Not if it's in a case.Originally posted by staplek
Is 10-1/2 lbs. heavy for a les paul?
I agree w/ all that... I'm lucky that both my Lesters are 9-9.2 lb., not too heavy. Both tone monsters.Originally posted by paintguy
After owning at least a dozens Les Pauls over the years, I have always favored the heavy ones as just sounding thicker and fuller to me. I have had many guitar tech/experts tell me the lighter ones sound fuller and thicker, although I have to dis-agree.
I own 1 now that probably is in the 8-9lb range and feel it is the thinnest and brightest(not in a good way) Les Paul I have ever owned.(and it's a 1959' reissue).
I agree, try many and don't pay attention to weight. Just find the 1 that feels and sounds right to your ear.
This is a good point. I have back problems, ruptured a disc a couple of years ago. I'm very sensitive to weight, and I use a postal scale to weigh guitars and determine what works and what doesn't. My rule of thumb for LPs is, anything over 9 lbs is no go; it'll hurt me. Under that, and I can usually play a full night with no problems.Originally posted by CharlieNC
actually, the weirdest thing about the weight of a les paul to me is that in some models it feels as if it is all concentrated in the butt end of the guitar.
I have 3 historics (an R6 w/ p-90's, R9 and a CR9-cloud 9) and the cloud 9 is the thickest sounding of the bunch and is 7.2 lbs, that may be due to the tone chambers. That being said my favorite by far is my 99 R9 that is 8.8 lbs. This one kind of annoyed me at first because I can't get the stop-tail flush with the body-it is up about 1/2 an inch, but the thing just sings like Nigel Tufnel says "whaaa"After owning at least a dozens Les Pauls over the years, I have always favored the heavy ones as just sounding thicker and fuller to me. I have had many guitar tech/experts tell me the lighter ones sound fuller and thicker, although I have to dis-agree.
None of my LPs have the stoptail flush w/the body, eventhough they could. There are several reasons NOT to do so. First, if the strings contact the rear body of the bridge, the tail s/b raised as to free any contact. There may be a small benefit to that in terms of string harmonics. Second, and most important, Those tune-o-matic bridges will slowly flatten if too much continual pressure is applied. It's best to relieve that, and raising the tail makes a big difference. Lastly, raising the tail lessens the final string angle, resulting in a much slinkier feel for bends, etc. Any benefit which may be realized (and it's arguable whether this matters at all) in improved resonance as a result of a flush tail, are easily trumped by these reasons.Originally posted by FredW
I have 3 historics (an R6 w/ p-90's, R9 and a CR9-cloud 9) and the cloud 9 is the thickest sounding of the bunch and is 7.2 lbs, that may be due to the tone chambers. That being said my favorite by far is my 99 R9 that is 8.8 lbs. This one kind of annoyed me at first because I can't get the stop-tail flush with the body-it is up about 1/2 an inch, but the thing just sings like Nigel Tufnel says "whaaa"