Should Ligher Body Weight Be An Option.

[darwinohm]

There are several who have complained about the body weight of their G&Ls. As a gigging musician in my 70's it has become a major issue for me. Why doesn't G&L give an option for less than X lbs as an example. I have Asats in the 6 to 7 pound range and they are very nice. They could add an upcharge for this but at least give the option. I also think that all online dealers should post the weight in their ad and I also believe that G&L should have the weight on the COA and then the dealer couldn't complain about having to weigh it.

I gig as a bass player and love G&L's basses. The current bass I use (M-2500) is just over 10lbs. It is heavy by the end of a 4 hr gig. G&L does use some special woods in limited builds that are light but it is a luck of the draw in getting a light one or you have to find one online that has a posted weight.

In my search of a light bass I decided two weeks ago to do something and after a lot of research I ordered an Emerald Flow 5 string bass which is made of Carbon Fiber. This is made in Ireland and will not exceed 7 Lbs. It will not have the pickups I prefer (G&L Buckers) but if I am not happy with the sound, I can replace them with something more agreeable as there are many options out there. The only option to reduce weight is to saw off or remove parts of the body. I talked to my G&L dealer about this sometime back and they cannot specify weight. They can ask for a lighter build but there is no guarantee. When you order, what you receive is what you get. It seems to me that it wouldn't be too difficult to grade bodies by weight that are sitting on shelves. Anyway, I hope to have solved my own problem and we will see what I get when it arrives around the first of May. It was not cheap and I would have loved to have had the option from G&L for a 7 LB M-2500. This is probably my rant for the year. I will give you a look when it arrives. The wait has just started.-- Darwin

[Fumble fingers]

didn't they just get a new type of wood that was real light ??...... or maybe post weight with the guitar sheet so you know what your getting ..... I have solid bodies from 7 lbs to 10 pounds , Ideally I prefer 8 or under , but my Bcaster is close to 10lbs doesn't seem as heavy as it weighs , my ASAT Deluxe is 10 pounds and feels like 12 , good thing it's purdy ... lol

[darwinohm]

Eric posted

didn't they just get a new type of wood that was real light ??

That could very well be true but how do I order an M 2500 with that wood and specify a weight of less than 8 lbs? That is the issue that I have posted. I can search around for an M 2500 on line if the weight is posted. What are the odds of finding a color that I want? My point is that the weights do vary a lot and how difficult would it to be to grade by weight at the factory. These are supposed to be like a custom build and are built to the dealers spec but weight is not an option to request. -- Darwin

[KenC]

Darwin,

I appreciate what you're saying. I bought my first G&L (an '83 SB-1) specifically because of its light weight. I was having some back problems at the time, and playing my 10+ lb Fender was becoming a problem.

A light body weight option could be so popular that it cause problems for G&L, i.e., just about every customer wanting to upgrade to a lighter build. That could make it very difficult to source lumber for body blanks, and possibly lead to backlogs.

Does G&L offer a semi-hollow option on all of their basses, or just a couple of models?

Ken

[Nubs]

I think they have a limited supply of Empress that they're using for a few builds. Apparently that's pretty light.

[Boogie Bill]

Can't see them offering this as an optional upgrade.

I would try to find a use '90s Fender Precision Bass Lyte, or one of the semi-hollows, ala the Gibson EB2--Ibanez makes one.

Another custom builder you might check with is Mike Lull of Bellevue, Washington. He does beautiful instruments.

And another possibility would be to get a leather worker to make you a waist belt for the bass so that it rides on your hips, not your back and shoulders.
Fender had a belt for their basses that was offered back in the 1960s.

Bill

[guitar_ed]

G&L also offers semi-hollow bodied guitars & basses, at least in the ASAT bass's (sp?)

So there is an option.

edg

[darwinohm]

It appears that this is not an issue to most so maybe my expectations are unrealistic. I would like to comment on some of your suggestions but keep in mind that I want or wanted an M-2500 (5 string) which I stated in the original post..

Kenc wrote

Does G&L offer a semi-hollow option on all of their basses, or just a couple of models?

I do have a semi hollow Asat . They only come in 4 string and the one I have is 8 Lbs 13 Oz. They are the only semi hollow bass available to my knowledge.

Nubs wrote

I think they have a limited supply of Empress that they're using for a few builds. Apparently that's pretty light.

That is a way to accomplish the mission but is it an orderable option?

Boogie Bill suggested

I would try to find a use '90s Fender Precision Bass Lyte, or one of the semi-hollows, ala the Gibson EB2--Ibanez makes one.

A good suggestion if I were looking for a 4 string.


Guitar Ed suggested

G&L also offers semi-hollow bodied guitars & basses, at least in the ASAT bass's

True, but to my knowledge only in the Asat and it is not available as a 5 string.


Thanks to all for your suggestions. The perception seems to be that a chambered body will result in a light instrument and that is not necessarily true. There are some who have chambered that are still quite heavy and it is a luck of the draw. The reason for the post is that you have no guarantee on a special order. Some of you may have missed it in my original post but I have ordered a Carbon Fiber Bass that will be under 7 Lbs (hopefully). It will be here by early May. The jury is still out until it is in hand. It is being build by a reputable builder and through a dealer who has a stellar reputation.

As a retired dude, if I lived in Fullerton, I would volunteer my time to weigh the bodies in the factory. What a way to hang around the factory!! Thanks again -- Darwin

[GentlemanJim]

Darwin,
This subject has been my reason for not ordering/buying another G&L guitar. Last year I bought a Clasic ASAT for Fumble fingers and while I love the look, and sound, I was very unhappy with the weight. Having always played my 1988 ASAT I wasn't aware of the differecne in body depth or weight. I should have done my homework. While I still own the Classic, it stays cased most of the time, not good.


Edit from MHoepfl : Sling Strap comment
I just went to there web site also and wow, that's different. Thanks Darwin, for bring it up again in your post.

[KenC]

My personal preference in G&Ls tends toward the days when most of the bodies were mahogany or northern ash, with some maple mixed in here and there...all of it dense wood, and resulting in 9+ pound guitars and 10+ pound basses much of the time. Somehow the early SC and SB instruments turned out much lighter than their "professional" counterparts, but some of that may be due to the large number of them built over a 2-3 month period in late 1982 and possibly using a batch of lighter-than-average maple for the bodies. Some of the very early F-100s and L-1Ks/L-2Ks had poplar bodies, and poplar came back as a standard body wood for the Lynx in 1984 (or was is '86?) and maybe some second-generation SB-1s and SB-2s.

G&L has given some nods to the 1980s on recent models (the whole Fallout concept, and maple bodies on the Superhawk and Rampage reissues), and also to the 1990s (the LB-100 reissue). It seems like they could achieve lighter weights by making soft maple an option on other models, and/or by bringing poplar back as an option. Maple should look fine under just about any finish, and poplar would work with solid colors. They could even claim it as a return to Leo-era roots...

Ken

[Case24]

Although not a bass, my 2004 ASAT Classic weighs in at 6.8 lbs. It is black in colour with the natural wood binding and I believe the body to be alder as far as I know, the only other wood option at that time was ash. It has a two piece body as well; I can just see the seam down the middle if I hold it in the right light as the finish is quite thin. This guitar is so lively and resonant when strummed acoustically and it has tremendous natural sustain; there is just something special about the body wood. The first time I picked it up out of the case I thought I was going to put it through the ceiling as I was expecting it to be much heavier! I can relate to the desire for a light weight instrument. My LP weighs in a 9.8 lbs and feels like an anchor after about 30 minutes. My Strat is about 8 lbs with an alder body.

[MHoepfl]

While you wait, maybe something from Slinger Straps might help?


http://www.slingerstraps.com

I haven't used them myself, but I went to a Screaming Females show a few months back - Marisa Paternoster had her S500 strapped with one of their rigs, and she does a lot of moving during their set. At the time I thought she'd just sorta rigged something up herself, but apparently this is a company that sells waist-based guitar straps.

[Yamwich]

I actually built an electric guitar from scratch and learned a lot about why certain guitars have certain attributes. The guitar I built weighed about 13lb. Solid maple body, maple neck, ebony fingerboard. One of the things that a luthier takes into consideration when it comes to selecting body wood is the overall balance of the guitar. A maple neck weighs over one pound, maybe over 2, all by itself. Add ebony or rosewood, both are more dense (read: heavy), plus a few ounces for machine heads and fretwire... Call the whole neck 3.5 lb. This is further complicated by the fact that the weight is all fairly far off the midline of the human who's going to play it, and you have to choose a body wood that is going to be a counterweight for the neck, which is really sort of a lever, when you think about it.

I wish I could draw a picture, but the center of balance of a balanced guitar is somewhere around the neck-body joint. Measuring from that point to the headstock, that's... I don't know offhand, maybe 24 or more inches. Going the other direction, you have maybe 12-14 inches. So the body has to be dense enough to offset the cantilevered weight of the neck vs the center of the guitar. Otherwise, your fret hand ends up both lifting and fretting, and boy let me tell ya, if you think holding up a balanced 9lb guitar makes you tired, imagine holding half of that weight up with your fret hand, and trying to play something delicate and fast.

Anyway, point is, you could make a guitar body out of balsa and it would be light but even more uncomfortable to play for long periods of time. So I say, let the experts choose the woods and pair them together. Some will be heavier together, some lighter. But don't trade balance for weight.

[darwinohm]

Yamwich, you have made some good points about a build. Yes, the balance is important therefore the neck may have to be lighter for a light build. My G&L Bluesboy at 6lbs 2 oz it quite well balanced even with locking tuners. My Parker Southern at 6 lbs 7 oz is also very well balanced. This can also be alleviated with straps which I have done to a degree. It is more difficult with a bass. My Carvin Koa bass at 8 lbs 1 oz is also very well balanced. It has a koa neck with maple strips. Your points are well taken. I would suspect that G&L doesn't worry about balance as they are assembling guitars from stock parts with custom options, unlike a custom build that would take all this into account and charge much more for this kind of detail. They build an awesome guitar for the money. I wouldn't expect them to change what they are doing for 1 or 2 people as that would require a higher build cost. Weight appears to not be a big concern for most. This has been a good discussion and I thank everyone for their thoughts.

However, MHoepfl may be the winner here with his suggestion of a Slinger Strap. I did some research, and talked to the company as I had many questions. I have already ordered one and will let you all know how it works out. I do want to continue using my M-2500 and will use it on that. It is amazing what can be found out on this board! Thanks again to MHoepfl for this thinking outside of the box suggestion. -- Darwin

[MHoepfl]

Darwin,

Wow, excellent! That's fantastic news - I'm glad that I was able to help!

Definitely let us know how the strap works out for you. They look like they're a really nice piece of gear.

[KenC]

Anyway, point is, you could make a guitar body out of balsa and it would be light but even more uncomfortable to play for long periods of time. So I say, let the experts choose the woods and pair them together. Some will be heavier together, some lighter. But don't trade balance for weight.

Those are good points, but G&L does have a history years ago of making some lighter designs work well. The first generation SB-1s and SB-2s had maple bodies, and the lumber they were using during the early production in late '82 and '83 tended to be very light weight. My '83 SB-1 is just over 7.5 pounds and balances just as nicely as my 10.5 pound '84 SB-2. Aside from the extra pickup and denser lumber, those two basses are identical in design and dimensions. I can sure feel the difference in weight, though. My Interceptor Bass is just over eight pounds, but it balances better than any of my others. I chalk that up to the design of the upper horn and the location of the strap button relative to the neck/body joint.

George Fullerton wrote that the ASAT Bass concept was only feasible with a 1.5" nut, as any wider necks caused the bass to go out of balance. My '91 ASAT Bass weighs 8.25 pounds, and has just a tiny hint of neck dive. There was a regular on TalkBass a while back who sold strap button extenders for ASAT Basses. They went beneath the three-bolt neck plate, and had an arm several inches long that acted like an upper horn with a strap button at the end. I've never tried one, but they got rave reviews for controlling neck dive with lighter bodies.

Ken

[Encinitastubes]

I agree that a lighter weight option would be popular and worth an upcharge. I have an ASAT Classic that is 7.2 lbs. and a Bluesbody semi-hollow that is 6.8. I prefer the 7 lb. range, just because it balances better for me.

I don't think the semi-hollow equates to a lighter guitar as a rule. I believe the semi-hollow line was introduced to be able to use a heavier wood supply.

The empress guitars supposedly look and sound like ash, but are in the 5-6 lb. range. Some luthiers rave about it, but some complain that it is too soft to stand the test of time. I'd sure like to play one before plunking down money for one.

One thing that G&L has been absolutely great at is building a custom shop quality guitar at a reasonable price. I wonder if the heavier wood is the concession to keeping the price down.

[helle-man]

I personally prefer lighter guitars. I find that heavy guitars may give me more sustain, but the lighter guitars seem to have more tone.

The semihollow's are my favorites because they seem to have more resonance which allows the guitar's body to shape the tone in a pleasing way.

I've also noticed a trend over the years: Guitars are slowly getting heavier as time goes on. Guitars from the 80's are lighter than guitars made now.

Yes, I think light weight guitars should be an option at G&L.

Will

[darwinohm]

Thanks everyone for your comments, this has been an interesting discussion.

Several of you have mentioned that G&L's were lighter in the eighties. I believe that is true.

Encin commented

I don't think the semi-hollow equates to a lighter guitar as a rule. I believe the semi-hollow line was introduced to be able to use a heavier wood supply.

I have to consider this as a possibility as I have found that semi-hollow doesn't necessarily mean lighter.

WR also commented

I personally prefer lighter guitars. I find that heavy guitars may give me more sustain, but the lighter guitars seem to have more tone.

The semihollow's are my favorites because they seem to have more resonance which allows the guitar's body to shape the tone in a pleasing way.

Interesting opinion from someone who certainly has experience and my respect.


I revisited the feel of my semi hollow Equatorial Bluesboy. It is my lightest at 6 Lbs 2 oz. It is a bit neck heavy, just a bit and is not noticeable with a wider strap, certainly a perfect solution for me. It also has Schaller locking tuners which are the heaviest of the tuners that G&L has been using. I would consider the neck weight almost negligible on a guitar of this size. The Parker Southern is perfectly balanced at 6 Lbs 7 Oz. My heaviest G&L is a Blond Legacy at 8 Lbs 13 Oz and it feels HEAVY. It is not a guitar that I would prefer to gig with considering the other choices I have. The bottom line is that I would be happy choosing a solid color, especially a flake with a lighter body so grain wouldn't be that important. Again, I hope that this has been an interesting discussion and we can only wait and see if it is of any interest to G&L. I also think the issue is more difficult to solve on bass guitars. I also feel the Asat Bass isn't the best candidate for chambering but may be the easiest from a production standpoint. I also suspect that mahogany may be lighter for necks but don't know for sure.

As a side note, I spent a lot of time last night going through the prototypes on the G&L Web Site. They have experimented with different body woods and have some fine looking prototypes. The weight was only mentioned on one bass and it was over 10 Lbs, apparently considered light by G&L. Again, I think that it would be beneficial if the weights were posted on the COA and dealers would post them as the dealer currently is the only one who may know.

Getting older is inevitable folks, it is not an easy task. Let me remind you we are all heading in the same direction.
Have a great weekend everyone and Tim, you are close to the factory. Maybe you could weigh all of them in your spare time! They're lucky that I don't live down the street from them. I could be of all kinds of help, all for free and probably that is what it would be worth. -- Darwin

[CSVeteran]

I have never been a fan of lightweight bodies or thin necks (like most production necks today) on electric guitars. The only guitar I have owned that has not been modified is my G&L, which says it all. The better sounding guitars I have played in both stratocaster and LP configurations have always been on the heavier side.

[glvourot]

Try Pine, there were some Asat classics made with Pine. Not sure if it is still offered.

[Fumble fingers]

I think they should offer some lighter wood options ..... I prefer light guitars for gigging if I'm going to be holding them for three hours straight and my Fallout seems to be THAT guitar , I do have some 10 pounders that sound beautiful , balanced perfectly but I still don't think I would want to do a whole gig with a heavy weight , I'm 53 and if I have/had a choice I would prefer 8 lbs or under

[KenC]

Several of you have mentioned that G&L's were lighter in the eighties. I believe that is true.

I just weighed all of my Leo-era G&Ls that were out of their cases. Most of the guitars weighed around 8-9 pounds. The notable exceptions were a couple of the '82-'83 SCs (but not all of them), and a maple body Superhawk. The Leo-era basses were all over the place, as I mentioned in a post above. The '81 L-2KE (mahogany body) and '84 SB-2 (flamed maple body and neck) were the heaviest G&Ls at 10.5 pounds each. The rock of the collection is a '77 Stingray with an ash body. It pushes the needle past the end of my 12 pound scale. I would guess about 13 pounds for that one.

Ken

[darwinohm]

Good information Ken. I could be wrong as some of those are pretty heavy. 10.5 Lbs for a bass may be on the lighter side of average for basses. My Stingray5 is about 11 lbs. My American L2500 was about 11. -- Darwin

[Fumble fingers]

I need to weigh mine again to get the figures accurate , but that said , my Leo era are my heaviest other than my ASAT Deluxe with Bigsby as it is the heaviest of all mine but it also has the most stuff on it , locking tuners , quartersawn neck (not sure if that makes a difference) double buckers and Bigsby it should weigh the most but my Broadcaster is just a touch lighter and it doesn't have anything on it .... my Cavalier comes in at third heaviest a touch under 10 lbs and is my heaviest strat type by far .... the 86 Rampage , 2000 Comanche ,1997 S500 and 13 Legacy are all right at 8 lbs ...... haven't weighed my 2014 Fallout , 2013 SC2 and 2014 LE2 but they feel a good bit lighter than anything I own , I'm guessing 7lbs-ish

[Lacking Talent]

YMMV, naturally, but my own experience (I have owned 8 G&Ls, Leo and BBE eras, and handled many more), combined with my observation of online guitar-related communities have led me to conclude that G&Ls are (at the very least, perceived to be) heavier -- "on average" -- than their similarly shaped counterparts from other U.S. "factory" makers. Could be the quality hardware, could be heavier woods, or -- of course -- a combination of the two. This "heavier-than-thou" factor seems to have fostered an interesting view of the brand in the marketplace for new and used electrics: G&Ls are seen as bulletproof examples of high quality American manufacturing, and simultaneously don't interest many buyers committed to the idea of the under-7lb Tele and the under-8lb Strat.

I, too, would prefer that the company offered weight-related options.

[KenC]

I just landed a new (old) G&L, which weighs in at just under 6.5 pounds. It has some of that lightweight 1982 maple. NGD post to follow when I can get some decent pics.

Ken

[darwinohm]

It is interesting to see the results of the weights posted. I wouldn't have even thought about it in my younger years. It is a consideration for us older dudes and dude-etts. So the title of this thread still stands begs the question. I wonder if Darth is interested in commenting? -- Darwin

[Boogie Bill]

I've also noticed a trend over the years: Guitars are slowly getting heavier as time goes on. Guitars from the 80's are lighter than guitars made now.

Will

Uh...Will...my main problem is that I'M heavier than I was in the 80's!!!!

Bill

[Boogie Bill]

So what's the cutoff? A 5.0 lb. blank is lightweight, but a 5.2 lb. blank is heavy?

Bill

[helle-man]

Why offer a list of options without having guitar weight as one?

BTW, I find Fender Squier's are typically lighter than G&L's. Huh?

Will

[legacy_player]

I think it's also important to remember too that older G&L's seemed to have used less wood as well. (At least from my experience). My '94 Legacy has a thinner body, thinner neck and thinner fingerboard than my 2014. The headstock is slightly different as well. Also, the hardware you put on there makes a difference. As someone mentioned, locking tuners weigh more. The G&L bridge has more metal in it than Fender's design. I'm not sure about the trem block.

All that said, I definitely be for a weight option on ordering if they can keep everything else the same and just use lighter wood. I'm not sure if that is possible or not given the thicker body dimensions of the more recent Legacy models. As for the other models, I really don't know as I don't own any of them. I used to own 2 custom shop strats that were the same weight or heavier than my legacies though.

[Fumble fingers]

maybe give us a light weight wood option

[darwinohm]

by MHoepfl » Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:39 am
While you wait, maybe something from Slinger Straps might help?

As I mentioned earlier in this post, I ordered one of these. I used it last weekend for two gigs and it does work well. It took a bit to get it adjusted perfectly but by the second night we were flying low and it really takes the weight from the left shoulder and neck. No back ache either night. I am going to call the manufacturer for a suggestion that can help a bit but it is a keeper. It distributes about 3 pounds of the lower body to the waist and hips, a perfect solution in my opinion. Not a waste of money with this one. BTW, if you have a neck heavy guitar, this is a good solution. It keeps the bass in perfect alignment all the time.-- Darwin

[MHoepfl]

by MHoepfl » Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:39 am
While you wait, maybe something from Slinger Straps might help?

As I mentioned earlier in this post, I ordered one of these. I used it last weekend for two gigs and it does work well. It took a bit to get it adjusted perfectly but by the second night we were flying low and it really takes the weight from the left shoulder and neck. No back ache either night. I am going to call the manufacturer for a suggestion that can help a bit but it is a keeper. It distributes about 3 pounds of the lower body to the waist and hips, a perfect solution in my opinion. Not a waste of money with this one. BTW, if you have a neck heavy guitar, this is a good solution. It keeps the bass in perfect alignment all the time.-- Darwin

That's awesome to hear - Slinger's site made their product look really solid, I'm glad that they were able to deliver. Which strap did you get?

[darwinohm]

Waist and both shoulder harness. -- Darwin