#1
Gonna be buying a Les Paul Studio soon (Left Handed) and I have a question about the differance in the thickness in tone between the two.

I love my sound to sound thick, deep and bassy and Ive heard mixed opinions about the tone between the tone. Do the chambered Les pauls still have that thickness/bass-ness as the weight relieved ones or are they relatively the same?

I'm assuming the choice of amp adds to the low-end as well?
#2
Quote by Blacknoise


I'm assuming the choice of amp adds to the low-end as well?


Your amp is like 80% of your tone. Really, which guitar you pick would be "adding to the low end", not the other way around.
Spin 'round carousel when your horse isn't screwed in.

My band:
Fractured Instinct
(For fans of Death/Groove/Prog Metal)

Ibanez RGA42E
Ibanez S420
LTD H-301
Ibanez RG520
Peavey Predator USA
Douglas Grendel 725
Line 6 Pod HD500X
#3
they both ain't gonna be as thick as a solid les paul.

my chambered lp sounds more like a semi hollow then a historic r8
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#4
Quote by Offworld92
Your amp is like 80% of your tone. Really, which guitar you pick would be "adding to the low end", not the other way around.



Well, I have an Orange Tiny Terror (which I'm quite happy with for the mean time).

As long as I can have that heavy, bass-like like low end growl with the post-06 Studios, I'm all good
#5
Quote by AcousticMirror
they both ain't gonna be as thick as a solid les paul.

my chambered lp sounds more like a semi hollow then a historic r8


How less of a thickness are we talking?
#6
My Les Paul is chambered and I think that it's still got a great very full sound to it.
Satan. Grant this man the gift of revenge against his foes at the Food Network.
#7
Quote by Blacknoise

I love my sound to sound thick, deep and bassy and Ive heard mixed opinions about the tone between the tone. Do the chambered Les pauls still have that thickness/bass-ness as the weight relieved ones or are they relatively the same?


Plugged in, I seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference consistently. (Different guitars sound different. This is particularly true with Les Pauls because Gibson QC isn't fantastic. But to consistently tell which guitar is chambered and which is weight-relieved? Simply not going to happen).

The notion that you need a heavy guitar for a "heavy" tone is pretty much absurd.
#8
Quote by HotspurJr
Plugged in, I seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference consistently. (Different guitars sound different. This is particularly true with Les Pauls because Gibson QC isn't fantastic. But to consistently tell which guitar is chambered and which is weight-relieved? Simply not going to happen).

The notion that you need a heavy guitar for a "heavy" tone is pretty much absurd.



you don't need a heavy guitar for a heavy sound. you need a solid guitar for a full thick sound.

chambering and weight relief doesn't make the gibson usa guitars any lighter then a historic reissue.

they have to be chambered/relieved because without any sort of relief they'd be 12 pounds.

a gibson historic tops out at 10 with the average at around 8.5-9.

a weight relieved historic limited edition tops out at 7.5 pounds.

you'll never find a gibson usa that light with a maple cap and a full sized body.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#10
I'm actually considering a Traditional at this point since I don't like the idea of a chambered body. The price isn't that far away from a studio either.

I guess the wisest thing would be to go to a guitar store. Only problem is that being left handed, I'm abit limited in where I go.

Does anyone know the best place in the UK for Les Pauls?
#11
Weight-relieved Les Paul:



Chambered Les Paul:



Both guitars have the maple tops removed.
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell?" - Aldous Huxley
#13
Quote by Dmaj7
1 is lighter


nope. how much relief the backs get is entirely dependent on how heavy they are before relief.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#14
^^ I don't believe that's correct. Weight relief and chambering are CNC so they are set in program and left. Pre-slection of woods has both using the heavier stock to begin with and the end result weight does vary a fair bit. Chambering has been consistently lighter in my experience than weight relief for obvious reasons.
Moving on.....
#15
Quote by KenG
^^ I don't believe that's correct. Weight relief and chambering are CNC so they are set in program and left. Pre-slection of woods has both using the heavier stock to begin with and the end result weight does vary a fair bit. Chambering has been consistently lighter in my experience than weight relief for obvious reasons.


there's variation since the weight across the wood isn't consistent.

however, wood isn't just shoved into the machines. they are presorted by absolute weight first.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#16
i have two chambered studios. they could not sound any different acoustically. one is loud like a semi, the other is really thick and dense and has more of resonance to it. acoustically i could tell which is which, and be undoubtedly right every time, now if i was playing them amplified to you, i doubt you could tell which is which.

i know that this is a solid v. chambered debate, but what i am trying to do is to simply point out the fact that even the chambered ones vary a lot from one to the other.
WTLT 2014 GG&A

Quote by andersondb7
alright "king of the guitar forum"


Quote by trashedlostfdup
nope i am "GOD of the guitar forum" i think that fits me better.


Quote by andersondb7
youre just being a jerk man.



****** NEW NEW NEW!
2017-07-07 2017-07-07 Update and a Chat On Noise Constraints *** NEW FRIDAY 7/7
2017-04-13 RUN AWAY from COMPUTERS!!! TCE? RANT ALERT!!!
2017-03-02 - Guitar Philosophy 1001- Be Prepared For the Situation (Thursday 2017-03-02)
2017-02-21 How to Hot-Rod the Hell of your Stratocaster for $50! (Tuesday 2017-2-21)
Resentments and Rambling from a Guitar Junkie
---> http://trashedengineering.blogspot.com/
#17
Quote by trashedlostfdup
i have two chambered studios. they could not sound any different acoustically. one is loud like a semi, the other is really thick and dense and has more of resonance to it. acoustically i could tell which is which, and be undoubtedly right every time, now if i was playing them amplified to you, i doubt you could tell which is which.

i know that this is a solid v. chambered debate, but what i am trying to do is to simply point out the fact that even the chambered ones vary a lot from one to the other.



From what I've read on the les paul forums, alot of people do agree that the post '06 standards/studios (the chambered ones) do sound differant to the pre '06 versions even when amplified. Even then, the guitars of the same model do vary still. The general theme seems to be that the chambered versions have a thinner sound in comparison to the older ones, yet have more warmth/resonance/woodiness (whatever that means?) to them.

There are not alot of les paul guitars around in my area, let alone lefties. How high of a risk would it be to buy a les paul over the internet? I've decided I want a Les Paul traditional, as from what research has told me, they currently seem to be quite similar to the pre-06' standards.
#18
Quote by Blacknoise
From what I've read on the les paul forums, alot of people do agree that the post '06 standards/studios (the chambered ones) do sound differant to the pre '06 versions even when amplified. Even then, the guitars of the same model do vary still. The general theme seems to be that the chambered versions have a thinner sound in comparison to the older ones, yet have more warmth/resonance/woodiness (whatever that means?) to them.

There are not alot of les paul guitars around in my area, let alone lefties. How high of a risk would it be to buy a les paul over the internet? I've decided I want a Les Paul traditional, as from what research has told me, they currently seem to be quite similar to the pre-06' standards.


if you were regarding my comparison, I stated my two Chambered LP's sound different acoustically, not one being chambered and the other being solid. again

the second bolded text is what my prior point was.

i wouldn't necessarily describe a chambered LP to sound thinner, but i will definitely say there is a difference between the chambered/weight relieved/unrelieved certainly acoustically. I would still bet that if all else was held constant and completely identical (pickups, bridge, tuners, nut, strings, action, being of the same wood) that 99% of the people couldn't say that it were indefinitely either of the three.

that is just my thoughts however, i have played quite a few gibsons, own six, but i certainly have not played them all, so this is just from my experience, your experience may vary.

i wouldn't worry too much about buying a gibson without playing it, as long as it is from a reputable person/dealer, but that is something a lot of people are fussy about. i have blindly bought two gibsons (both LP's) and love them equally, even though they are a little different.
WTLT 2014 GG&A

Quote by andersondb7
alright "king of the guitar forum"


Quote by trashedlostfdup
nope i am "GOD of the guitar forum" i think that fits me better.


Quote by andersondb7
youre just being a jerk man.



****** NEW NEW NEW!
2017-07-07 2017-07-07 Update and a Chat On Noise Constraints *** NEW FRIDAY 7/7
2017-04-13 RUN AWAY from COMPUTERS!!! TCE? RANT ALERT!!!
2017-03-02 - Guitar Philosophy 1001- Be Prepared For the Situation (Thursday 2017-03-02)
2017-02-21 How to Hot-Rod the Hell of your Stratocaster for $50! (Tuesday 2017-2-21)
Resentments and Rambling from a Guitar Junkie
---> http://trashedengineering.blogspot.com/
#19
Someone should run the output from a chambered and a solid LP into an oscilloscope and compare the signals. Better yet, run a bunch through and see if the difference in the signals are consistent in any way.

My thought is that they are gonna sound a little different, but different isn't necessarily bad. Obviously, chambering the body is not a cost cutting measure. It seems it would be a lot cheaper to leave them solid.
#20
Quote by agroban
It seems it would be a lot cheaper to leave them solid.

Not really, the only difference is the CNC has to be programmed for the chambers (which is just a once off thing) and then they just pump them out with chambers added. It would take a little bit longer, but it wouldn't cost them any more.

And if they left them solid, they would all be very heavy, too heavy for most people to be able to play comfortably.
#21
i played a chambered LP at samash and it honestly wasnt far off from the tone of a solid one. if u really want it lighter, then go for it
Quote by kangaxxter
The only real answer to the SG vs Les Paul debate is to get a Flying V and laugh at all the suckers who don't have one.


Quote by Blompcube

if you embrace inaccurate intonation it can be quite arousing.


I <3 TWEED
#22
my chambered les paul sounds almost like a full hollowbody. in a good way. but that's nothing like what a classic les paul sounds like.
I like analogue Solid State amps that make no effort to be "tube-like", and I'm proud of it...

...A little too proud, to be honest.
#23
of the two you mention, i'd go with weight relieved. (i did twice).

over full chambered. (i did once).

that said, the right pups make a difference too. there are plenty of good vintage sounding pafs available from a number of suppliers.

of the 3 LPs i've owned, i still own the two weight relieved guitars. solid VOS guitars can be had used at about the price of a new fully chambered studio if you look around.

good luck.
I wondered why the frisbee was getting bigger, then it hit me.
#24
Quote by littlephil
Not really, the only difference is the CNC has to be programmed for the chambers (which is just a once off thing) and then they just pump them out with chambers added. It would take a little bit longer, but it wouldn't cost them any more.

And if they left them solid, they would all be very heavy, too heavy for most people to be able to play comfortably.


Time is money. Time to program the machine. Time to periodically change the bits. Time to feed the blanks into the machine. Therefore, chambered and weight relieved are gonna be more expensive than the solid ones.

I think weight reduction is the main reason they do this.
#26
Quote by agroban
Time is money. Time to program the machine. Time to periodically change the bits. Time to feed the blanks into the machine. Therefore, chambered and weight relieved are gonna be more expensive than the solid ones.

I think weight reduction is the main reason they do this.

but the solid ones cost more.

because light weight mahogany isn't so easy to come by these days.

man i want a solid korina les paul with a maple top.
I wondered why the frisbee was getting bigger, then it hit me.
#27
Quote by agroban
Time is money. Time to program the machine. Time to periodically change the bits. Time to feed the blanks into the machine. Therefore, chambered and weight relieved are gonna be more expensive than the solid ones.

I think weight reduction is the main reason they do this.

I think you may have an image of some frantic assembly line in your head. That's not how things generally work, no one cries about the extra 5 seconds it takes to select the chambering setting on a CNC machine or the extra few minutes for the machine to do it.
#28
that's not how it works. No one selects chambering on the cnc machine.

the woods get selected by weight.

let me try that again the woods get selected by weight.

if a body piece is above a certain weight. it gets relieved or chambered.

heaviest pieces get chambered. second heaviest gets relieved.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#29
Quote by AcousticMirror
that's not how it works. No one selects chambering on the cnc machine.

the woods get selected by weight.

let me try that again the woods get selected by weight.

if a body piece is above a certain weight. it gets relieved or chambered.

heaviest pieces get chambered. second heaviest gets relieved.


Makes sense.
#30
Quote by AcousticMirror
that's not how it works. No one selects chambering on the cnc machine.

the woods get selected by weight.

let me try that again the woods get selected by weight.

if a body piece is above a certain weight. it gets relieved or chambered.

heaviest pieces get chambered. second heaviest gets relieved.



It's not that simple but close. The pieces get sorted by Weight, the lightest single piece blanks go to the Custom Shop. There they may be solid as in most re-issues or Chambered as in LP Custom or CR Series.
The remaining woods will all get either Chambering or Weight relief depending upon the model that is being built. I don't believe for a second thet Gibson USA does any more sorting on mahogany for it's USA products. If they did the finsihed models weights would be more consistent than they are. It's especially apparent in the Weight relieved Trad series which vary by more than 1 lb.
Moving on.....
#31
Quote by KenG
It's not that simple but close. The pieces get sorted by Weight, the lightest single piece blanks go to the Custom Shop. There they may be solid as in most re-issues or Chambered as in LP Custom or CR Series.
The remaining woods will all get either Chambering or Weight relief depending upon the model that is being built. I don't believe for a second thet Gibson USA does any more sorting on mahogany for it's USA products. If they did the finsihed models weights would be more consistent than they are. It's especially apparent in the Weight relieved Trad series which vary by more than 1 lb.


they still do sort but it's not as rigourous as the custom shop.

the custom shop as like 5 different levels that are separated by 1 pound to less then 1 pound.

gibson usa probably just has heavy and ****ing heavy.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#33
I don't think the chambered LPs sound remotely like hollow bodies. They might be a little brighter acoustically, but when plugged in, they still sound like Les Pauls. There is a difference - but it's not a massive difference.
Music Man JPX 6
Ibanez RGT220H
Fender 50th Anniversary Deluxe Strat
93 Jackson Std Professional (Japan)
03 Gibson LP Special
Alvarez AD60SC

Mesa Single Rectifier/Mesa 4x12 cab
Mesa Transatlantic TA-15
Hughes & Kettner Triplex
#34
So can anyone verify that the sole purpose of chambering is to relieve weight from a really heavy cut of wood?

It seems to me that chambering, while not the traditional Les Paul way, would offer a level of resonance not typically found in a solid cut of wood.

A buddy of mine bought a Les Paul Custom, which is a step above a standard. I own a Les Paul Studio 60s tribute. Both guitars are chambered. Is this the norm now? It seems like many people would take a Les Paul that's a pound or so heavier if it's not chambered over a chambered one just because the classic Les Paul was not chambered, or at least one that's only been weight relieved.

I'm just trying to figure out if Chambered Les Pauls are going to be the modern Les Paul.
#35
no chambering isn't the standard.

all the historic reissues are solid except the chambered reissues that were a limited run.

a solid historic reissue and a chambered gibson usa will have the same weight on average.

a chambered reissue will always be lighter.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#36
Quote by AcousticMirror
no chambering isn't the standard.

all the historic reissues are solid except the chambered reissues that were a limited run.

a solid historic reissue and a chambered gibson usa will have the same weight on average.

a chambered reissue will always be lighter.

Ok, so then chambering is usually for weight relief, but is also an available option on the models that don't need weight relief. That's cool that they are offering different options for people that want that sort of thing.
#37
It seems like chambering is going to be the standard on cheaper Les Pauls. The Studios are all chambered, and the Standards are all either chambered or weight-relieved. That's the most efficient way for Gibson to use mahogany - select out the lightest pieces for the most expensive models, and use progressively heavier wood on down the line until the Studios get whatever is left.

Like Min said, it's not the standard across the board - the reissues should be solid forever. Plus the LP Traditional is weight relieved, which has been the norm on the Standard since the 70s.

I think chambering is a cool offering. It sounds a little different, but not in a bad way, and it certainly makes it easier to find a Standard or Studio with a manageable weight, and you can still get a Standard without it if you want. The Studio is the only model where you're forced to have chambering.
#38
Quote by Roc8995
Like Min said, it's not the standard across the board - the reissues should be solid forever. Plus the LP Traditional is weight relieved, which has been the norm on the Standard since the 70s.

where did you get that information? most of what i've been seeing states the early 80s.

1982 being the year most cite as the starting point historically.
I wondered why the frisbee was getting bigger, then it hit me.
#39
I heard 80s as well for weight relief with chambering happening a few years later.

chambering on the historic isn't really an option. It was a limited run of less then 500 or so guitars.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer