Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

[Stringmachine]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I actually don find it uncomfortable. But then again I've played one for the last 19 years.

 

[FELIX57]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

i think gibson did get it right... it's just that the guitar is called an SG.

the first sg's were les pauls

from wat i read on a previous posting was the older mahogany les pauls were made out of south american mahogany which was lighter but then it got to difficult and or expensive to attain this so now they use african mahagony which is lighter on the top of the tree but heavier as u get to the base of the tree and the lighter african mahogany is for the high end gibsons like customshops and the heavier mahogany has holes drilled into it to make it somewhat lighter than it would be but supposedly its not supposed to have effect on the sound

 

[Zerberus]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I don´t have any problems with Lesters....but then again, I rarely play sitting, and as others have said: On a strap they´re almost perfect

 

[pac112]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

That said, my the paul II has a tummy cut

slade

mine too. and its not made by gibson. <insert evil scientist laugh>

 

[Simon_F]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

i think gibson did get it right... it's just that the guitar is called an SG.

True. The SG is the ergonomically revised version of a Les Paul. Trouble was, Les didn't like it so they had to rename it.

Ergonomics, my arse. Les Pauls ROCK!!! :headbang: :laugh2:

 

[LPbluesboy]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I like the shape and feel of my les paul better than my strat...

i guess the strat just hugs me too close...

 

[bryvincent]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I have noticed some people can't be happy know matter what. .....

+1. you're not gonna use your guitar for sleeping, so what's next - why are electric guitar strings made of steel ? they're so uncomfortable to play!

no pain, no gain

 

[some_dude]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

the first sg's were les pauls

from wat i read on a previous posting was the older mahogany les pauls were made out of south american mahogany which was lighter but then it got to difficult and or expensive to attain this so now they use african mahagony which is lighter on the top of the tree but heavier as u get to the base of the tree and the lighter african mahogany is for the high end gibsons like customshops and the heavier mahogany has holes drilled into it to make it somewhat lighter than it would be but supposedly its not supposed to have effect on the sound

That's pretty much it. The lighter the Les Paul, the more open and airy the tone. The further you go down the tree, the more compressed and dense the wood becomes, which provides for a less resonant wood.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

The weight of a LP kills me . . . I've played a few cheap Epi ones (I think they were all in the 11-12 lbs range), and just couldn't picture myself standing and playing for more than a half hour. Of course, I don't have very good guitar straps . . .

 

[ex-250]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I don´t have any problems with Lesters....but then again, I rarely play sitting, and as others have said: On a strap they´re almost perfect

on a strap, explorers are 100% perfect

 

[Mr Wolf]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

Les Pauls looks cool

 

[Wattage]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

Xeromus I think you need to switch to a Les Paul Special.

 

[papersoul]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I can't explain it but the LP is the most comfortable for me - just feels great in every way to my body! Different strokes for different folkes.

 

[MikeS]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

All a LP needs is a nice wide strap. Doesn't seem as heavy, is very well balanced, and fits my body pretty well. I don't mind not having any comfort cuts. In fact, anymore I feel a little goofy playing a strat because of how accustomed I've become to the Tele and Les Paul feel. Sometimes the strat seems to want to slids off my leg while playing seated.

 

[Kelsey]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

I agree with the LP feeling uncomfortable while sitting and heavy while standing, but I also agree that the Strat seems to slip off my leg while sitting and the arm contour actually seems to catch my arm at times. My Teles seem to avoid these issues and offer the best fit for me, as well as the tone I prefer. My Es-137 also seems very comfortable to play and sounds great with the new Seths in it. I also love the tone of my LP's (or will after I finish swapping the pickups, but the potential is clearly there). However, I am still having a tough time getting into the tone of my Strats even after pickup swapping. I guess I just prefer two good pickups and a 3-way switch with solidly anchored strings. Different strokes for different folks...

 

[Z0S0]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

At least Leo Fender got it right and made nearly the best guitar shape to conform to a person's body, it's completely ergonomic.

What's the deal with les pauls? I like the way they sound, but they are just plain uncomfortable to play. They are too heavy, the back cuts into your ribs and the upper bout digs into your forearm. The upper access isn't very good either. Anyone else think the body shape is very un-ergonomic and lacks any kind of imagination at all? It's like gee we'll take a solid slab of mahogany, cut it into the shape of an acoustic, make it thinner and add a cutaway, voila.

If your LesPaul is diggin into your ribs, you're wearing it too high.

If the upper bout is digging into your forearm, you're not holding it right.

I agree with you on the weith issue, most LesPauls are heavy but that's why their sound is so full and thick, unlike a Fender. Also, try a wider strap. I found out the hard way that getting a nice thick cushy strap didn't help the weight issue as much as getting a wide strap.

It's all a matter of getting used to it. I feel uncomforable playing a Strat or a Tele because the top of the guitar is flat. After about an hour, I'm OK.

The only other complaint I have is access to the upper frets. The SG was designed to make up for that problem but the sound ain't quite the same.

Maybe an SG would be a better fit for you?

 

[Aceman]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

The same reason my wife's high heels hurt her feet. They are so damn sexy, she just has to wear them! And a Les PAul is so sexy (as guitars go...) I just gotta play it! Who cares if it hurts a little - you suffer for the tone you dig!

 

[chcjunior]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

Les Paul = unergonomic.

It's not so much the weight, and I like the neck. But damn...that heel is just too big. And spare me the "no pain, no gain" lines. No offense, but I just don't get it. There's a better chance of me rejoining the catholic church.

 

[Hot _Grits]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

i greatly prefer LP bodies to strats. not only do i love heavy guitars in general, but i actually find strats really uncomfortable. the upper horn always gets in the way, and theres just too much body around where you picking arm goes (which probably explains my love of explorers). the sole advantage i think a strat has is the improved upper fret access, but that rarely bothers me. and dont even get me started on things other than just the body- middle pickups/strat knob placement/strat bridges......euch.

the upper horn gets in the way of what? your enormous man-breast? your extra arm? thin air?

As far as ergonomics go, I have a suggestion: PRS McCarty.

 

[Hot _Grits]

Re: Les Paul, why is it so un-ergonomic?

By the way, Gibson's new Neal Schon LP has a sculpted neck joint. Unfortunately it also has a floyd rose...