs/

The other is a solid mahogany body with the set maple neck (I think) & rosewood fretboard. Compared to the first guitar it is very light.
It's more of the higher end LTDs, in the middle I think? (ESP LTD EC-400)


Does that mean the second guitar is actually a lot better quality? Despite being higher priced?

 

[Schaf]

People put way too much emphasis on whether thye are weight relieved or not. Hell, they did it for years and people didn't even know it. Plus, the non weight relieved ones won't bring any more money that the chambered or weightones. There are fans of both. I have a chambered one. I also sold a white custom on here three or four months ago. I was weight relieved. It was the fattest sounding guitar I have ever owned. The neck was just too big for me. Play them and if you like it buy it.

BTW, the chamber one I own is badd ass. It sounds great.

 

[Ventura]

People put way too much emphasis on whether thye are weight relieved or not. Hell, they did it for years and people didn't even know it. Plus, the non weight relieved ones won't bring any more money that the chambered or weightones. There are fans of both. I have a chambered one. I also sold a white custom on here three or four months ago. I was weight relieved. It was the fattest sounding guitar I have ever owned. The neck was just too big for me. Play them and if you like it buy it.

BTW, the chamber one I own is badd ass. It sounds great.

That electrical receptacle is unusually high off the ground. Flood plain?

 

[Heritage Softail]

It looks like a garage level receptacle. But they often have GFI units in them.

On the LP body... I have had only 4. I just like the scale and feel when in that mood. It's all about the pickups for me. What you want it to cover. I'm experimenting with some MCP solutions right now. Might be the good Metal Lester pickup.

Just play what feels good until it don't. I just got an Anderson. Been enjoying that a bit. Other things may take the front seat for a while, but the comfy old LP works faithfully.

 

[Ventura]

That's right - there is no right and wrong when pertains to "opinions", so as long as it works for the worker, it's the right thing to do.

That said, I love my Lesters, and have gone through many. Interestingly enough, the ones I've kept are the solidbody customs and reissues. So it goes.

Thanks for the clarification on that receptacle. It was haunting me no end.