Well Gibson is not the only one

[GAS Man]

years ago people bitched that Lesters were heavy. now people bitch that they are weight relieved. there will always be some one bitching regardless of what happens.

 

Yeah, I haven't necessarily seen anything that gives me the impression that weight relieving is somehow "cheap". I mean, they must end up grinding up a lot of mahogany into chips in the process, so it's a production cost either way, right? So I just think of it as "different". Unless they are doing it to get more resonance out of otherwise "dead" wood.

 

I have the VM that's definitely weight relieved, a Supreme that is that and chambered, and I have a Custom Classic SB on the way that is supposed to be chambered as well. So far I have mixed emotions about them. A bit more resonant than some heavy bodied axes - YES - a bit brighter and chimey-er - YES - and a bit less sustain - YES. Ergo = different. No?

[GAS Man]

reminds me of college botany class.

 

xylem and phloem cells.

 

It's all about the xylem and phloem cells right? Not about computer routers.

[DaveAronow]

I did not need an Xray to see that the VM was "Hollow" I knew from the time I picked it up it was a POS not to mention the sharp frets, neck heavy bad build quality all around, sent it back tried another ..same crap the VM is NOT a solid body guitar as advertised, it is however an over priced Gibson, some like the VM, more power to them, like I stated before I like solid well built guitars not cheaply built ones like the VM.

 

FYI, you can like what you like and hate what you hate, I wouldnt try to change your mind on that, but lets be clear about your reasons for hating.........

 

When you weight relief a guitar, it not only isnt cheaper to accomplish, it is more time consuming and labor intensive to manufacture.

 

Its not like they are getting a special deal on wood that magically grows with the weight relief routs already in them.

They start with the same block of wood they normally would(minus the drop top which doesnt affect this arguement) and then they have to physically rout out the weight relief channels costing money on time, labor, machine parts(router bits or cutting blades etc.)

They may verywell have honed this process down to where it doesnt cost them much more in the long run, but it is definitely NOT done to save money or cut any costs in the manufacturing or building process.

 

It is done simply to accomidate the masses(market) who have demanded in the past that the weight be cut down, and as a side effect, some people actually think the chamdering adds to the resonance and tone of the instruments.

 

The fact that some of the other companies are starting to jump on board with this chambering idea(PRS, Warmoth aftermarket bodies, Taylor and others) leads me to believe that these Tried and true companies may know something that alot of people havent quite figured out yet or admitted to them selves for whatever reason, stuborn closeminded tradition being one of the biggest; that enough people prefer the added lightness from chambered bodies to make it profitable to produce them, and that enough people actually like the tone benefits that chambering offers that it hasnt hurt their market share.

 

And for the ones who were unaware before being exposed in some way, such as the x-ray pics in this post, if they were happy with the sound and feel enough to buy an instrument without knowing they were chambered, why would knowing change their minds?

 

Just food for thought, but lets be clear that chambering does NOT= cheapness or corner cutting. Its not like they save money by selling the sawdust that was created by the chambering proccess.

 

[ID_Ghost]

FYI, you can like what you like and hate what you hate, I wouldnt try to change your mind on that, but lets be clear about your reasons for hating......... When you weight relief a guitar, it not only isnt cheaper to accomplish, it is more time consuming and labor intensive to manufacture. Its not like they are getting a special deal on wood that magically grows with the weight relief routs already in them. They start with the same block of wood they normally would(minus the drop top which doesnt affect this arguement) and then they have to physically rout out the weight relief channels costing money on time, labor, machine parts(router bits or cutting blades etc.) They may verywell have honed this process down to where it doesnt cost them much more in the long run, but it is definitely NOT done to save money or cut any costs in the manufacturing or building process. It is done simply to accomidate the masses(market) who have demanded in the past that the weight be cut down, and as a side effect, some people actually think the chamdering adds to the resonance and tone of the instruments. The fact that some of the other companies are starting to jump on board with this chambering idea(PRS, Warmoth aftermarket bodies, Taylor and others) leads me to believe that these Tried and true companies may know something that alot of people havent quite figured out yet or admitted to them selves for whatever reason, stuborn closeminded tradition being one of the biggest; that enough people prefer the added lightness from chambered bodies to make it profitable to produce them, and that enough people actually like the tone affects that chambering offers that it hasnt hurt their market share. And for the ones who were unaware before being exposed in some way, such as the x-ray pics in this post, if they were happy with the sound and feel enough to buy an instrument without knowing they were chambered, why would knowing change their minds? Just food for thought, but lets be clear that chambering does NOT= cheapness or corner cutting. Its not like they save money by selling the sawdust that was created by the chambering proccess.

As if I needed you to "Elighten" me and YOU used the word "hate" not I
dude you seem to have a problem with me and I would suggest you back off
of me Im asking you once to just get over yourself.
PS:"Rock on little Kitty Rock on"

[guitarchaz]

Do you really think that's the primary reason they're doing it? I can't see these guitar companies being willing to (possibly) sacrifice tone quality to save a few pennies on shipping costs. Maybe they simply want the guitars to be lighter? Would that be a major concern for them?

 

 

For what it's worth, I recently had a chance to AB last years LP vintage mahogany with this years (which is lighter and chambered). I much prefer the tone of the new one. It has more sustain, more snap, and is generally just a better feeling and sounding instrument to me, acoustically and electrically.

[sylvesterlowery]

When will everyone stop complaining about this crap and actually get around to playing their guitars?

[guitarchaz]

Here's what Gibson has to say if anyone missed it.

http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/Features/Chambering%20the%20Les%20Paul_%20A%20Mar/

[DaveAronow]

As if I needed you to "Elighten" me and YOU used the word "hate" not I dude you seem to have a problem with me and I would suggest you back off of me Im asking you once to just get over yourself. PS:"Rock on little Kitty Rock on"

 

Wow. Someone is pretty defensive tonight. Dude, this is an editorial "YOU" and not meant for you in particular. You may have taken it to mean you because I quoted you, but I was using your quote as a general guideline as to how ALOT of people think about this situation.

 

As far as me having a personal problem with YOU, dude, I'm sure we have talked plenty of times and I am a pretty opinionated guy, and I will ALWAYS say what I feel and NEVER sugar coat anything, but Personally ,I cant even remember one specific comment I've ever made that was directed towards you personally. I'm not saying I havent, I'm just saying I dont remember picking on you specifically, so lighten up man. I can be harsh and abrasive with anyone and everyone, or kissy kissy lovey dovey with the exact same person. It just depends on the topic.

I wouldnt really say that the post that offended you so much was all that harsh anyway.

 

But anyway, you did use the words cheap and crappy, and I just wanted to point out that your reasons for using these words(chambering) are not valid. So ,if I mistook that to mean "hate", sorry but that is really not to far of a stretch anyway, is it?

 

So, Sorry, if I offended you, and by the way, EVERYONE needs a little enlightening sometimes. Including YOU, AND ME.

 

And I,m glad you are only going to ask me ONCE to get over myself, because the answer would still be NO even if you asked me 100,000,000 times.

[Help!I'maRock!]

basically, it comes down to that if you want a Les Paul type guitar, you're gonna have to get something weight relieved. it just doesn't happen any other way now. so forget the name on the headstock and pick the one that plays and sounds the best, to you.

 

and if you come across a Les Paul Recording Model from the Norlin years, PM me. i'm interested.

[docjeffrey]

Gibson and PRS use South American mahogany, not African or an Asian source.

 

Just thought I'd share that for the person who had that long theory about how African mahogany was heavier...

 

It's all about providing a product that meets the demands of modern players. Eleven pound Les Pauls are not going to sell. Period. There are too many alternatives.

 

Gibson knows this. So does PRS. Nine pounds seems to be the maximum for a $2000 + instrument.

 

Shipping costs? Gimme a break.

[Help!I'maRock!]

Gibson and PRS use South American mahogany, not African or an Asian source. Just thought I'd share that for the person who had that long theory about how African mahogany was heavier... It's all about providing a product that meets the demands of modern players. Eleven pound Les Pauls are not going to sell. Period. There are too many alternatives. Gibson knows this. So does PRS. Nine pounds seems to be the maximum for a $2000 + instrument. Shipping costs? Gimme a break.

even most heritage guitars i see on gbase and whatnot are chambered. seems that its the only way to do it anymore.

[warriorpoet]

dj, PRS uses African Mahog. It's in the latest edition of Sweetwater news. Gibby's been doing it for a long time.

[docjeffrey]

The days of manufacturing guitars out of traditional tonewoods are numbered, just like the days of using fossil fuels are.

 

They will continue to get more expensive. Occasionally, new sources will be found; but in the meantime, companies like CF Martin, Rainsong, and Ovation will pioneer using synthetic materials that will eventually become accepted.

 

Last summer, it became illegal to transport Brazilian rosewood across international boundaries (even privately owned instruments) without a permit.

 

In the future, those with large collections of Gibsons, Martins, and other guitars that use South American tonewoods will become extremely wealthy by selling their instruments to well-heeled collectors who want instruments from the "Golden Age" of guitar making (1950--1965 and 1990--2010).

 

All of them will have x-ray machines to inspect the goods, and those that are solid and weigh less than 10 pounds will be revered, much like 1950's bursts.

 

Unfortunately, we will be dead by the time that this happens, but our grandkids (at least mine and Bbreakers') are going to be freakin' rich.

[DaveAronow]

 

The days of manufacturing guitars out of traditional tonewoods are numbered, just like the days of using fossil fuels are. They will continue to get more expensive. Occasionally, new sources will be found; but in the meantime, companies like CF Martin, Rainsong, and Ovation will pioneer using synthetic materials that will eventually become accepted. Last summer, it became illegal to transport Brazilian rosewood across international boundaries (even privately owned instruments) without a permit. In the future, those with large collections of Gibsons, Martins, and other guitars that use South American tonewoods will become extremely wealthy by selling their instruments to well-heeled collectors who want instruments from the "Golden Age" of guitar making (1950--1965 and 1990--2010). All of them will have x-ray machines to inspect the goods, and those that are solid and weigh less than 10 pounds will be revered, much like 1950's bursts. Unfortunately, we will be dead by the time that this happens, but our grandkids (at least mine and Bbreakers') are going to be freakin' rich.

 

 

This is not entirely true.

 

Only woods considered to be endangered such as Brazillian Rozewood(as you mentioned), certain species of mahogany, Brazillian Pernambuco- used for violin bows and others will have their days numbered.

 

There are plenty of other tonewoods that are still considered traditional that arent even remotely scarce and or endangered and therefore there is no danger of them becoming scarce any time in the foreseeable future.

 

Im not even sure about the "scarceity and rareity and endangered status of Brazillan Rosewood." It may be true that it is becoming increasingly rare, but alot of these natural products from the south american rainforest have become illegal to harvest, possess, and transport in certain instances simply to protect the forests against widespread clearing and harvesting and get lumped in with general protection strategies as opposed to actually trying to protect individual speicies because of their rarity.

 

Dont take this to mean that I know it to be the case for Brazillian rosewood specifically, I dont, but I wouldnt be suprised if it was the case, as it is for certain other protected species.

[steve_man]

only one what... to over-charge for their instruments?

[Sic666]

This is not entirely true. Only woods considered to be endangered such as Brazillian Rozewood(as you mentioned), certain species of mahogany, Brazillian Pernambuco- used for violin bows and others will have their days numbered. There are plenty of other tonewoods that are still considered traditional that arent even remotely scarce and or endangered and therefore there is no danger of them becoming scarce any time in the foreseeable future. Im not even sure about the "scarceity and rareity and endangered status of Brazillan Rosewood." It may be true that it is becoming increasingly rare, but alot of these natural products from the south american rainforest have become illegal to harvest, possess, and transport in certain instances simply to protect the forests against widespread clearing and harvesting and get lumped in with general protection strategies as opposed to actually trying to protect individual speicies because of their rarity. Dont take this to mean that I know it to be the case for Brazillian rosewood specifically, I dont, but I wouldnt be suprised if it was the case, as it is for certain other protected species.

 

 

Well I don't really care if they chamber them or not if it sounds good im happy.

 

BTW I prefer that a rainforest is preserved than cutting it down to make electric guitars. I love guitars but I prefer to have in the future rainforests.

[docjeffrey]

This is not entirely true.

Yeah. It's entirely true. When your great grandkids are in their 70's, you'll see that I'm right.

I'm pretty sure that Martin never thought they'd run out of South American Rosewood and Mahogany 50 years ago.

All of those alternative indigenous woods face the same fate.

The greenies will eventually convince the industry to use ONLY renewable farmed woods, recycled materials, and synthetics. Indigenous timbers will be protected (rightly so), so even the species that you mentioned will be protected. It only takes a few years to completely wipe out a species--whether it's animal or vegetable. We should know that by now.

By the way, you are much more knowledgeable than I am (seriously), so I'm probably wrong with my prediction. We humans don't seem very smart when it comes to being good stewards of our resources.

[Runn3r]

even most heritage guitars i see on gbase and whatnot are chambered. seems that its the only way to do it anymore.

so...are you saying the CUSTOM SHOP LP's are chambered as well?!?!



.

[docjeffrey]

so...are you saying the CUSTOM SHOP LP's are chambered as well?!?! .

I guess you have to check the specs for each model, but the Gibson CS makes a point of advertising that their guitars are not weight relieved, and that they are South American Mahogany (where applicable).

[DaveAronow]

 

Well I don't really care if they chamber them or not if it sounds good im happy. BTW I prefer that a rainforest is preserved than cutting it down to make electric guitars. I love guitars but I prefer to have in the future rainforests.

 

 

I'd kill flipper for a tuna sandwhich.:poke:

 

 

 

J.K. Personally, I dont know anyone who wants to see the rainforest dissapear, but you are right, the ones that simply dont care are out there in droves.

I think we will be O.K. The whole planet has begun a massive "awareness" of the need to protect its resources, and although it could be considered in its infancy, I think that the demands of the masses will eventually catch up to the ones who would do the earth harm for profit. It has already begun and it will become harder and harder in the future to buck the system if for no other reason that it will not be profitable to do so as more and more people become aware and simply refuse to buy the products that are made as a result of causing such damage.

 

On the other hand, we need to be reasonable, and not get too carried away going into the other direction where life as we know it unneccessarily ceases to exist because a group of people that worship grass for example, decide they dont want a feild cleared for a school or hospital or such, even though it might be on the edge of a bazillion acre prairy where grass is obviously not in any short supply. Certainly not endangered.

 

But, yeah, I'm all for saving and preserving everything possible for future generations.

But i'm not going top stop buying Maple for guitar necks until someone convinces me that there is a reasonable need to do so.

[UllyssesSB]

I gots no beef with chambering. As Alchemist points out, if it's made dried dog crap but plays good I'll take it!

[relva3]

The whole planet has begun a massive "awareness"

 

 

a lot of countries are aware, but it seems china doesn't care. they are one big massive coal cloud over there.

[balthazarr]

I'd kill flipper for a tuna sandwhich.:poke:

 

 

 

So Flipper was a Tuna, eh?

And all this time I thought he was a Bottle-Nosed Dolphin.

 

:poke:

Sorry, Charlie.

[DaveAronow]

So Flipper was a Tuna, eh? And all this time I thought he was a Bottle-Nosed Dolphin. :poke: Sorry, Charlie.

 

Uhm, no.

 

The joke means that I care so little about flipper the dolphin, that if he has to die in the net along with the tuna, just so I can have a measley sandwhich, so be it.

 

But, of course, Im only joking.

 

 

 

Or am I?

 

[balthazarr]

Uhm, no. The joke means that I care so little about flipper the dolphin, that if he has to die in the net along with the tuna, just so I can have a measley sandwhich, so be it. But, of course, Im only joking. Or am I?

Good save, Dave. Thought I had 'ya there.