Lunch Report - Monday, December 5th, 2011

[CGT]

It's a dreary, drizzling afternoon in Toronto. This is perfect weather as I am in the midst of setting up a website for a client and the bad weather keeps me from wandering outdoors. Also, the Legacy is in its case and I've put the recently acquired Telecaster out of view and therefore out of mind.

Today's lunch will be leftover Chicken Parmesan or Corn Chowder from yesterday. I've packed on the pounds as I've aged, so I'm cutting back on portions but not on deliciousness, which is apparently what one has to do as one's metabolism slows over the years.

After spending a week exclusively noodling with the newly-acquired (and therefore exciting) Squier Affinity Telecaster, I went back to the Legacy and noted how much heavier and more solid it feels. In fact it is the heaviest guitar I own, outweighing even the brick of a Gibson Sonex that I played for so many years. Now, often on this and other forums, I see discussions of weight, with many favouring lighter instruments due to decreased stress on the back when gigging. This of course often dovetails into discussions about the effect of weight on tone, especially in Gibson forums where punters often discuss the relative tonal qualities of weight-relieved cambered Les Pauls vs. the older solid models.

My Legacy is far more resonant that my other guitars, now while I'm certain the wood plays a role in it, the electronics, hardware and the generally excellent finish contribute to the tone, but it has also been my experience that heavier guitars sound better, namely, older non-cambered Les Paul studios sound a lot better than the newer ones that I've played and the heaviest telecasters I've played also sound best to my ears.

Where do you folks weigh in on all this? Do heavier guitars sound better? How does denser wood affect tone? What, if any variances, have those of you who own multiple examples of particular G&L models experienced in terms of weight and tone? Also, do red guitars sound better?

If you were forced to whittle it down to ONE guitar, be it one that you own or one that you'd like to own, what would it be? At this point it would have to be my Legacy, but given that I've fallen for the tele vibe, I find myself wondering whether an ASAT III would give me the best of the T- and S-style worlds. In your experience, what is the closest thing to a guitar that can handle all eventualities?

[darwinohm]

GCT, good questions today. I had a great sandwich with chips when I got home from a DR. visit. I had to fast and that is what happened to my sandwich. It went fast.

My Fenders all seem to be fairly consistent in weight. They are mostly alder except for a couple with caps. They are also mostly boring in the wood grain department. On the other hand the G&Ls that I own vary considerably in weight and are usually drop dead gorgeous in the looks dept. My heaviest is the Legacy Blonde that is killer wood grain and looks. It also sounds great but it has the Kinman Blues. The other end is the chambered ASAT's with the f holes. They are both light and extremely resonant. I am not convinced that weight is associated with tone or sustain but, I will be the first to admit that I am not a tone freak and like every guitar that I have. I am not even sure if there is a correlation between weight and sustain. I am referring to sustain unplugged. My Gretsches are great for tone and sustain. they just sing. My Taylor SB is very similar., as are the ASATs. I think the overall construction and setup contribute to that. I am convinced that my G&L Bluesboy had better sustain after installing the Bigsby. The problem is that all these thoughts are subjective. It is too bad we don't have the instruments to measure all this. I will say that a friend of mine has an original Fender Jazzmaster and it did not have much sustain and they were noted for that. Was it the bridge? Anyway, I think the neck joint fit, bridge coupling to the body and other mechanical things contribute to sustain. I think the saddle lock contributes to sustain. Loose the lock and spread the saddles from each other a bit and see what you notice. This has been discussed on the Bass Forum. The woods very well may be a contributing factor also. Only thing I know for sure is that I do not have fret spout while humidifying the room. That I will guarantee. After thinking about this while posting my most resonant guitars are chambered. (Gretsches, ASATs, Chambered Tele, Hamer, and Taylor SB. If I were in court the attorney would ask me if I had a hearing problem. That speaks for my opinion.

If I were forced to whittle down to one guitar, that would have to be when I am pushing daisys and then I wouldn't need even one. Unlike the dude from Wisconsin last year who wanted to be buried with his Les Paul, I wouldn't waste 'em like that! Thanks for keeping it going today-- Darwin

[Dr B]

Great questions. I'm no expert but I think I am right in saying that swamp ash has better grain and wider pours which give it resonance. Someone once told me that in the early leo days - even the Fenders were swamp ash - but as mass production became the name of the game there was a switch sometime in the late 1950s / 1960s.

I always smile when people say they want that vintage Fender tone and then buy alder......instead of swamp ash. I dont think wood is super importqant on an electric - but its not unimportant either.

Wider grain should make it less heavy (one would think) but hey.....i guess it depends on whether you think you have a swamp ash Legacy or not.

I have always noticed how my swamp ash G&Ls sound very bright and sweet in relation to other guitars - even when unplugged.

[Kit]

The 2 best sounding guitars I own also happen to be the heaviest and likely the lightest guitars I have, based on that I'd conclude that weight has very little to do with whether a guitar sounds good or not. My heaviest guitar is a 1976 Yamaha SG1500 which is at least 10 lb, it is one of those has a brass block embedded in the body under the bridge. It is a heavy beast but sounds beautiful. My lightest is likely my Melancon Pro Artist (in my avatar) which has a Louisiana swamp ash body. It has a set of Kinman Blues pickups and also sounds wonderful.

If I have to go with just one guitar I'd probably go with my SG1500. But I have several other guitars which are almost as good as the Yamaha, so having to pick just one is not an easy decision.

Kit

[louis cyfer]

the metabolism doesn't have to slow down as you get older, if you do something about it. people lose muscle mass as they get older unless they engage in resistance training. muscle is the active metabolism in the body, more muscle = higher metabolism. this is why it is so important for people to train with weights as they get older, as well as being able to avoid most issues with the knees, back, hips, etc. to live a higher quality life when getting older, training is absolutely essential. it surprises me how many people take care of their financial future, while ignoring the body, so they can be healthy enough to enjoy retirement without too many ailments.

[blargfromouterspace]

Guitar body weight

I think you nailed it - a lighter body is more comfortable over a long gig. I'm sure there is a small effect on the tone, but I couldn't say or describe what it is. To put it in perspective, changing amps will give you an infinitely bigger difference in tone than body weight. My recent acquisition of a masonite Jerry Jones guitar has made me realize how little the wood matters.

If I were forced down to one of my owns guitars it would be my blonde '97 ASAT Classic. It's a true lightweight and plays real nice. It's getting a new set of pickups installed in it as soon as I finish typing this. If I could choose any guitar in the world I'd haveAllan Tomkins make me a tele.

[Boogie Bill]

As far as weight goes, I will say that after about 9.5 lbs, I'm a little hesitant to buy a guitar that heavy. I have one chambered LP that is actually under 8 lbs., but all of the rest are between 8.9 and 9.3 lbs. I think my heaviest guitar is my ASAT Deluxe--as I recall, it weighs 9.6 lbs.; the DF Vibrato probably adds to the weight of that guitar.

The key for me is not weight, but what I call resonance. I have some of my LPs, particularly the three Historics, that just shake from stem-to-stern when you hit a chord--they feel alive in my hands. All of my guitars have some of that, but both the solid Historics and the chambered Classic Antique LPs are amazing in that regard.

I do notice differences in the alder and ash G&Ls I have, but to me it really only makes a difference on one song that the band plays, and on that one song I prefer the alder bodied Legacy. Because...you guessed it--it's more resonant, and that gives it a more natural, acoustic guitar type tone.

I personally don't believe in that ONE guitar that can do it all. A Legacy is my Number One guitar--can't live without one--but there are some songs that demand a 2HB guitar. I'd much rather go pickup a different guitar from my rack--and get the right tool for the job.

(At least that's the excuse I beeing telling myself in my acquisition of 49 guitars!)

Now, if I have to be limited to one guitar, I might choose a pre-War II Martin D-28 or D-45, or a 1959 Sunburst LP--then I could sell it for a boat-load of greenbacks and get what I wanted. But that's probably cheating, so....

I'd have a tough choice. I would probably choose one of my G&L Legacy-bodies, but even that's hard to pin down whether I would want the Legacy, Legacy Special, S-500 or Comanche. And it might depend on whether I got to keep MY pedalboard and one of my Mesa amps.

But then there is this...

With a good Martin D-28, I could cover a lot of tunes and genres and probably make enough money busking on street corners to at least survive. It would be hard to do that with an electric guitar and amp in tow.

And I never, ever want to be forced into doing that. I love my warm bed and a roof over my head. And I am so thankful and fortunate to have that, and a woman who cares about me.

Bill

[louis cyfer]

if

[louis cyfer]

if i had to choose one guitar, it would have to be my 84 sq squier that i bought new. it's a great guitar, but i don't play it much anymore, but for sentimental reason it would have to be it.

[zapcosongs]

Thanks for stepping up CGT. Nice start.

Regarding weight/wood density/tone: Personally, I think there are far too many variables to generalize. My heaviest guitar is probably my P-90 equipped Hamer Special. The body is all 'hog. It's probably 10 pounds. It just vibrates in my hands - despite it's tune-a-matic style bridge. If that thing had a G&L fixed bridge, oh man oh man!

My lightest guitar is probably my Japanese '72 Fender Thinline Reissue. That thing absolutely smokes! The S/H body just seems to beg for the Wide Range humbuckers that this instrument features.

Forgive me, but I cannot pick just one guitar. Some days, though, my (solid alder, double-bound) Bluesboy (on the heavy side, btw) is the one. Then again, some days, my maple-bodied '86 ASAT takes the cake and eats it (I have a theory that the large MFDs were designed with maple bodies in mind).

And I must confess, there are times when my (1st body style) SC-3 sounds supremely wonderful to my ears. Especially when the bridge and middle pickup work and quack together. I'm guessing it's maple as well, and a middle-weight treasure.

Again, what was I saying? - ed

[Michael-GnL-Michael]

I realize "whittled down to one guitar" is not the question for this response however as my idea of the ultimate one and only guitar, I'd like a Legacy that gets Strat (Strat neck, neck/middle and middle/bridge) and Tele (Tele neck and neck/bridge) tones with an ASAT neck. I am speaking of the tones and not only the pickup selection combinations. I know there are guitars that allow the combinations with wiring but none get the tone of both a Tele and Strat. They usually get one or the other and something else produced by the combinations. The tone is not only in the switching options, if you follow what I am describing. And to restate, I want a Legacy body with an ASAT neck.


Louis, doesn't metabolism at least change with age even if you can prevent it from slowing down with exercise?

I used to know a guy who was an instructor at a university, actually had a Ph.D in something chemistry/biology? (not that it made him a genius in every other regard......trust me), who regularly weight-trained and said as you grow older your metabolism changes so you do not build muscle with weight training. I am only remembering a conversation many years ago so I am mentioning this now hoping you can clarify this:

the metabolism doesn't have to slow down as you get older, if you do something about it. people lose muscle mass as they get older unless they engage in resistance training. muscle is the active metabolism in the body, more muscle = higher metabolism. this is why it is so important for people to train with weights as they get older, as well as being able to avoid most issues with the knees, back, hips, etc. to live a higher quality life when getting older, training is absolutely essential. it surprises me how many people take care of their financial future, while ignoring the body, so they can be healthy enough to enjoy retirement without too many ailments.

[Philby]

Thanks for kicking off the week CGT.

Important things first - red guitars do sound objectively better than all the other colours. I can tell just by looking at your Legacy how good it sounds.

As far as weight goes, I don't think it has as much to do with tone as most people believe. Certainly pickups and amps are likely to have a far greater affect. I don't have a preference for any wood type but I do prefer a middle/lightweight guitar over a heavy one for sheer comfort.

I'm aware that Gibson have copped a backlash from traditionalists for weight relieving or chambering their current models, but I picked up my first ever Gibson a few weeks back (photo below) and it is a chambered Les Paul that resonates like a bell. I've never been a fan of the old boat anchors that most LP players seem to love so when I finally found a light one that felt comfortable I jumped at it. It's as comfortable to play as my semi-hollow ASAT.

[louis cyfer]

I realize "whittled down to one guitar" is not the question for this response however as my idea of the ultimate one and only guitar, I'd like a Legacy that gets Strat (Strat neck, neck/middle and middle/bridge) and Tele (Tele neck and neck/bridge) tones with an ASAT neck. I am speaking of the tones and not only the pickup selection combinations. I know there are guitars that allow the combinations with wiring but none get the tone of both a Tele and Strat. They usually get one or the other and something else produced by the combinations. The tone is not only in the switching options, if you follow what I am describing. And to restate, I want a Legacy body with an ASAT neck.


Louis, doesn't metabolism at least change with age even if you can prevent it from slowing down with exercise?

I used to know a guy who was an instructor at a university, actually had a Ph.D in something chemistry/biology? (not that it made him a genius in every other regard......trust me), who regularly weight-trained and said as you grow older your metabolism changes so you do not build muscle with weight training. I am only remembering a conversation many years ago so I am mentioning this now hoping you can clarify this:

the metabolism doesn't have to slow down as you get older, if you do something about it. people lose muscle mass as they get older unless they engage in resistance training. muscle is the active metabolism in the body, more muscle = higher metabolism. this is why it is so important for people to train with weights as they get older, as well as being able to avoid most issues with the knees, back, hips, etc. to live a higher quality life when getting older, training is absolutely essential. it surprises me how many people take care of their financial future, while ignoring the body, so they can be healthy enough to enjoy retirement without too many ailments.

i have up to 87 year old clients who still build muscle. you do not build it as fast, or be able to build as much, but can certainly stop any muscle loss. i know 70+ guys at the gym, who still look good enough that most 20-30 year olds would trade with them any day.

[blargfromouterspace]

WANT! That's a beauty, Phil.

[louis cyfer]

Thanks for kicking off the week CGT.

Important things first - red guitars do sound objectively better than all the other colours. I can tell just by looking at your Legacy how good it sounds.

As far as weight goes, I don't think it has as much to do with tone as most people believe. Certainly pickups and amps are likely to have a far greater affect. I don't have a preference for any wood type but I do prefer a middle/lightweight guitar over a heavy one for sheer comfort.

I'm aware that Gibson have copped a backlash from traditionalists for weight relieving or chambering their current models, but I picked up my first ever Gibson a few weeks back (photo below) and it is a chambered Les Paul that resonates like a bell. I've never been a fan of the old boat anchors that most LP players seem to love so when I finally found a light one that felt comfortable I jumped at it. It's as comfortable to play as my semi-hollow ASAT.

i really like the 50's and 60's tribute les pauls with the chambered bodies and p 90's. sound better than most les pauls, weight nothing and cost 800 new.

[CGT]

So many great answers. Thanks for contributing folks:

Louis Cyfer: Thanks for the tip on metabolism. With respect to resistance training, I really don't like weight machines. I was looking at using a rower and a stepper/cyclical trainers with arm levers as part of my routine to work my muscles and then augmenting this with crunches. Is this advisable? What would you recommend for someone like me who wants to lose weight but hates using weights?

With respect to Les Pauls: I've recently played a Faded Studio and an early 90s alpine white Studio. The ceramic humbuckers on the recent studio didn't impress me at all. The older one was much warmer. How would you compare the sound of the P90s to the the stock pups on the lower range Studios?

Philby: Gorgeous guitar. Is that a Studio?

Zapco: The '72 reissue sounds like a great axe. It is definitely on my bucket of list of guitars.

BoogieBill: Yes, that is cheating but it is a very clever cheat. I agree that if I was down to one, it would have to be something like the D-28. One can after all, do a lot with effects if one requires electric tones.

Blarg: Agreed about weight during gigs. Is there however a way to relieve weight through the way the guitar is positioned? My two main beasts are HEAVY.

Kit: SG1500? SWEET! Weight may not matter. I find my featherweight Squier Tele sounds nice and loud even unplugged.

Dr. B: I'd say the same thing to people who want vintage Fender tone and a five-way switch.

Darwin: Asking you to whittle it down to one guitar is like asking the sun to stop shining. Our lives would not be complete were it not for your takes of acquisitions, set-ups and restorations.

Thanks to all of you for making the time to take part in this discussion.

[Michael-GnL-Michael]

...Is there however a way to relieve weight through the way the guitar is positioned? My two main beasts are HEAVY....

Rig up a harness that uses the guitar strap pegs and a waste belt (in addition to a regular guitar strap) so some of the weight is transferred to your hips and bypasses your back.

[Philby]

Philby: Gorgeous guitar. Is that a Studio?

Thanks CGT. It's a Les Paul 50's Tribute Humbucker of the type Louis mentioned earlier. It has a thin nitro finish designed to 'age' and faux binding to keep the cost from blowing out. I don't know why anyone would buy an Epi copy. They're only slightly cheaper.

[louis cyfer]

So many great answers. Thanks for contributing folks:

Louis Cyfer: Thanks for the tip on metabolism. With respect to resistance training, I really don't like weight machines. I was looking at using a rower and a stepper/cyclical trainers with arm levers as part of my routine to work my muscles and then augmenting this with crunches. Is this advisable? What would you recommend for someone like me who wants to lose weight but hates using weights?

any of the rowers, steppers, ellipticals with the arms attached only help you do aerobic or cardiovascular work. not suitable for resistance training. the arms are attached to the legs anyway, no separate work required.
there is really no way out of the free wight, cable machine, cam machine choices to do resistanc4e training. the reason you hate it is that you probably need it badly. we usually hate what we need most. if i client tells me they hate to do something, we'll be doing more of that for sure. eventually they'll start liking it as they get better.

[Michael-GnL-Michael]

...if i client tells me they hate to do something, we'll be doing more of that for sure. eventually they'll start liking it as they get better.

Okay Chief, I love this bench pressing but I hate eating cheesecake with fresh strawberries.

[louis cyfer]

...if i client tells me they hate to do something, we'll be doing more of that for sure. eventually they'll start liking it as they get better.

Okay Chief, I love this bench pressing but I hate eating cheesecake with fresh strawberries.

nice try.

[astutzmann]

I have 2 heavy guitars, the asat special deluxe with mahogany body and maple cap

I also just got a Heritage H150CM which is 9 lbs 8 oz and is also mahogany with maple cap.

Both of those guitars are really beefy in sound but it could also be the pups, the MFDs on the classic and the wax potted SD 59's on the heritage.

Heavy, but I play sitting down so its not an issue for me. Once I learn how to play standing up (lol), I'll need to rethink, ha.

Right now my favourite is the Heritage, but my favourite changes all the time because I really love all the guitars I now have!