History of the Les Paul Studio

[uOpt]

I'm going to get one of these in spring, but I can't find a good writeup of the modifications over time.

In particular:

• Body thinkness: I know early 1990 models were thinner and later models were upgraded to full LP standard thickness. When exactly? I remember hearing 1996.
• Ebony boards, do I figure this right that the alpine white model has an Ebony board but the Antique white has rosewood?
• Neck profile: did they stay with a chunkier neck all the time?
• Maple deck: there are at least the Vintage Mahogany models, but do any others have a mahogany cap instead of maple?

Any owners want to chime in?

 

[lex666]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

My classic white LP Studio purchased in 2006 has an ebony board. The body is as thick as a standard LP and also just as heavy (9-10lbs easily). It has the 50's style rounded neck. But be careful, alot of the specs have changed since, most notably, they're hollow now...

 

[pinto79]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

My sister has one in Wine Red from about 1995/6 and it is full thickness, full weight and ebony board with trapazioid inlays, along with 498T and 490R pickups.

 

[doctadre]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

My lead guitarist just got one recently, it has the maple cap, ebony fretboard, but is VERY light. Must be the new hollowed out one.




Anyone got info on why they hollowed them out and what kind of chambering pattern was used?


I think it will effect the tone a little but would it really make the difference between a good guitar and a great guitar?


Dre

 

[Fender_Punk]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

My lead guitarist just got one recently, it has the maple cap, ebony fretboard, but is VERY light. Must be the new hollowed out one.




Anyone got info on why they hollowed them out and what kind of chambering pattern was used?


I think it will effect the tone a little but would it really make the difference between a good guitar and a great guitar?


Dre

The chambering was introduced to relieve some of the weight that a 1 3/4" thick slab of mohag brings (I think that's the thickness, could easily be wrong). The chambering reduces some of the sustain along with the guitars mass, which has been the centre of the skepticism around the chambering. Apparently LP players are willing to put up with the extra weight for the little bit of extra sustain. However if you'd like a solid-body that kind of gets that semi-hollow vibe going, maybe a chambered LP is right for you?

If you're gonna get a Les Paul, do yourself a favour and either buy a used one that at least 3 or 4 years old (or find one in a shop that is) and you will get the specs you're after or buy something similar from Edwards or Tokai. Not only has the chambered bodies been an issue for many players, but so has their quality control recently. I've never heard of Studios having maple caps, I thought they were all mohag, but again, could easily be wrong, I'm not much of a Gibby fan.

 

[MikeS]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

I'm going to get one of these in spring, but I can't find a good writeup of the modifications over time.

In particular:

• Body thinkness: I know early 1990 models were thinner and later models were upgraded to full LP standard thickness. When exactly? I remember hearing 1996.
• Ebony boards, do I figure this right that the alpine white model has an Ebony board but the Antique white has rosewood?
• Neck profile: did they stay with a chunkier neck all the time?
• Maple deck: there are at least the Vintage Mahogany models, but do any others have a mahogany cap instead of maple?

Any owners want to chime in?

I've got a 2000 Studio.

• Thickness - I'm not sure what the specs are from year to year, nor do I know how thin they were. Mine certainly feels thinner than new standards, especially at the heel. Maybe I'll remember to snap a pic when I get home.
• Fretboards - Most I've seen have been rosewood. You're right in that ebony is on the Alpine white, but I want to say it was also used on the platinum studios, too. Could have been used on smart woods studios, but I can't confirm that. I believe ebony was the choice on the Swamp Ash Studios, if swamp ash + Les Paul floats your boat...
• Neck - has been '50s profile since at least '99 AFAIK. Not sure if it was ever anything different before that or not
• Maple cap - Again, as far as I know, with the exception of the "smartwoods" and swamp ash studios, all studios except the "vintage mahogany" have had plain maple caps.

That's what I know... hope it helps. I've never heard of them being "hollow bodies" or "chambered bodies" unless you're throwing those terms around as a polite way of saying "weight relief holes" (as Gibson likes to put it). When I think about a hollow or chambered body I think about a guitar that was purposefully hollowed out to achieve a particular tone. It's quite clear that Gibson's sole aim of their "chambers" is to reduce the weight of heavier mahogany being used today.

 

[phil_104]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

The chambering was introduced to relieve some of the weight that a 1 3/4" thick slab of mohag brings (I think that's the thickness, could easily be wrong). The chambering reduces some of the sustain along with the guitars mass, which has been the centre of the skepticism around the chambering. Apparently LP players are willing to put up with the extra weight for the little bit of extra sustain. However if you'd like a solid-body that kind of gets that semi-hollow vibe going, maybe a chambered LP is right for you?

If you're gonna get a Les Paul, do yourself a favour and either buy a used one that at least 3 or 4 years old (or find one in a shop that is) and you will get the specs you're after or buy something similar from Edwards or Tokai. Not only has the chambered bodies been an issue for many players, but so has their quality control recently. I've never heard of Studios having maple caps, I thought they were all mohag, but again, could easily be wrong, I'm not much of a Gibby fan.

My experience isnt quite in the same field as what you describe. My studio does have the chambers in it, but it does'nt take away from the sustain, and does'nt make the guitar sound like a semi-hollow, not even a little.

I think studio gibsons are like any other guitars : you really have to play them before you buy...caus there are great and terrible ones.

 

[dressed2kill]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

My studio has a maple cap, 50's neck, rosewood board (think only the alpine white maybe have ebony) and also has the "lp standard" thickness.

I know mine isn't chambered, per say, would guess on the swiss cheese holes, think the chambering began in late 06??

You will hear a lot ramble on about the chambering, it does this, it does that, I dare say most haven't even played a chambered model, but will tell you not to buy one at the same time. There are some stellar models that are chambered, which of course sustain like a LP and sound like a LP not a semi-hollow body.

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

My classic white LP Studio purchased in 2006 has an ebony board. The body is as thick as a standard LP and also just as heavy (9-10lbs easily). It has the 50's style rounded neck. But be careful, alot of the specs have changed since, most notably, they're hollow now...

WOW, Nice axes!

 

[aloha]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

I have a BFG, which is a kind of Studio.

They are now (since 2007) heavily hollowed out. This makes them a bit livelier at lower volumes. I find that the guitar is more touch sensitive than the older swiss cheese models (pre-2007).

They've been weight relieving since the early 90's or late 80's...It's nothing new. At least, that's what I've been told...and it could be wrong. I don't have an x ray machine and spend that much time obsessing about it.

Go to a store and try a bunch...I bet you'll find one that feels great and speaks to you.

Aloha

 

[uOpt]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

BTW, the weight relief come in many forms.

They used to put balsa woods between mahogany and maple around the switch and around the pots. Nowadays I think non-custom shop standards and studios have just large holes drilled into the mahogany, in the area between bridge and strap-side edge.

There is also real chambering for resonance reasons going on in e.g. the non-plain top R8 and some other Custom Shop reissue.

The BFG is in the middle of those two.

The reason is very simply that the mahogany that Gibson can get (or decides to pay for) gets heavier and heavier.

 

[The Golden Boy]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

They used to put balsa woods between mahogany and maple around the switch and around the pots. Nowadays I think non-custom shop standards and studios have just large holes drilled into the mahogany, in the area between bridge and strap-side edge.

Keep in mind that Balsa is not exactly cheap.

 

[MikeS]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

balsa? Really? where are we hearing this stuff?

Not necessarily saying it's not correct information, just hard to believe as balsa isn't cheap and it's extremely soft which makes it very difficult to work with.

 

[uOpt]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

I think that balsa is from mylespaulforum.

Note that it is in cavities in the mahogany, not between mahogany and maple.

 

[jmh151]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

balsa? Really? where are we hearing this stuff?

Not necessarily saying it's not correct information, just hard to believe as balsa isn't cheap and it's extremely soft which makes it very difficult to work with.

I think Gibson called that wood chromyte

 

[Captain Tightpants]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

Well, the original Studio's had alder bodies, but that didn't last long, don't remember why. Played one once, pretty cool guitar, but I didn't have the scratch.

 

[bigheadood]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

The chromyte (balsa) blocks were in the Les paul studio Lite. It has a slightly thinner body than the standards, and an ebony board. They also came with the 496r/500t pickups. Mine weighs less than most strats i've played. They were discontinued in 2001, I believe. Great guitar, though.

 

[Aceman]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

This is a question for the LP Forum. I will say that variations on the Studio run far and wide, as opposed to the standard, and the custom. I couldn't hazard a guess at all of the:
body materials
thickness
neck size
fretboard wood
inlay
cap
etc...

But it generally/usually/typically is Same thickness, Mahog-maple cap, 50's neck. If there is a typical version.

 

[lex666]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

Wow, so many changes to the Les Paul recipe, which many consider to be a "perfect" guitar in terms of wood combinations and such...

I wonder why they just can't leave the body alone, and try more different colors and options. I'd be more inclined to buy a new Les Paul in a new cool color or maybe a trem option, but not a hollow one filled with balsa wood... heck add some Seymour's in there...

Anyways, my point is add or build on to what you know already works. Don't take away...

Should have made the hollow guitars a new line of guitars, like the Cloud 9's...

 

[Aceman]

Re: History of the Les Paul Studio

It's actually brilliant marketing. It allows Gibson to reproduce the vintage models and charge premium prices, reclaiming a slice out of the vintage resale market at increased profit. You get a "59" at a mega discount - and it's solid, from your point of view! Plus they sell the Standard line at the same price, yet increase profit by being able to buy cheaper materials since they are going to rout it out! And you still get the bonus of a Les Paul cheaper than the Historic line- and less weight/sound chambers, from your point of view.

And if you believe that...Anyway - I'm sticking with Norlin. THEY never pretended not to be boneheads, and the prices were reasonable. Gibson today pretends YOU are a bonehead and the prices are ridiculous.