Are lightweight bodies really all that?

Telenator

Junior Member
Messages
188
Or are they just highly over rated bodies that cost a premium and produce guitars who's necks resemble that of something in need of viagra?

I bought into this weight thing at one time but found, (personally) that lightweight guitars usually don't project well in a live band situation.  I also soon discovered that I have to keep the neck from flopping downward AND try to play it at the same time. This proves to be very cumbersome.

Why is there so much interest in ultra-light bodies when, as far as I can tell, they're a HUGE liability to anyone who attempts to use them in a gigging situation?

Is the Emperor wearing no clothes?
 
The comment about light guitars not cutting through in a live situation.....is that for real?

I don't know where to start answering that, but you could:
a) try tweaking any number of EQ/amp/pedal/tone settings.
b) ignore light guitars and continue to play heavy ones - it's your call.

I've played a chambered warmoth strat solidly for well over 100 gigs now, and never had problems cutting through the mix. Seriously, take a look at your amp settings if that's the problem.
 
Lightweight bodies are....well.....lightweight. Beyond that I've never seen them attributed any magical powers. They're just more comfortable to play for long periods of time.
 
I think the biggest reason said here for why people goes on light weight is: pain on the back :laughing7:
 
Telenator said:
Or are they just highly over rated bodies that cost a premium and produce guitars who's necks resemble that of something in need of viagra?

I bought into this weight thing at one time but found, (personally) that lightweight guitars usually don't project well in a live band situation.  I also soon discovered that I have to keep the neck from flopping downward AND try to play it at the same time. This proves to be very cumbersome.

Why is there so much interest in ultra-light bodies when, as far as I can tell, they're a HUGE liability to anyone who attempts to use them in a gigging situation?

Is the Emperor wearing no clothes?

I know what you mean, as a Les Paul guitar/Jazz Bass man I really prefer heavier guitars. I certainly can't stand neck/headstock heavy guitars.
 
I used a poplar Fender P-Bass (long ago) for a session when my Jazz just wasn't getting quite the desired sound. Amplified I thought the sound sucked - but run direct it proved to be the best sounding recording I've ever done (and there's been a few). Go figure. I've used many woods over many years, and I still come back to a lighter weight solid alder as 'the' go-to bass body......but that's just me
icon_wink.gif
 
My Green tele uses a lightweight warmoth ash body.  Sounds great and has no problems projecting live - or cutting to shreds any guitar hero wannabes that get up on stage with me during jam night :evil4:
 
Different species of wood absorb different ratios of high, low & midrange frequencies, so they all sound different - it depends on what you're looking for. It's generally held that lighter bodies are warmer-sounding and heavier bodies are clearer in high-gain situations. However, wood also varies widely within a single species, or even depending on how and where it's cut from the tree. Two boards from different sub-species of mahogany, grown on the same plot of land, may sound more alike than two boards of the same species grown under differing conditions. Changing from a PAF pickup to a X2N is going to have a somewhat different effect on a swamp ash body than it would on a mahogany one....

The "classic" combinations are what you've grown up hearing, so they sound "right." About 1/20th of the guitarists I've met play well enough that it could really make a difference.... the best ones learn to use the sound of what it's front of them, and use their ears to choose amp settings, pickups and speakers to make the most out of any given board. Did you know that the original "Cliffs of Dover" was recorded with a 335? And that Eric Johnson variously plays it on a Strat, 335, SG, or a Les Paul? Guess who it still sounds like....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sh1P0earDU&feature=related


P.S. Added Edit - Most of the very best guitarists in the world look for the lightest swamp ash, mahogany and alder bodies they can find, for their own signature guitars. They don't do it because they care how good you sound, they do it because they care how good they sound. Whatever that means for you is up to you, not them, and not to any marketing push either.
 
Yes, they are all that... I've got an assortment from a 3 lb. ultralight swamp ash VW to under 3 lb. Thinline and a couple of chambered Strats well under 4 lbs. My '64 Melody Maker is only around 4.5 lbs total weight. I don't understand your comment about "not projecting well" in a live gig. That's going to be much more a function of the PUs/electronics installed and your amplification.  Lightweight bodies, be they less dense pieces of solid wood, chambered or hollow, will tend to resonate/sustain more when played at volume and should have the opposite effect that you describe.
 
"I also soon discovered that I have to keep the neck from flopping downward AND try to play it at the same time. This proves to be very cumbersome."

Some guitar bodies are just more prone to be neck heavy. I've seen more than one LP and Tele types that tend to be a little unbalanced, and they weren't lightweight bodies...maybe just heavier necks or less hardware on the body...but I've never played a guitar that was neck heavy IF the upper strap button was located around the 12th fret, like a Strat. I have a Strat body that weighed 2.1 pounds before paint...an extra light hollow. The neck is a heavier one, a maple Warmoth Pro with Sperzels on the end, and it nowhere approaches neck heavy at a total weight of 6.8.

Also, it's plenty present enough live!
But, I'm sure pups and amps have alot to do with that, too.
 
I have a chambered tele that feels weightless and is a joy to play all night long .. no problems cutting through .
I also have a 30 yr old Les Paul Custom that weighs a ton , it's a fabulous axe , but after a few hrs it feels like an anchor.
It wasn't bad when I bought it new .. but I'm a wee bit older now and appreciate the option to use both.
 
Telenator said:
Why is there so much interest in ultra-light bodies when, as far as I can tell, they're a HUGE liability to anyone who attempts to use them in a gigging situation?

Is the Emperor wearing no clothes?

Maybe you've just got the back of a Lumberjack I guess.  On a bass, it's definitely a nice option.  I'm not quite sure about a liability though.  Do you mean construction issues or live volume?

And the Emperor wearing no clothes, this group has a quite a few members that will tell you straight up if something is BS or just marketing bable being repeated.
 
Well we all have different experiences I suppose. Of the 5 lightweight body guitars I've owned and the two Gibson SGs, I guess I've arrived at a point where my experience has put me off the light stuff.

I have been scratch building quality guitars since 1981 and over the years my experience has shown that "balance" is a key issue in playing. Of course this is more important to some than others.

As far as sound goes, once again my experience has often been that ultra light guitars don't cut as well as medium weight. Of my 16 guitars, I'd say they're all about average weight with no feather-lights in there and certainly no boat anchors.

For me, a Strat body needs to be at least 4 lbs for it to balance properly.

A solid Tele style body seems to suit me best in the 4 1/2 to 5 lb pound range.

And a chambered body at 5 lbs is about right.

I stand when I play and I like the guitar to sit properly on the strap with the neck tilted up a bit. I also like a little weight so the guitar doesn't bounce around when I play it. I get pretty agressive sometimes.

Here a few sound clips. Yeah, we're old, but we still get it groovin!
http://www.therockaholics.com/sounds.cfm
 
Back
Top