** UPDATE - Help me out with more Les Paul questions!!! **

[rlord1974]

ASKED When did the "Standard" change to the current version with the Neutrik locking jack, locking machine heads and PCB electronics?

ANSWERED Around mid-2008. Some early 2008 Standards were to 2002 specs. The later 2008's were the new version.....

NEW QUESTIONS

1.) When did Standards move away from solid mahogany bodies to the "swiss cheese" weight relief?

2.) What can you tell me about 2003 Standards? Good, bad or ugly?

 

[Doubleneck]

Pretty sure it's 2008
http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electri ... Specs.aspx

 

[adew]

Yes, 2008.

 

[King Loudness]

I believe it happened in mid (summer?) 2008. I've seen some Standards made in 2008 that were done to previous (2002 model) specs.

 

[rlord1974]

Thx guys. Also, when did they move away from solid mahogany bodies to the "swiss cheese" weight relief?

 

[rlord1974]

More questions added to OP!

 

[King Loudness]

More questions added to OP!

I believe most LP's have had some form of swiss cheese weight relief since sometime in the eighties. Chambering took place sometime in 2006 for a lot of their guitars with the exception of the Traditional and some Custom Shop pieces IIRC. 2003 Standards would be weight relieved models, based on the then fairly new "2002" model spec Standard. They're really no better or worse than a 2011 model or a 90s model... you just have to play it and see if that particular guitar speaks to you.

 

[reverymike]

I have an '89 Standard that I don't believe is weight relieved. I could be wrong though. I'll see if my wife can xray it at work!

 

[charveldan]

It's for your own good, signed Henry J.

 

[rlord1974]

I'm not opposed to the swiss cheese. It's not like Gibson was "skimping" by doing this - they made a conscious decision to cut out wood that would otherwise be there in order to make their guitars more manageable for gigging players. It might actually prove to be a nice change from having to wear a 10 pound Custom at shows!

A little cheese never hurt anyone.....

 

[charveldan]

I have a Goldtop & a LPC, both around 9.3 lbs, anymore would be uncomfortable, any less wouldn't feel right to me.

 

[Ayrton]

Gibson started the weight relieving holes around 1983.


The chambering started late 2007 I believe.

 

[snakeman1986]

Chambering is ridiculous to me. It might as well be a hollow body by those pics. If I want a hollow body then I'll get a hollow body. I have heard that the lp traditionals are not chambered but are weight relieved...could be wrong as I dont know much about them. I have no problem with weight relieving or chambering though as long as they advertise it as such and the customer isn't left wondering whether or not their new $3000 guitar is hollow on the inside. I think they should have called it something different too when they started weight relieving so customers can make a distinction and choose whether or not they want one weight relieved. I've only played a couple of les Pauls but neither one really spoke to me and I have not had the urge to try one again. Different strokes for different folks I guess. Sorry for the thread hijack.

 

[Wizard of Ozz]

Gibson started the weight relieving holes around 1983.

The chambering started late 2007 I believe.

This sounds about right to me. The 9 weight relief holes started in the early '80s.

As far as Les Pauls go, just buy a Historic R7/R8 and be done with it. They only go for about $500-$600 +/- than a Standard on the used market now, and are way better sounding and built all around. Plus the Historics have a solid (non-weight relieved) body, and the long neck tenon... which make a big difference in the sound. There are a few R8 in the classifieds right now.

 

[Ayrton]

I don't know how much difference the tenon makes, but for sure the wood selection is better on an R8 than any standard.

I own three LPs now, and if I end up with another, it will be an R8.

 

[Ventura]

FWIW, I'm a Lester freak-a-zoid... I love 'em. Now, my personal preference is for solidbody - period. But, have to mention this, my tech did a test on 2 Standards, same specs (as best as possible), but one was chambered, the other weight-relieved. The chambered had a lengthier sustain and greater "non amplified 'acoustic' natural" volume. So he then tested a whack of chambered versus weight relieved - the chambered always came out on top.

Regardless of this, I always buy solidbodies. I have not idea how they compare, and honestly, I don't care. I love my full wood Lesters

V.

 

[joepete77]

2001 was the last year for the standards that came stock with the chrome grover tuners, they were nice guitars. gibson introduced the new standards in 02 with the smaller 50's type headstock. These were all still one piece backs with two piece tops, somewhere in the mid to late 2000's they started using bodies made up of two and even 3 pieces of wood glued together which is a cost saving technique to use wood scraps or smaller sections that were before un useable.

 

[AndyK]

Gibson started the weight relieving holes around 1983.

The chambering started late 2007 I believe.

As far as Les Pauls go, just buy a Historic R7/R8 and be done with it. They only go for about $500-$600 +/- than a Standard on the used market now, and are way better sounding and built all around. Plus the Historics have a solid (non-weight relieved) body, and the long neck tenon... which make a big difference in the sound. There are a few R8 in the classifieds right now.

Yup! That's exactly why I bought my R8 back in '02. I wanted a traditional Les Paul, with no weight relief! The nice wood and long tenon were just icing on the cake! If you want accurate, get a Historic. Otherwise, the Standards play really nicely lately, even if they are semi-hollow.