software

OK...

Guitar weight...

You see this argued alot among Paula players...some claim Heavier= better tone, some lighter=better tone.

If you go over to the LPF for example..most guys are looking for the absolute lightest paulas they can find...under 9 pounds for sure and 8 is better. They won't even LOOK at anything over 9 pounds.

IME, weight is not an absolute deciding factor in tone....yet many believe it is...things like the particular piece of wood, finish, how the guitar is put together IMO are more important...

so...barring the obvious (i.e. that lighter equals easier to play all night at a gig), lets discuss...

Lighter weight in the same species of wood probably means it's more porous, and therefore more resonant. At least that's how I see it.


Originally Posted by FretFireLighter weight in the same species of wood probably means it's more porous, and therefore more resonant. At least that's how I see it.

Sound reasoning (no pun intended).

So in the case of the Hamer's I'm looking at..where we are talking a custom company basically that doesn't let out any quot;crapquot;, so to speak ...why would they (or anyone else) allow such varying weights? I could see, a pound or so variance with such a small production...but I'm seeing (especially in the Korina models) variance of 3-4 pounds.

I mean this as a legit question, not trying to quot;arguequot;...In the case of mass production, I can understand...Fender...Gibson..Ibanez, etc...there is *business* need to just get enough guitars out the door to meet demand.....

in general im a strat guy so ive never worried about weight too much.
my old les paul was a boat anchor, like 13 lbs. thats why i switched to sg's. what good is a guitar if after an hour you want it off your shoulder and you have 2-4 more hours to go

when i bought my new lp, i wanted a custom shop (no weight relief) and wanted it to be on the lighter side. im guessing mines under 9 lbs.
i didnt want another heavy one cause its too hard on my shoulder.
weight, tone, playability were the important factors
finish wasnt.
i wanted a '58 ri and ended up with a '56. wanted a plain top, ended up with a gold top (not my favorite). wanted buckers, ended up with p90's.
but the guitar was that good.
very lively and resonant

some people like heavy guitars. friends of mine wont buy anything if its too light.

hamer doesnt do weight relief so if a board is 9 lbs, its 9 lbs, if its 13 its 13.
the more rare a wood the less pickey you can be, there is only so much wood that is big enough to use, so do you make multi piece bodys or use heavier wood?
i think using heavier wood is a better option


Originally Posted by jeremysome people like heavy guitars. friends of mine wont buy anything if its too light.

hamer doesnt do weight relief so if a board is 9 lbs, its 9 lbs, if its 13 its 13.
the more rare a wood the less pickey you can be, there is only so much wood that is big enough to use, so do you make multi piece bodys or use heavier wood?
i think using heavier wood is a better option

Agreed Jeremy. I notice Hamer is not offering one piece bodies in the Korina anymore...most of the one's on Wilcutt's site are indeed two piece. In Korina I can understand with the rarity there, but Mahogany and maple? very common woods.

Weight doesn't bother me from a fatigue standpoint, I guess my concern is should I be picking (like you did) the lightest one I can find (for tone purposes), and disregarding what I prefer aesthetically? Or witha company like Hamer (or other quot;customquot; builders) is weight less of a concern?

My Faded LP std for example, is heavier than my Black Std (now sold), and I'd say similar to the CSB I sold to NAPs. Yet (and I'm assuming) due to the finish, it's considerably more resonant than either...I can feel the thing vibrating like crazy against my stomach when I play.


Originally Posted by jeremythe more rare a wood the less pickey you can be, there is only so much wood that is big enough to use, so do you make multi piece bodys or use heavier wood?I think this is a great point, from what I hear limba (korina) is getting harder and harder to obtain. It's mostly brought in from Africa if I remember correctly, in small numbers at that, and some of that limited amount is streaked (black limba) which I believe Hamer considers quot;unusablequot;.

you have the plank body faded lp?


Originally Posted by jeremyyou have the plank body faded lp?

Nope it's a typical production standard. 50s production neck.
it probably has more to do with the woods and how well the guitar was made than the finish. true, a lighter finish is a good thing tonally, but i suspect that the other factors contribute more. especially since gibson sprays nitro

I dig my guitars around 8 pounds, for mahogany. Nice and meaty to beat the **** out of. My 7 is at 8 lbs, and my 6 is at 7 lbs. Works out nicely.

For some reason it's a comfort to me. My Strats are fairly heavy and I like it. Guitars like Ibanez RG are also made of Basswood but are MUCH lighter and it scares me.

My repair guy explained it to me like this:

All guitars have the exact same frequency range delivered to them by the plucked string. The denser (heavier) the wood, the more lower (slower moving) frequencies struggle to resonate through the wood. So basically, heavier guitars dampen the lower end of the frequency spectrum.

I prefer light guitars, as they sound warmer. I've done comparisons with 70s strats, and the tonal difference between a light one and a heavy one is quite striking.

les Pauls seem to handle being heavy a bit better than fenders do, but the warmest sounding LPs I've played have been lighter ones. And the best sounding HB guitar I've ever played was a very light all-solid Historic 59 burst ri.

This is why I rarely go to those 'blues lawyer' sites like LP Forum......a bunch of rich guys sitting in their law offices arguing over how light a Paul should be, and who's the best custom rewinder.....gimme a break, half those guys are still noodling around on the pentatonic scale, trying to figure out Allman licks! LOL

To be honest, all guitars have a particular vibe, whether light or heavy. In general, I like light guitars more, but some of the best sounding ones I've had were relatively heavy, or middle of the road. Light = resonant and loud unplugged. Heavy = tight and bold sounding.....and often times more sustain!!

I like both. So much more of my preference is determined by how well the neck plays, and how the pickups match up with what the guitar is.

Hmmm much to ponder....Either guitar will have a pair of 59s in it...so possibly based on joe's theory of more mass =darker/bolder tone the TSB may be a good quot;matchquot; though I can always do a pup swap in the 59 burst if it's too bright....

Aesthetically no doubt to my eyes the TSB wins..even on just the figure in the wood...but guitars can often be like women and sometimes the really gorgeous one are the ones you really don't wanna live with for any length of time, cos it's all looks and no substance...

much to ponder....


Originally Posted by GearjoneserThis is why I rarely go to those 'blues lawyer' sites like LP Forum......a bunch of rich guys sitting in their law offices arguing over how light a Paul should be, and who's the best custom rewinder.....gimme a break, half those guys are still noodling around on the pentatonic scale, trying to figure out Allman licks! LOL

To be honest, all guitars have a particular vibe, whether light or heavy. In general, I like light guitars more, but some of the best sounding ones I've had were relatively heavy, or middle of the road. Light = resonant and loud unplugged. Heavy = tight and bold sounding.....and often times more sustain!!

I like both. So much more of my preference is determined by how well the neck plays, and how the pickups match up with what the guitar is.

You can make generalizations about any forum. How is quot;arguing over how light a Paul should be, and who's the best custom rewinderquot; any different than anything else that goes on here?

As far as weight of the guitar- all power to anyone that wants a 12 lb boat anchor around their shoulders. I had a massively heavy Custom that sounded great- looking back it may have been one of the best sounding LPs I've had- but I only had it for a few months- it was way too heavy. Cool guitar, great sounding guitar, whatever- if it's too heavy it goes. I also had an early Travis Bean- too heavy, aluminum neck in winter- it went.

As far as weight and the impact on tone... the point is moot for me. Great sounding and feeling LPs are around in the 8-9 lb range, those are the ones.

Well the other thing here is that we are not talking Paulas...so is the diff in a maple capped Explorer of a pound going to make as much diff due to its construction...

gahhh

I think I'm just gonna go quot;uglyquot;...my momma warned me about those super pretty girls and she was right!


Originally Posted by FretFireLighter weight in the same species of wood probably means it's more porous, and therefore more resonant. At least that's how I see it.

Balsa's really light and porous; does that make it more quot;resonantquot;?

The issue of wood and weight is far more complex.

The key issue is the woods elasticity and its restitution characteristics.

Restitution is a material's ability to return energy to a system. This is not directly related to hardness but is a complex interaction of various characteristics.

Generally speaking, something with a high elasticity and low coefficient of restitution is acoustically dead while a low elasticity and high coefficient of restitution is good at reflecting energy, but some materials - rubber for example - are both elastic and highly restitutive (did i just make that word up i wonder?) and obviously useless in an acoustic application.

Resonance is a word that is rather over-used by musicians who do not always use it appropriately. It has a specific meaning to a materials technician. All materials are capable of resonance, even water but they have different resonant characteristics so it isn't really correct to think in terms of some woods or materials being more resonant than others.

The issue here is more of mass than weight. The more mass that the string is anchored to, the less acoustic energy will be lost to the guitars body and the more the string will sustain as energy is fed back to the string, promoting resonance. However, the more mass you have the heavier the thing is so you can't really escape the weight issue.

Les Paul's sustain well despite the fact that they are mostly built from mahogany, a light wood of low density, because the guitar's shape is gives it a lot of mass. Specifically the string is anchored directly to a maple cap via two chunks of plated alloy and maple is a hard, dense wood. Conversely, a Strat made of basswood while have very low mass and will not sustain as well because the construction dissipates string energy more rapidly.

I've never weighed any of my guitars, and to be honest I've never taken it into consideration when buying one...

If I like playing the guitar and it sounds good, I'll ask the sales assistant to get me a strap. If it feels comfortable on a strap, then I'm interested in buying it.. I guess that does have something to do with weight, but also the location of strap buttons etc.. I can play a heavy guitar as long as it stays in a nice position on the strap. Light guitars can equally be a pain if they won't balance easily..

i think it also depends where the weight is. a heavier neck with a light body or a light neck with a heavy body or same density for both neck and body. i don't really know which one is preferable, they say a heavy neck with a light body is better.