-
I've been very satisfied with the tuning, intonation, and resistance to going out of tune. The exception to that would be sensitivity to temperature change, which causes all of the strings to go slightly sharp or flat, but evenly, probably because it affects neck relief a little. I can live with that. The strings stay in tune even if I bend them mercilessly, which is very nice in a hard-tail guitar.
-
06-03-2019 07:48 PM
-
Only had two LPs. Both 70s vintage.
Really enjoyed all aspects of them but one--they are uncomfortable to play from a seated position. The body is so small that the strings end up being too low in your lap. Your left hand ends up twisting unnaturally to chord.
-
No telecaster I've ever owned, nor the singlecut PRS I owned, had any neck dive issues. Including a VERY light tele thinline. This seems like a solution looking for a problem.
While I wouldn't mind a body contour like the strat has, none of my teles "gouge my ribs"... but then I'm not overly rotund either (which would actually be your ribs "gouging" the guitar body lol).
I don't find Les Pauls comfortable to play, but for entirely different reasons.... I don;t like the neck angles and they way my hand rests on the bridge... it's the opposite of a tele, strat, or PRS.... my Gretsch is the same way, but I've gotten used to it, and it doesn't matter as much because that guitar never leaves the house, and I always play it sitting. But for real (gig) usage, give me a tele, strat, or PRS every time. (personal preference)
-
Aside from my initial suggestion of simply getting better Les Pauls that do not suffer from these issues, I just want to point out that Gibson solved the whole horn thing back in '58, no doubt as a result of feedback from intrepid jazz guitarists.
Originally Posted by strumcat
This guitar has no shortage of horn, is immensely comfortable to play, and sounds like a million bucks. Perfect for jazzers looking for a great solid-body sound.
-
Hammertone,
What do you consider a “better” Les Paul as far as ergonomics? The body, neck and strap pins are pretty much all in the same place on all models, are they not? I play a LP Traditional and while I generally find it quite comfortable, (way more comfy than a 16” archtop)I am rather thin and thickly boned; my ribs are right there. I can sometimes during long sessions feel the edge hitting my bony ribs but I just accept that as the price one pays for being “boney”. A belly cut strat digs in less but I’m not happy with the neck, scale, pickups, or tone.
-
The most ergonomic Les Paul was the Recording Model. It featured a belly cut, like the Stratocaster. Very comfy.
-
For me its mostly because of the weight.
I used to be a standing Les Paul player until my scoliosis and lower back artrosis told me an early '90s 10 pounder was not fun anymore.
I still play it once in a while but only while sitting.
Its actually part of the reason I assembled a 490R equipped Warmoth Mahogany body and neck Telecaster with a belly cut to bring it just under 8 pounds.
-
Just a bon mot, but I'll offer some options. You mention that you are not happy with the neck, scale, pickups, or tone. Would that be in relation to your guitar in particular, or Les Pauls as a group? Originally Posted by whiskey02
-
Hmm... I took his dislike of neck, scale, pickups, or tone to be in reference to Strats. Maybe I'm misreading it, but that's my perception.
-
I guess I’ve just never bonded with any Fender style guitar in spite of the fact that I find a strat body the most comfortable. As it happened due to extremely heavy rain in my city today, I played my LP for about 4.5 hours today without a single complaint of comfort. I pretty much forgot about this thread, nothing hurting my prominent ribs today. I love everything about my guitar and wouldn’t trade it for anything, despite being able to say that in a direct comparison to a strat body, a strat is more comfortable. I want more out of my guitar than just comfort. I had a lengthy period of my life where my upper body was quite emaciated when simple things like seatbelts, furniture and a woman named Alicia could be pain inducing to my torso. Upon giving up racing and racing weight, a more natural and normal amount of muscle returning to my form makes this much less of a problem now. On occasions when I have felt discomfort, I’ve put on a sweater and been fine. Fwiw, I’ll take a neck and overall tone that I’m “comfortable“ with over actual comfort! I think the same could be said for many archtop players; what they get out of their fat guitar outweighs concerns of comfort or convenience. Originally Posted by Hammertone
-
I had a LP-type (Heritage 150) with a belly cut. It was a little more comfortable when I strapped it on. After that moment I actually never thought about it again for the hours I played it. With those without belly cuts, I notice the absence for a moment but never think about it either. My conclusion is that belly cuts are a good idea but not decisional for me.
Here's another one with a belly cut. Same deal. Nice but quickly forgotten.
Maybe if I lost a few pounds and the edge of the back was jabbing my ribs I'd have a different opinion.
-
I cannot say that my last Les Paul (a 2002 Custom Shop 57 Black Beauty) was a marginally better guitar than my current 2017 Les Paul Studio. In my case the cheaper guitar is as good or better, particularly for my purpose, to wit, using it as a jazz guitar. Originally Posted by Lobomov
My Studio has the ultra modern weight relief. I have read that the chambered Lesters have a different tone than the non weight relieved models whereas the Weight relieved models have the same tone as the heavy ones.
The only thing uncomfortable about a Les Paul is the weight (for some players) and Gibson has solved that problem for all of us sissies/snowflakes who cannot handle the weight.
-
I've played a few chambered ones. It feels different because the top and back vibrate. I'm sure some would argue that the amplified sound is inferior or the sustain is lessened. I didn't notice any negatives.
My only caution with a chambered LP is the possibility of neck dive if the neck is fat. This is speculation on my part.
-
My ergonomic beef with LP's is that I find that the lower bout digs into my right forearm uncomfortably. I've never experienced this with any other guitar, but I have on the LP's I've tried. Could just be a function of my playing position and anatomy not interfacing well with the LP size/shape), and maybe this doesn't bother others. I never particularly noticed the weight.
I had one of these (Studio DC):
The combination of chambered body and 24-fret neck made for severe neck dive. I wound up putting in a second strap button closer to the top of the lower bout. With that and a suede strap, the balance was OK, but stock it was pretty annoying. I don't think the chambering really affected the sound, but the extra frets did. The bridge pup sounded great -- just like you'd want/expect a LP to sound. But the neck pup did not have that rich, flute-y sound that LP's typically have. I've played other chambered LP's that sound great, e.g. a friend's LP supreme (which had the same 490R/498T pups as mine) sounds fantastic. I've also not noticed neck dive on the other LP's I've played, especially not the heavier ones.
-
For me, Les Paul style guitars are easy to adjust to. Yes, some can be too heavy. 9.5lbs is my preferred maximum weight, even though both my '68 Reissue Custom and Heritage H157 both weigh in at 9.5lbs. The body style suits me fine, standing or sitting.
-
My only beef with LPs is the weight. I just don't like it. My solution is a Benedetto Bambino. Superior in every respect, but about the same size.
-
I have tried a Bambino. A super cool guitar to be sure, but with a far different tone than a Les Paul and with less sustain. Originally Posted by sgosnell
For many years my main electric (only electric for about 9 years in fact) guitar was a 1975 Les Paul Custom. She weighed 11 pounds. By my 50's that weight was not cool for a 4 hour gig. I replaced it with a 10 pound Custom shop 57 Black Beauty. By 60, that weight was too much. My 2017 Studio weighs 7 pounds 14 ounces. Quite comfortable. I have seen some R-9's and R-0's out there that weigh in about 9 pounds. I think I would be OK with one of those (in fact, if I can find a sub 9 pound R-0 at a fair price, I might even pull the trigger.
For me, a Les Paul is a very comfortable guitar. As I posted earlier in this thread, those who feel differently ought to play something else. It isn't like there are no other choices.
-
I never weighed my old Heritage 150CM, but all that solid mahogany concentrated in one small spot on my thigh always ended up causing numbness and discomfort. A kind of solution was to wear a strap even while sitting at home, but I eventually got fed up with that. Standing while playing at jams was less of a problem, though after a couple of hours, it definitely left an "impression" on one's ribs. Otherwise, a lovely sounding and playing instrument.
-
Yes, my bad. Of course, with a strat, one can easily change the neck, the scale, the pickups, (and the body, while we're at it) which can significantly affect the tone, at least that's been my experience with strats. And teles. Originally Posted by sgosnell
But on to Les Pauls, where changing the pickups, wiring loom and hardware are the go-to tone modifiers.
Better Les Pauls for ergonomics? Limiting my comments to single-cutaway models, lots of folks complain about weight, which affects balance. I think the answer it simply to play lighter Les Pauls. I play a few chambered ones, which have no neck dive issues whatsoever. At somewhere +/- 7.5 pounds, they are as light or lighter than plenty of jazz guitars. I play a few that are not chambered, which weigh +/- 8.5 pounds. That's not heavy IMO. 9 pounds is as heavy as I am willing to go with a Les Paul. I have not noticed any significant balance issues if I play them seated. Using a strap while seated allows me to adjust the angle of the guitar on my knee any way I want. An they all stay in tune. I'm just a lucky man.
None of mine have belly cuts, and I'm not inclined to modify any of my Les Pauls in that manner since the lack of belly cut does not bother me. Plenty of Les Pauls are available with that feature. Still, some might find Les Pauls uncomfortable to play for one reason or another, which brings me back to my original suggestion:
Last edited by Hammertone; 06-08-2019 at 09:20 AM.
-
I readily admit that the Bambino doesn't really sound like a Les Paul. But I prefer the sound as much as I prefer the weight. I don't knock LPs, but I'm not a huge fan. Obviously, at least in terms of sales, I'm in the minority. It's my money, though, and I buy what I prefer.
-
Aaron Cowles told me about when he worked on the Explorer, Firebird and Flying V prototypes. McCarty and his crew were looking for modern appearances to better compete with those odd shaped Fenders. Gibson put a lot of work in those guitars, according to Aaron. They'd tell him where to put the pickups and he'd move them. They'd play them for a while then tell Aaron to change something else. The point Aaron was making to me was that these monstrosities were carefully worked out to make the most of their shapes.
Of all of those creations, the one that makes the most practical sense sitting down is the non-reverse Firebird. But these guitar were not about making sense. They were about making dollars.
-
sure that works great. So does buying a strat if you're uncomfortable with the thickness of an L5! Seriously, a PRS or 335 sounds absolutely nothing like a les paul. If you like a les paul, you're sort of out of luck. Originally Posted by John A.
I don't find them hard to play or have issues with the strap placement. Tons of jazz guys have used les pauls. My issue is the weight but it's part of the reason they sound the way they do.
-
If it wasn't for the infamous bird inlays, those would be truly beautiful IMHO. I don't need literal references on a unique object.
-
I rather like the bird inlays, it's one of the things that makes it a PRS. Never understood the hate for them.
Not EVERYTHING has to be the way it always was (Fender or Gibson only, dots or blocks only, 24.75" or 25.5" only...)
-
What Is the Definition of Non-Objective Art? Originally Posted by ruger9
I understand why people like them, but they don't make sense to me. No harm. I will never own a PRS. I have what I need.
P.S. It is the same reason I don't like f-holes on Tele body shapes. I can deal with a cat's eye though, but I will never have one of those either.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions