Weight relived Les Paul article

[the guy who invented fire]

I'm sure this will cause a wide range of replies but it's a good read either way and has good pics...

http://www2.gibson.com/News-Lifestyl...une+19%2C+2012

[Mr 9finger]

Read that this morning. It's a good read, but I'm sure it'll start a fire.

[ImmortalSix]

Great pics, would embed them here if I weren't on my phone at the moment

[King IzzO)))]

LOL, I got nothing bad to say here.

[STRATDELUXER97]

Seems these days alot of players prefer lighter bodied guitars...I'm not really a diehard LP guy anyway and so doesn't bother me...Good read though!

[uOpt]

I don't have a problem with Gibson doing any of these weight relief styles.

I have a problem with them not marking the products clearly enough wrt which weight relief, if any, has been in use.

In my option the reason why Gibson weight relieves pretty much any Les Paul except most historics is that they buy cheap wood. I don't expect other people to hold the same view, but the point is, information about weight relief is important so that potential buyers can make up their mind either way.

[ratherdashing]

I was under the impression that weight relief is a necessary consequence of using denser, heavier African mahogany. The "golden age" LP's were made from lighter Honduran mahogany, thus weight was not really a problem. Most LP's from the '50s are in the 8 - 9 lb range - no weight relief required.

The article doesn't really mention this at all.

[King IzzO)))]

oh noes!

[Mr 9finger]

When did they start using African Mahogany? I thought they were still using South American Mahogany, just not anything from Honduras because of the ban. I'm just asking because my 60's tribute has a very light tan color to it and all of the African Mahogany I've seen has a red tint to it.

[Archer_of_Fish]

I am all for the Traditional style and the modern style. THe super light 2008 weight reduction was over the top for me...I also thought that the brightness of the chambers and the BB Pro pickups made for a shrill sounding instrument.

[uOpt]

I was under the impression that weight relief is a necessary consequence of using denser, heavier African mahogany. The "golden age" LP's were made from lighter Honduran mahogany, thus weight was not really a problem. Most LP's from the '50s are in the 8 - 9 lb range - no weight relief required.

The article doesn't really mention this at all.

Nah, most of the MIJ Les Pauls from the late 1970ties to 1990 or so are not weight relieved and still much lighter. They simply pick the light wood. And Gibson does not.

[TheLivingDead]

I think they're cool depending on what you're looking for. Too bad Gibson's not very upfront with what relief is done on what model.

[ItsaBass]

Any model of Les Paul should be available in solid, chambered, or weight relieved IMO, and with a fat or skinny neck. My problem is lack of choice, and the fact that they hid their weight reliving practices for years.

[tc]

Uh...

It’s just a good thing. It costs us extra time and effort to do it, so we’re not saving anything. It’s an expense on our part, but we feel good about doing it.

Is he implying that labor is the only production factor necessary for production? Or that the price of labor is more expensive than light weight, high quality Honduran Mahogany?

Either case he's delusional. If the light weight mahogany were cheaper than the work needed to chamber the heavy mahogany, then Gibson would clearly go for the light weight stuff, or otherwise they would lose money. So they actually do save money by chambering/weight relieving their guitars.

Are we supposed to swallow this stuff? No problem with chambered guitars, but don't try to lie to consumers like that. Just say it like it is: good wood ain't cheap and we like our profit margins.

[MetalManiac]

Any model of Les Paul should be available in solid, chambered, or weight relieved IMO,

And they are. You just have to pay more nowadays for a guitar made with premium wood that does not need to be weight relieved.
After 2005, the premium African Mahogany wood which Gibson then used became cost prohibitive and / or rare to obtain, so they needed at that time to source non- premium less expensive heavier and more dense African mahogany woods for their Standard lines, and hence to weight to relive them to achive acceptable parameters for quality.
To say you dont care if a neck is Ebanol or Ebony / Rosewood or Synthetic, (regardless of whatever moderate price discount ) is Naive at best, and Ignorant at the least.

[atreidesheir]

I think customers and players would respond positively to less spin and intelligence insults. We are all willing to accept the unavoidable changes from resources being priced out of he market and traditional woods being replaced by more abundant alternative materials.
If you switch to cheaper less desirable stuff, my bottom line should reflect a bit of the savings too.
Asian-made jeans cost just as much as the ones from South Cariolina or wherever. They put us in the unemployment lines when they move our factories, then we see none of the new savings. Consumers are suckers, and I am one of them. My wife is a weak link and lines up to do whatever marketing experts tell her to do.

Luckily, The pickup market is one of the last segments of the guitar market where we can buy quality made stateside at a bearable cost.

[FuseG4]

I like the chambered sound in my Studio. It goes well with alnico 5s like the BBpros. It adds a little roundness in the attack that I came to desire after having 2 bright epiphones and a 10 lb agile with brightness and sustain issues.

Interested in seeing how the now 2012 weight relief turns out. Looks like it could be cool.

[GuitarDoc]

... and we like our profit margins.

Actually, I like the profit margins of the girl in your sig vid.

[UberMetalDood]

I have one of the modern weight-relieved models, Studio Deluxe, and it's almost equally as heavy as my Traditional. I would say that they sound the same except that my Traditional is slightly thicker - but that could very well be the 50's neck as opposed to the 60's neck. I truly can't tell them apart sonically unless they have different pickups.

[MetalManiac]

I have one of the modern weight-relieved models, Studio Deluxe, and it's almost equally as heavy as my Traditional. I would say that they sound the same except that my Traditional is slightly thicker - but that could very well be the 50's neck as opposed to the 60's neck. I truly can't tell them apart sonically unless they have different pickups.

So, you have a $1300 guitar with much heavier and denser wood that needed to be weight relieved , and it sounds and plays the same as a 2700 guitar with premium woods/construction?
You'll have to excuse me if I find this typical of anyone who owns a guitar to try and justify their investment and pride of ownership in that guitar and find it just as good as any other guitar ever made.;
No it isn't.