Les Paul Models?

[esandes]

Re: Les Paul Models?

How are chambered bodies a blasphemy? Explain yourself. I hope you are not another one of these cork-sniffers. I guess that's why B.B. King sounded so awful on his semi-hollow bodied ES-335 (sarcasm there).



;>)/

I hooked up a chambered one and a normal one to an oscilloscope and the normal one had a stronger signal.

Jk

When I heard Gibson Swiss cheesed the bodies I couldn't believe it. It came to be because of complaints from rock stars who lug them around for 2+ hours every night I'm sure.

The theory is as you know more mass more resonance and sustain. My heaviest guitars have that neck vibration someone else mentioned in this thread. Normal Les Pauls start out very heavy. Punching out a little bit of weight may provide still plenty of resonance and sustain but theoretically and practically not as much as a normal body. For me it's the practice that is shocking rather than the sound and feel differences.

I didn't watch the video. I think a better comparison would be unplugged and perhaps with an oscilloscope.

 

[RorySquier]

Re: Les Paul Models?

I hooked up a chambered one and a normal one to an oscilloscope and the normal one had a stronger signal.

Jk

When I heard Gibson Swiss cheesed the bodies I couldn't believe it. It came to be because of complaints from rock stars who lug them around for 2+ hours every night I'm sure.

The theory is as you know more mass more resonance and sustain. My heaviest guitars have that neck vibration someone else mentioned in this thread. Normal Les Pauls start out very heavy. Punching out a little bit of weight may provide still plenty of resonance and sustain but theoretically and practically not as much as a normal body. For me it's the practice that is shocking rather than the sound and feel differences.

I didn't watch the video. I think a better comparison would be unplugged and perhaps with an oscilloscope.

Hey if a guitar is built well and adjusted properly, etc. it will play well & sound good no matter if it's chambered or not. That's just my honest opinion.



;>)/

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: Les Paul Models?

A Les Paul is a thick Mahogany body, single cut, maple topped, 23 3/4 scale guitar with a Tune-o-matic bridge and a humbucker. The end.

There is no point in Gibson's history in which this statement would have been correct:

- The early gold tops did not have a T.O.M.
- The first gold tops with T.O.M.s didn't have humbuckers.
- Customs had mahogany caps until '68.
- The uncapped, wraparound-tailpiece, single-coil-equipped Les Paul Junior was introduced well before humbuckers appeared on G.T.s and Customs. The Special followed shortly, still before humbuckers.
- Double cut Jrs. and Specials followed not long after humbuckers came in on the G.T.s and Customs.
- For a couple years in the '60's, the LP was actually what we now call the SG.
- Even when the LP was reintroduced in the late '60's, the P90-equipped G.T. was not only part of the line, but was the introductory reissue model – not just humbucker-equipped models.
- The LP Personal, Professional, and Recording models were introduced in the late '60's through early '70's.
- The '54 LP Custom reissues of 1972–1974 featured mahogany caps and single-coil pickups.
- LP Special reissues were back in production by 1973, and have remained in production continuously to this day.
- And on top of all of that, the Gibson scale is 24-3/4", not 23-3/4".

So, at no point has every Les Paul being manufactured by Gibson met all of those criteria. Other than '52–'53, the LP has pretty much always been a *range* of guitars with various features, at various price points.

 

[Ben1962]

Re: Les Paul Models?

I think thats been confirmed already. You know, some people cant fork out 6 grand or even $3000 for a new standard. Young people are the future of guitar, so let the 1st one be a studio. Most of the tone is in your hands anyway

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Les Paul Models?

I own a Studio, Special and a Standard.
I can honestly say the Standard is a far superior instrument imo. The Studio is definitely a no frills guitar. It sounds great, but the Standard is far superior. And I even prefer the Special over the Studio. I will say that my Studio has the chunky 50’s neck and it’s a little too big for my hands. But still, I played it just fine for years before I got the Standard. It’s a good entry level LP.
Fwiw, I have changed the pickups in all of my Gibsons, so there is that to consider too.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: Les Paul Models?

As for preferences, Juniors will always take top prize for me, followed by Specials, then first-gen (soapbar-equipped) Customs, then soapbar-equipped Models/Standards. Studios and Standards are the same to me; the slight difference in top thickness is nothing in the sonic sense. As for what I currently have, it's a Junior, one of those circa 2003 Melody makers that's basically just a cheaper Jr. (i.e. has a dogear P90 instead of that crappy little MM single coil), a humbucker-equipped Special, a Standard, and a Custom (which I have converted to P90's). All but the Special have been with me for a long time, and none of them except possibly the Special will be sold, outside of a moment of terrible desperation. It ain't a competition; they're all fine axes. I used to have a beautiful wine red Studio Plus too. I would still have it, but I had a chance to trade it for a super expensive SINAR camera system that will last me a lifetime. The difference in value between the guitar ($1,200 new) vs. the camera system ($20,000 new) was too huge to ignore.

 

[Aceman]

Re: Les Paul Models?

So, at no point has every Les Paul being manufactured by Gibson met all of those criteria. Other than '52–'53, the LP has pretty much always been a *range* of guitars with various features, at various price points.

23 was a typo - you and I both know that....

And the majority - the VAST freaking majority of Les Pauls are exactly what I described. And we have already established that they vary a lot. So neener neener.


I could have thrown in mahogany neck, but you would have pointed out that Norlins had maple necks. Again....you are missing the grander point. A Les Paul is mostly a Les Paul.

Nobody is talking about the freak show variations you described above for the most part.

 

[Aceman]

Re: Les Paul Models?

I own a Studio, Special and a Standard.
I can honestly say the Standard is a far superior instrument imo. The Studio is definitely a no frills guitar. It sounds great, but the Standard is far superior. And I even prefer the Special over the Studio. I will say that my Studio has the chunky 50’s neck and it’s a little too big for my hands. But still, I played it just fine for years before I got the Standard. It’s a good entry level LP.
Fwiw, I have changed the pickups in all of my Gibsons, so there is that to consider too.

"Far superior" how? In terms of sound, you just said it sounds great., You contradicted yourself. And there are standards with both neck sizes. So that's a choice.
The difference is binding and yada yada. There is no substantial tonal or playability factor. (at least no consistent ones even from model to model in the same strata)

Bling factor? sure - but even at that I have a killer triple burst with some cool flame - so even that doesn't really apply.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Les Paul Models?

The Studio does sound great, but the Standard sounds and plays/feels superior. Again....imo.

 

[esandes]

Re: Les Paul Models?

Hey if a guitar is built well and adjusted properly, etc. it will play well & sound good no matter if it's chambered or not. That's just my honest opinion.



;>)/

Some people prefer the sound of a steinberger or Parker fly too. I'm sure there are 50 threads about chambered vs non-chambered Les Pauls already.

The point is the OP deserves to be educated about the differences in the models. I'm also a "tradition" type of guy when it comes to classic guitars.

What's next? Plastic Les Pauls with maple tops to cater to the geriatrics too weak to strap a 9 pound guitar on? I guess that wouldn't be blasphemy either as long as it sounds good to you.

 

[Mr. B]

Re: Les Paul Models?

A lot of the difference in tone between the models comes down to which pickup set they put in them. I like more vintage specs and a fatter neck, so I tend to like the Traditionals better. I do NOT like the new asymmetric neck on the Standards. It may be good for blues bends, but it is very unbalancing with your thumb behind the neck for shred stuff.

 

[Aceman]

Re: Les Paul Models?

As always - the BEST advice regarding Les Pauls is usually play a lot of them and get the one that speaks to you.

Yo never know if it will be a skinny neck classic construction or baseball bat for a neck with tailored sound holes or something else....

 

[ibanezrocks]

Re: Les Paul Models?

Used classics (and classic antiques) are where it's at. Same price as a (new) Studio for a much nicer guitar, half the price of a new Standard and only gives up the flamed maple top.

I also see good deals on Traditionals all the time for people who prefer the 50's neck.

Sent from my BlackBerry using Tapatalk

 

[RorySquier]

Re: Les Paul Models?

"Far superior" how? In terms of sound, you just said it sounds great., You contradicted yourself. And there are standards with both neck sizes. So that's a choice.
The difference is binding and yada yada. There is no substantial tonal or playability factor. (at least no consistent ones even from model to model in the same strata)

Bling factor? sure - but even at that I have a killer triple burst with some cool flame - so even that doesn't really apply.

Exactly Aceman! He did contradict himself when he said the LP Studio sounded great. It's just a bit of a different tone compared to a solid LP which isn't a bad thing. Variety is the spice of life.



;>)/

 

[RorySquier]

Re: Les Paul Models?

Some people prefer the sound of a steinberger or Parker fly too. I'm sure there are 50 threads about chambered vs non-chambered Les Pauls already.

The point is the OP deserves to be educated about the differences in the models. I'm also a "tradition" type of guy when it comes to classic guitars.

What's next? Plastic Les Pauls with maple tops to cater to the geriatrics too weak to strap a 9 pound guitar on? I guess that wouldn't be blasphemy either as long as it sounds good to you.

How about a cardboard Fender Stratocaster? Test that on your fancy little oscilliscope.

;>)/

 

[esandes]

Re: Les Paul Models?

No thanks. Seems like that's more up your alley.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Les Paul Models?

Exactly Aceman! He did contradict himself when he said the LP Studio sounded great. It's just a bit of a different tone compared to a solid LP which isn't a bad thing. Variety is the spice of life.



;>)/

How is that a contradiction? The Studio sounds great...but the Standard is superior.
Can’t two guitars sound great but one of them sound better?
Geez, nitpick much?

 

[esandes]

Re: Les Paul Models?

Fact is two identical guitars can sound different.

 

[Ben1962]

Re: Les Paul Models?

I hooked up a chambered one and a normal one to an oscilloscope and the normal one had a stronger signal.

Jk

When I heard Gibson Swiss cheesed the bodies I couldn't believe it. It came to be because of complaints from rock stars who lug them around for 2+ hours every night I'm sure.

The theory is as you know more mass more resonance and sustain. My heaviest guitars have that neck vibration someone else mentioned in this thread. Normal Les Pauls start out very heavy. Punching out a little bit of weight may provide still plenty of resonance and sustain but theoretically and practically not as much as a normal body. For me it's the practice that is shocking rather than the sound and feel differences.

I didn't watch the video. I think a better comparison would be unplugged and perhaps with an oscilloscope.
So, what determines louder is better? You use high output PUPS because louder is better? My real point is there are way more variables than LOUD. Just saying

 

[Mincer]

Re: Les Paul Models?

I don't buy the mass/sustain thing. Why not make 30lb guitars, then that you only sit down and play? I think a great builder can build a light guitar with tons of resonance and sustain. Gibson is churning out guitars, and don't have time for the attention that would take- so you either get what you get, or you play many to find one that works for you.