602a Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Does anyone have a light weight 150 and if so how do they compare to a regular 150 as far as sounds and sustain. I would imagine they have less sustain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tulk1 Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Does anyone have a light weight 150 and if so how do they compare to a regular 150 as far as sounds and sustain. I would imagine they have less sustain? I don't have one, but I got to play Katie's at PSPI. To my ears, no difference in sustain. In fact, we did an unplugged test where we plucked a string and listened for the decay (think Beatles A Day in the Life). It sustained forever. And in my opinion, it translated to the electronics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
602a Posted March 5, 2011 Author Share Posted March 5, 2011 I don't have one, but I got to play Katie's at PSPI. To my ears, no difference in sustain. In fact, we did an unplugged test where we plucked a string and listened for the decay (think Beatles A Day in the Life). It sustained forever. And in my opinion, it translated to the electronics. Thanks Tulk that is what I was hoping to hear was from someone who has played one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut1 Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 I had an unchambered 150 ultra a while back, now I got a chambered 150 ultra. To be honest, I liked the unchambered better, but it really might be just an illusion, that it sustains better, or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmenne Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I have a chambered 150. I have not played a heavy weight, so can not offer a comparison. My guitar has lots of sustain and has a great resonance un plugged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sick1982 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 When I bought mine, tested 1 LW and 3 regular. I bought the LW because it had the most sustain and had the fullest tone. It also felt more comfortable playing for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut1 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I wouldn't go back to heavy weight either. My current 150 weights 3,4 kg and I can play it for hours. It's nice and vibrant. It would be interesting to do an A/B comparison. This guy is the german LP and sound guru if I may say so. His number 1 guitar is a 1968 chambered gold top. And he sure has played QUITE A FEW guitars: http://www.gregorhilden.de that's his channel on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/GregsGuitars This guy has played basically all kinds of LP guitars that are out there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuz Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I wouldn't go back to heavy weight either. My current 150 weights 3,4 kg and I can play it for hours. It's nice and vibrant. It would be interesting to do an A/B comparison. This guy is the german LP and sound guru if I may say so. His number 1 guitar is a 1968 chambered gold top. And he sure has played QUITE A FEW guitars: http://www.gregorhilden.de Well, I know his #1 is an original 1968 LP that was converted to PAF. They didn't make chambered LPs back in the '60s. I am sorry but I have to disagree that his 1968 LP is chambered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuz Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I am just going to give MY opinion here. AGAIN, this is only my opinion (and maybe that of Alex Sckolnick!!!). I have owned 2 chambered Single Cut guitars (a Fender Robben Ford model and a 245 PRS). They were great guitars and I think they had no difference in sustain. I DO feel, and this is something I have heard first-hand, that there is a difference in tone. Ren has said this point before as well. Solid guitars have less low-mids than chambered guitars. You can totally dismiss this point I make, and that is fine. What I am trying to do is give MY honest evaluation for potential buyers so they can make an informed decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut1 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 Well, I know his #1 is an original 1968 LP that was converted to PAF. They didn't make chambered LPs back in the '60s. I am sorry but I have to disagree that his 1968 LP is chambered. You've got only PART of the equation right. Yes, it is an 1968 gold top, converted to PAFs, BUT it was chambered by someone along it's life. The guitar whas chambered from the back, and someone put a new back on top of the old one. It is hardly noticable but that's the way it is. The whole story of the guitar is on his page in german. So you CAN trust me on this one 1968 Gibson Les Paul Std. Goldtop/PAFs, - converted to 50ths specs. Meine absolute Nummer-1-Gitarre - ursprünglich mit P-90 Pickups ausgestattet (jetzt 1 alter PAF in der Stegposition und ein 63er Pat. No. am Hals). Besonderheit: Die Gitarre wurde von einem Vorbesitzer gechambered. Aber nicht nach Gibson-Handwerkskunst, sondern: von hinten reingebohrt, gelöchert und anschließend mit einem neuen Boden versehen, Der Boden ist allerdings so gut gemacht, dass man die Modifikation auf den ersten Blick gar nicht sieht. Kopfbrüche (zuletzt aber final und end-sicher durch Boris Dommenget restauriert), mittlerer Pickup (wieder entfernt), Bigsby (auch wieder weg), neu bundiert sowieso - die Gitarre hat einiges erlebt! Der Sound ist göttlich (zwischen ES-335 und Les Paul anzusiedeln), der Hals perfekt (wie original 59er) und die Gitarre ist natürlich leicht (3,8kg). Ironie der Geschichte: Ich habe die Gitarre in Zahlung genommen, als ich vor etlichen Jahren meine originale 1959er Gibson Les Paul Std (Video) verkauft habe. Dies war sicherlich die non-plus-ultra-Les-Paul im klassischen Sinne, die 68 Goldtop war aber von Anfang an mehr noch "meine" Gitarre. Dies ging schon damit los, als ich die Gitarre abholte, sie 2 Sekunden in der Hand hatte - und wusste, dass sie meine Hauptgitarre für den Rest des Lebens sein wird! Fotos (Fotos: Manfred Pollert, die Nashville Bridge ist inzwischen nicht mehr drauf)) Video1 (mit Dumble ODS 100) Video2 (mit Fender Vibrolux, silverface/Aluframe 1968), die Gitarre wude bereits auf etlichen CDs eingesetzt und ziert auch sehr schon das Cover von "Golden Voice Blues". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyGrass Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 A few thoughts on topic. First, it makes no sense that a chambered instrument should lose sustain faster than a solid one. If there is a difference, it can't be enough to talk about. I have never heard anything but biased, unsubstatiated claims either way. My personal experience, albeit modest, tells me that the chambering effect on sustain is maybe number 100 on the list of what to be concerned about to enhance sustain. Second, a ten pound guitar makes no sound in the case. If it's uncomfortable, it won't be used. Nowadays (since the late 60s) most sustain comes electronically anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erictheweasel Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 A few thoughts on topic. First, it makes no sense that a chambered instrument should lose sustain faster than a solid one. If there is a difference, it can't be enough to talk about. I have never heard anything but biased, unsubstatiated claims either way. My personal experience, albeit modest, tells me that the chambering effect on sustain is maybe number 100 on the list of what to be concerned about to enhance sustain. Second, a ten pound guitar makes no sound in the case. If it's uncomfortable, it won't be used. Nowadays (since the late 60s) most sustain comes electronically anyway. Weight is the thing. It's why I got rid of my 157 classic. 13 pounds (!!!) is just way too heavy for a guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donnie Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Other things (pickups, electronics, etc.) being equal would this then mean that sustain would not be compromised by going to a semi-hollowbody, i.e., H535 or Prospect in an attempt to get a more comfortable instrument? Just for the record, this is a real question-not just trying somehow to make a point in a sideways manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalismanRich Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 You've got only PART of the equation right. Yes, it is an 1968 gold top, converted to PAFs, BUT it was chambered by someone along it's life. The guitar whas chambered from the back, and someone put a new back on top of the old one. It is hardly noticable but that's the way it is. The whole story of the guitar is on his page in german. So you CAN trust me on this one Courtesy of Babelfish (not perfect, but you'll get the drift) 1968 Gibson Les Paul Std. Goldtop/PAFs, - converted to 50ths specs. My absolute Nummer-1-Gitarre - originally with P-90 Pickups equipped (now 1 old PAF in the bar position and a 63er Pat. No. at the neck). Characteristic: The guitar came from a previous owner chambered. But not after giving on handicraft art, but from the rear clean-bored, gelöchert and afterwards with a new back provided, the back is made however so good that one does not see the modification at first sight at all. Head breaks (last however final and restored by Boris cathedral-mixed), middle Pickup (again removed), Bigsby (also again away), again bundiert anyway - the guitar experienced some! The sound is divine to settle (between ES-335 and Les Paul), the neck perfectly (like original 59er) and the guitar is naturally easy (3,8kg). Irony of history: I have the guitar in payment took, as I before some years my original 1959er Gibson Les Paul Std (video) sold. This was surely non plus ultra Les Paul in the classical sense, which was 68 Goldtop however from the outset more still " meine" Guitar. This went already thereby loosely, when I fetched the guitar, it 2 second in the hand had - and knew that it will be my main guitar for the remainder of the life! Photo (photo: Manfred Pollert, the Nashville Bridge is in the meantime no more drauf)) Video1 (with Dumble ODS 100) Video2 (with Fender Vibrolux, silverface/Aluframe 1968), which also very already " guitar wude already on some CD assigned and made a fuss the Cover of; Golden Voice Blues" BTW, if you are interested in some of Gregor's work, you can pick up a couple of his CDs at BigMo's online store. This is the same place you get Danny Gatton CDs. They only have a few. Gregor Hilden's CD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
602a Posted March 7, 2011 Author Share Posted March 7, 2011 I wouldn't go back to heavy weight either. My current 150 weights 3,4 kg and I can play it for hours. It's nice and vibrant. It would be interesting to do an A/B comparison. This guy is the german LP and sound guru if I may say so. His number 1 guitar is a 1968 chambered gold top. And he sure has played QUITE A FEW guitars: http://www.gregorhilden.de that's his channel on youtube: http://www.youtube.c...er/GregsGuitars This guy has played basically all kinds of LP guitars that are out there... That guy could make a cigar box guitar sound like a 58 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuz Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 A few thoughts on topic. First, it makes no sense that a chambered instrument should lose sustain faster than a solid one. If there is a difference, it can't be enough to talk about. I have never heard anything but biased, unsubstatiated claims either way. My personal experience, albeit modest, tells me that the chambering effect on sustain is maybe number 100 on the list of what to be concerned about to enhance sustain. Second, a ten pound guitar makes no sound in the case. If it's uncomfortable, it won't be used. Nowadays (since the late 60s) most sustain comes electronically anyway. I don't think this statement was directed to me, as I said I didn't think there was a difference in sustain, BUT TONE. If it is true (which I guess it is) that Gregor's LP is chamber, he says himself the tone is in between a LP & 335. Semi-hollows (335 or 535) are known for having less mids. Again, this is not a sustain question, but a tone altering one. As for weight, I ordered all my 150s with a 9.5 weight limit, so mine all came in around 9lbs. Just my opinion, but I want my 150/LP to sound like a real vintage LP, thus solid body all the way. Again, that just me, your version may vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyGrass Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I don't think this statement was directed to me, as I said I didn't think there was a difference in sustain, BUT TONE. If it is true (which I guess it is) that Gregor's LP is chamber, he says himself the tone is in between a LP & 335. Semi-hollows (335 or 535) are known for having less mids. Again, this is not a sustain question, but a tone altering one. As for weight, I ordered all my 150s with a 9.5 weight limit, so mine all came in around 9lbs. Just my opinion, but I want my 150/LP to sound like a real vintage LP, thus solid body all the way. Again, that just me, your version may vary. John, Tone is a different matter, I agree. I was listening to Alvin Lee tonight on his 335. He never ran out of sustain. The decay was smooth and his notes lasted until he lifted his fingers for the next notes. Once again, my opinion is that whether a solid body is chambered or not is not at the top of the list of concerns regarding tone. I'm not saying it's off the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sick1982 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Seems that my LW is still the heaviest guitar I own: 3,8 Kg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut1 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 My LW 150 has got a shaped back as well, hence 3,4kg I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalismanRich Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 My chambered guitar has f-holes... sustains just fine. (I imagine a Milli would sound close to a chambered 150, everything else being equal) As for comparing to my 157, well, they sound different. Different bodies, different pickups, different caps, different strings. I play whatever floats my boat at the time. But what do I know... last night I was playing SRV on a 535! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I really like those hollowed-out traps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erictheweasel Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Courtesy of Babelfish (not perfect, but you'll get the drift) 1968 Gibson Les Paul Std. Goldtop/PAFs, - converted to 50ths specs. My absolute Nummer-1-Gitarre - originally... Gregor Hilden's CD A more accurate translation: Absolutely my #1 guitar – originally equipped with p90’s (now with an old PAF in the bridge and a 63 Pt. No. in the neck). Peculiarity: The guitar was chambered by a previous owner. But not in the handcrafted Gibson fashion. Rather, it was drilled out from the back and fitted with a new back. The back, however, is so well done that you don’t notice the modification at first sight. Broken headstock (finally properly restored by Boris Dommenget), middle pickup (removed), Bigsby (likewise removed), new binding – this guitar has experienced a lot. The sound is God-like (between and ES-335 and a Les Paul), the neck is perfect (like an original ’59), and of course the guitar is light (3.8 Kg). The irony of the story: I took the guitar in payment, when I sold my original ’59 Les Paul Std (video) several years ago. This was the Les Paul non plus ultra, in the classic sense. The ’68 goldtop, however, was from the beginning more “my” guitar. I knew it in the first two seconds after I laid my hands on it. And I knew that it would be my primary guitar for the rest of my life. (Fotos: Manfred Pollert, the Nashville bridge is no longer mounted) Video 1 (with Dumble ODS 100) Video 2 (with Fender Vibrolux silverface/aluminum frame 1968), the Guitar has been used on several CD’s and wonderfully graces the cover of “Golden Voice Blues”. Never trust a robot to do the work of a human. eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.