Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
- Thread starter GuitarGuy503
- Start date
Hot _Grits
Buttery Toneologist
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
The best LP I've ever played, which also happens to be the best guitar I've ever played, was extremely light.
I've played the occasional heavy one that sounded good, and LPs seem to handle being heavy better than other instruments, but as a rule the lighter ones sound fatter. It's pretty simple: denser wood absorbs the lower frequencies that a string produces.
as for lighter wood being more expensive, I don't think it's the wood so much as the man-hours sourcing it.
The best LP I've ever played, which also happens to be the best guitar I've ever played, was extremely light.
I've played the occasional heavy one that sounded good, and LPs seem to handle being heavy better than other instruments, but as a rule the lighter ones sound fatter. It's pretty simple: denser wood absorbs the lower frequencies that a string produces.
as for lighter wood being more expensive, I don't think it's the wood so much as the man-hours sourcing it.
ledzepp29
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
thats my opinion as well, by the way what model les paul were you speaking of? I don't know the technicalities of it but it just makes sense to me that a light paul would sound more open and resonant, and a heavier one a little harder and not so open sounding. Just in the same way an aluminum tailpeice does that to your tone compared to a stock tailpeice. I'm sure theres exceptions, but when it comes down to it you may think you want a heavy paul but your shoulder's gonna be disagreeing with you during those last setsHot _Grits said:
Hot _Grits
Buttery Toneologist
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
Don't know exactly, but it was a high end '59 burst ri that was selling at a 'discount' price of $USD 8500.00. At that price you should be able to name your weight.
ledzepp29 said:
Don't know exactly, but it was a high end '59 burst ri that was selling at a 'discount' price of $USD 8500.00. At that price you should be able to name your weight.
bryvincent
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
IMO 8.5 - 9.5 lbs sounds best. but, even LPs with the same weight sounds different. it depends on the distribution of the weight(heavy neck,light body or light neck,heavy body). i think guitars with heavy(more dense and stiff ) neck and light(less dense) body sounds best.
IMO 8.5 - 9.5 lbs sounds best. but, even LPs with the same weight sounds different. it depends on the distribution of the weight(heavy neck,light body or light neck,heavy body). i think guitars with heavy(more dense and stiff ) neck and light(less dense) body sounds best.
kaknight
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
in the old days, they used south american mahogany to make LPs. It's what all of the original 1950's LPs were made of. It was light and very resonant! As time went by though, the wood got much more expensive, so they switched to other types of mahogany (different species from different places). that stuff is much heavier and less resonant. In recent years, Gibson realized that not only was the weight of the non-south american mahog guitars hard on the shoulders of guitarists, but produced a stifled tone. so they began drilling holes in their bodies (under the maple cap) so the guitar would be a bit lighter. For their premium custom shop guitars they either choose the lightest of these inferior mahogs or actually get a chunk of the south american stuff. In doing this, they don't have to carve as many holes in the body to lighten it up. Heritage offers, as an option, south american mahog bodies (which mine has). My LP is a healthy 8.3 lbs and sounds super warm and rich!
in the old days, they used south american mahogany to make LPs. It's what all of the original 1950's LPs were made of. It was light and very resonant! As time went by though, the wood got much more expensive, so they switched to other types of mahogany (different species from different places). that stuff is much heavier and less resonant. In recent years, Gibson realized that not only was the weight of the non-south american mahog guitars hard on the shoulders of guitarists, but produced a stifled tone. so they began drilling holes in their bodies (under the maple cap) so the guitar would be a bit lighter. For their premium custom shop guitars they either choose the lightest of these inferior mahogs or actually get a chunk of the south american stuff. In doing this, they don't have to carve as many holes in the body to lighten it up. Heritage offers, as an option, south american mahog bodies (which mine has). My LP is a healthy 8.3 lbs and sounds super warm and rich!
strat_master
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
i dont really know i dont own any pauls but form what vie tried i think theya re all relatively heavy and most of them sound amazing so im guesing the weight has some factor in the tone.
i dont really know i dont own any pauls but form what vie tried i think theya re all relatively heavy and most of them sound amazing so im guesing the weight has some factor in the tone.
bryvincent
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
where did you get that story? Gibson (still) uses south american mahogany on all its LP and other models with mahogany. btw '50s LPs are made of old growth Honduran mahogany which is not available anymore. and not all south american mahogany are light, they can be heavy too. the weight of mahogany is inconsistent.kaknight said:
Thames
Great White Malice
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
bryvincent,
To my knowledge, kaknight is absolutely right.
The drilled bodies and short tenons are what makes me laugh at Gibson production line.
My Edwards weights a healthy 11.x lbs, yes, heavy but soooo great sounding. However, I'd not say it is a light, airy tone. It's more of a deep, strong tone, with lots of wood resonance and a heavenly sustain
bryvincent,
To my knowledge, kaknight is absolutely right.
The drilled bodies and short tenons are what makes me laugh at Gibson production line.
My Edwards weights a healthy 11.x lbs, yes, heavy but soooo great sounding. However, I'd not say it is a light, airy tone. It's more of a deep, strong tone, with lots of wood resonance and a heavenly sustain
gOgIver
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
Here's some info Gibson's mahogany purchases. It's a bit dated but still cool.
The Greening of Gibson: Prestigious Guitar Manufacturer Adopts SmartWood Standards
bryvincent said:
Here's some info Gibson's mahogany purchases. It's a bit dated but still cool.
The Greening of Gibson: Prestigious Guitar Manufacturer Adopts SmartWood Standards
bryvincent
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
the drilled bodies and short tenon makes me laugh too but thats not what i'm talking about. kaknight is claiming that current LPs('68-current) are made of cheap heavy mahogany and all south american mahoganies are light.as i said gibson is using south american mahogany which is similar to honduran mahogany used on the '50s LPs. if you go to the link posted by gogiver, it says gibson is now purchasing its mahogany in guatemala which is a neighbor of honduras. it doesnt say what type of mahogany but i'm sure its south american or maybe honduran mahogany. one more thing, all mahoganies can be heavy or light regardless species. also the quality of wood today is different from the wood in the '50s even of the same specie. back then they used old growth wood which means the wood came from old trees( maybe 50-100 years old) which grew slowly and have more ring count per inch and most '50s LP are light because there had a lot of wood supply to pick from.now woods come from "plantations" where trees grow fast(maybe 10 years) and has diff. characteristics from those from the '50s. and woods are getting more scarce now and demand is getting higher that they have to use the heavier ones too.i know gibsons are way overpriced but they are not made of cheap materials.
thames,Thames said:bryvincent,
To my knowledge, kaknight is absolutely right.
The drilled bodies and short tenons are what makes me laugh at Gibson production line.
My Edwards weights a healthy 11.x lbs, yes, heavy but soooo great sounding. However, I'd not say it is a light, airy tone. It's more of a deep, strong tone, with lots of wood resonance and a heavenly sustain
the drilled bodies and short tenon makes me laugh too but thats not what i'm talking about. kaknight is claiming that current LPs('68-current) are made of cheap heavy mahogany and all south american mahoganies are light.as i said gibson is using south american mahogany which is similar to honduran mahogany used on the '50s LPs. if you go to the link posted by gogiver, it says gibson is now purchasing its mahogany in guatemala which is a neighbor of honduras. it doesnt say what type of mahogany but i'm sure its south american or maybe honduran mahogany. one more thing, all mahoganies can be heavy or light regardless species. also the quality of wood today is different from the wood in the '50s even of the same specie. back then they used old growth wood which means the wood came from old trees( maybe 50-100 years old) which grew slowly and have more ring count per inch and most '50s LP are light because there had a lot of wood supply to pick from.now woods come from "plantations" where trees grow fast(maybe 10 years) and has diff. characteristics from those from the '50s. and woods are getting more scarce now and demand is getting higher that they have to use the heavier ones too.i know gibsons are way overpriced but they are not made of cheap materials.
Thames
Great White Malice
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
Ok I understand your point, and Im not saying that Gibson uses "cheap" mahogany. Just different species. For what I know, they are still using African Mahogany, and the lightest plank goes to Custom Shop models.
Maybe they changed supplier in the last years, I dont know.
African Mahogany is not a cheap wood, just different.
Ok I understand your point, and Im not saying that Gibson uses "cheap" mahogany. Just different species. For what I know, they are still using African Mahogany, and the lightest plank goes to Custom Shop models.
Maybe they changed supplier in the last years, I dont know.
African Mahogany is not a cheap wood, just different.
Spankadelphia
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
My LP Special weighs in around 8 lbs, and I'd never trade it for anything.
My LP Special weighs in around 8 lbs, and I'd never trade it for anything.
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
so let me get this right...
Lighter = better and
heavier = not so good (according to the S. American mahogany theory)
so then why do so many korean/chinese made Les Pauls sound so terrible and weigh so little? Ok, I'm sure some of them are actually plywood or something, I'm sure I've played a few mahogany ones and they sound pretty thin and lifeless.
I understand that there are several variables here at play, such as the pickups and setup etc etc, but I'm trying to add some perspective into this less weight=tone discussion.
Thanks
so let me get this right...
Lighter = better and
heavier = not so good (according to the S. American mahogany theory)
so then why do so many korean/chinese made Les Pauls sound so terrible and weigh so little? Ok, I'm sure some of them are actually plywood or something, I'm sure I've played a few mahogany ones and they sound pretty thin and lifeless.
I understand that there are several variables here at play, such as the pickups and setup etc etc, but I'm trying to add some perspective into this less weight=tone discussion.
Thanks
Thames
Great White Malice
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
Personaly, I think both have their "character", as I said, my LP weights over 11 lbs and its a real tone machine that I wouldnt sell for anything, even if I could sell it twice the price I paid for actually.
Light : great, for some reasons
Heavey : great, for some other reasons...
Personaly, I think both have their "character", as I said, my LP weights over 11 lbs and its a real tone machine that I wouldnt sell for anything, even if I could sell it twice the price I paid for actually.
Light : great, for some reasons
Heavey : great, for some other reasons...
Marty Horne
New member
Re: Best weight for a Les Paul? Whats your thoughts?
As someone who plays 4 sets a night, 5 nights a week, the only Paul I can use is a chambered one like my Custom Shop Elegant. It weighs about the same as a PRS Custom which is comfortable for me. The Elegant has a great playing neck with an ebony board and sustains as good as any of the solid Pauls I've owned.
As someone who plays 4 sets a night, 5 nights a week, the only Paul I can use is a chambered one like my Custom Shop Elegant. It weighs about the same as a PRS Custom which is comfortable for me. The Elegant has a great playing neck with an ebony board and sustains as good as any of the solid Pauls I've owned.
