Bolt on Les Paul

[AprioriMark]

In one of these recurring Les Paul bolt-on threads from the past, another forum member nailed it.  That is, the Les Paul is so iconic, some can't get past it.  Even with a 24 3/4" conversion neck, a Warmoth still isn't a Les Paul and never will be for some.  The set neck vs. bolt-on will always linger in the subconscious on what makes a Les Paul a Les Paul and may taint some's enjoyment.  "It'd be better if it was a real one......."

What's funny is that was probably me.  I don't own a W Les Paul for a reason, and that reason is that I have subconscious enjoyment issues.  I have built LP influenced Strats and Teles where the bolt neck doesn't bother me, but a LP should say Gibson on it and "feel" a certain way.  Fenders were meant to be modular... Les Pauls are part mystical experience, at least for me.

-Mark

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

It's probably more common than not.  The water cooled Harley has it's critics from the die hards.  There is growing Agile movement, that for the price, many swear make a great Les Paul while some are happy to overpay for tuning, fret, and finish issues.  I've got fanboy denial issues myself that are easily soothed by the waterslide decal.

 

[Corey P.]

I think the biggest issue is calling it a Les Paul - W's LP...isn't one.  Not exactly, anyway - it's obvious what Warmoth's LP is there to reproduce what people want, but there are enough qualities to distinguish them, and while I realize it's more apples/apples than apples/oranges, they still need to be considered distinct instruments IMO.

 

[bagman67]

I've got fanboy denial issues myself that are easily soothed by the waterslide decal.

Bingo - that's a quote worth hanging on to.  And a feeling I confess to having sometimes myself.

 

[Strat Avenger]

When I first started posting here, I was talking about wanting to build a LP. I like the bolt-on neck.
What made me change my mind is that I just can't get past the improper bridge placement (as compared to the Gibson). Even if you go with the 24-3/4" conversion neck, the bridge is till too far back to make you feel like you're playing a real "Les Paul".

So I've decided to built a Tele, and then an Strat. I may go with USACG for the Strat (haven't decided yet), but the Tele will definitely be Warmoth.

By the way; the only thing that's gonna sustain better than a properly bolted-on neck, is a neck-thru.  It's an absolute myth that set-necks sustain better than properly screw-attached necks.

 

[Alfang]

I don't believe a neck through is any better either, once you bolt on the neck and tighten it up its practicaly 1 piece of wood, or it should be as such.

 

[jay4321]

My sample size of Warmoth Les Pauls and Gibson Les Pauls is exactly one each, but I don't see any loss of sustain. The Gibson's neck joint is a little thicker and the Warmoth handles a little differently due to being a 25.5" scale, which affects the strings' response to bends and hitting open strings, but that's about it. Overall, it sounds like your typical mahogany LP with a maple cap, ebony board, and a JB/Jazz setup.

I do have a couple Epiphone LPs still too, one with that pickup kit. It sounds slightly muddier/darker, noticeable if you're actively listening and comparing. My non-musician wife could hear the difference. It's a neck-through, however the board is rosewood and there's no maple cap, plus it figures to be some other grade of mahogany, so there are more obvious reasons to explain the differences.

But getting back to the Warmoth LP vs the maple-capped Studio, my results make me think that neck-through sustain thing might be a little overblown. I didn't break out a stopwatch, but if I have to get that into it to find a difference then it's not a difference that means anything to me. YMMV

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Well, In MY opinion, I hate Gibson.  Why?

Well, I work in a music store, and have held a bit more than 17 Les Pauls (which is quite an astounding number, so I'm mailing you a trophy)
ccasion14:

and the quality is just not in Gibson anymore, at least not that I can tell past early 1980's.  Weight relieving and chambering DO NOT help a guitars tone, I don't care WHO makes that claim.  Just be honest that its for whiners who can't take the weight.  Both the chambered and swiss cheese LP's always feel like crap and do not resonate better than a solid chunk of mahogany.  I've seen so many huge Quality Assurance issues with Gibson's that I've had to send back because of poor craftsmanship, especially the es335's.  Not to mention Gibson has a reputation so far as not really knowing which woods are ok to use and which ones get you raided.

Someone in here mentioned it already, depending on how tight the pocket is on a bolt on, I've seen them get just as great sustain, if not better than other forms of neck joints.

Good stuff.  Welcome to the boards.  Your view on chambering, I would argue there's good and bad ways to go about them.  To blanket all techniques as ineffective is to say that all pickups sound the same because they are inherently wire, magnets, and plastic.  There's good ones and bad ones, but more accurately ones we like and dislike for various reasons.  Buy you're right, it's mostly done for weight, and by all accounts, most don't favor the giant chambers in the Les Paul.  But for most resonance and sustain are buzz words.  For either one to be extreme, the other has to be the polar opposite.  They're inversely proportional to each other like torque vs. horsepower.  As one goes up, the other goes down.  Just look at a resonator.  Doesn't sustain worth a darn.  If all it did was sustain, it wouldn't resonate.

 

[peter.k]

Back a million years ago, I was the proud owner of a 1979 Gibson Les Paul Goldtop.  My buddy had a 'lawsuit' Ibanez Les Paul copy with a bolt on neck.

I could not admit it to myself at the time, but the Ibanez was the better instrument.

That's why my 1977 Ibanez PF100 (bolt on Les Paul type) is still my go to guitar.......ply birch top and all....

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

What's even funnier, or sadder, I know a guy that tours with a 70s Ibby lawsuit and Tokai Les Paul copy because he doesn't want to bring the Gibsons to the bars.  Could have it backwards.

 

[Strat Avenger]

Well, In MY opinion, I hate Gibson.  Why?

Well, I work in a music store, and have held a bit more than 17 Les Pauls (which is quite an astounding number, so I'm mailing you a trophy)
ccasion14:

and the quality is just not in Gibson anymore, at least not that I can tell past early 1980's.  Weight relieving and chambering DO NOT help a guitars tone, I don't care WHO makes that claim.  Just be honest that its for whiners who can't take the weight.  Both the chambered and swiss cheese LP's always feel like crap and do not resonate better than a solid chunk of mahogany.  I've seen so many huge Quality Assurance issues with Gibson's that I've had to send back because of poor craftsmanship, especially the es335's.  Not to mention Gibson has a reputation so far as not really knowing which woods are ok to use and which ones get you raided.

Someone in here mentioned it already, depending on how tight the pocket is on a bolt on, I've seen them get just as great sustain, if not better than other forms of neck joints.

Good stuff.  Welcome to the boards.  Your view on chambering, I would argue there's good and bad ways to go about them.  To blanket all techniques as ineffective is to say that all pickups sound the same because they are inherently wire, magnets, and plastic.  There's good ones and bad ones, but more accurately ones we like and dislike for various reasons.  Buy you're right, it's mostly done for weight, and by all accounts, most don't favor the giant chambers in the Les Paul.  But for most resonance and sustain are buzz words.  For either one to be extreme, the other has to be the polar opposite.  They're inversely proportional to each other like torque vs. horsepower.  As one goes up, the other goes down.  Just look at a resonator.  Doesn't sustain worth a darn.  If all it did was sustain, it wouldn't resonate.

LOL!!!  Torque and Horspower are not exactly inversely proportional to each other.  A better example might be Voltage and Current.

 

[stubhead]

The train left the Rational Station as a result of two things, in my mind.

1) In 1965, 66,67,68,69,70,71,72.... a 1958, 59 or 60 Les Paul was quite likely to be the very best (or at least very good) guitar available for a group of extremely talented, dedicated tone-seekers who used them to record a body of work which transformed the world of music, entertainment (and with a few assorted chemical enhancements) totally blew the mental states of a HUGE demographic bubble; who have also now seized control of TV and radio programming to the extent that "our music" will always be held to be the "best," until we all croak.

2) Because of this AND rarity AND the natural process afflicting "antiques" AND human stupidity but LARGELY because of brilliant marketing - and I do mean BRILLIANT - on the part of about 25 - 40 people who stood to gain the most from it - a 1958, 59, 60 Les Paul is now "worth" between $250,000 and $750,000.

Because of this the entire system is totally skewed away from anything even resembling "bang for the buck", "you get what you pay for", "a bad craftsman blames his tools" and even "a fool and his money are soon parted." You can't even say the words "Les Paul" without a whole slew of associations entering into the brain like little gnawing spider-babies, you can actually KILL people - the right ones - stroke 'em out, sequentially blow all four heart valves one after the other like a string of cheapbeer-farts - just by joking "You know, my grandpa just croaked and left me this guitar he bought in 1959, it's called a Lesspool er sumptin.'" (heh)

That may have been more than two reasons.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Maybe mostly then.  The little torque to hp formula with the 5252 involved says they are, as well as every dyno chart I've seen. 

 

[Cagey]

Maybe mostly then.  The little torque to hp formula with the 5252 involved says they are, as well as every dyno chart I've seen. 

No, still not. Horsies = (Torque X RPM)/5252

So, with either constant torque or constant RPMs, you end up with the same horsepower, which is always directly proportional...

Torq RPM Horsepower
100 1000 19
100 1500 29
100 2000 38
100 2500 48
100 3000 57
100 3500 67

100 1000 19
150 1000 29
200 1000 38
250 1000 48
300 1000 57
350 1000 67

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Algebraically, you can swap places of the constant (5252) and the hp.  Torque is in the numerator, hp is in the denominator which makes them inversely proportional.  One goes up, the other goes down to keep the same constant of 5252.  In other words,  5252 equals (torque x rpm)/horsies.

But seriously, this is the hijack tangent we're gonna run with?

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Oops.  Mispoke of the highest order.  Got a lot on my plate this week.  Been doing that a lot lately.  Good thing I drive a minivan.

 

[Assumer]

Someone built me a warmoth les paul and then buy me a gibson les paul (both lefty please) and I will settle this argument for everyone.

 

[Kadmium]

By the way; the only thing that's gonna sustain better than a properly bolted-on neck, is a neck-thru.  It's an absolute myth that set-necks sustain better than properly screw-attached necks.

Just out of interest, I know a lot of players use sustain as a sort of general "quality bar", but when's the last time you have been playing a song and thought to yourself, "I wish that note had rung out a little longer?" I often have the opposite problem (power chords ringing out too long into the soft section), but I've never needed a note to last longer.

If there's a legitimate concern about bolt-on necks (or, at least, Fender-style bolt on necks), it's that of upper fret access. Compared to an Axcess Les Paul, the fret access (even on a contoured heel) won't be as good, but it's every bit as good as an ordinary LP.

 

[Strat Avenger]

By the way; the only thing that's gonna sustain better than a properly bolted-on neck, is a neck-thru.  It's an absolute myth that set-necks sustain better than properly screw-attached necks.

Just out of interest, I know a lot of players use sustain as a sort of general "quality bar", but when's the last time you have been playing a song and thought to yourself, "I wish that note had rung out a little longer?" I often have the opposite problem (power chords ringing out too long into the soft section), but I've never needed a note to last longer.

If there's a legitimate concern about bolt-on necks (or, at least, Fender-style bolt on necks), it's that of upper fret access. Compared to an Axcess Les Paul, the fret access (even on a contoured heel) won't be as good, but it's every bit as good as an ordinary LP.

I agree with what you're saying about "sustain".  I think one wants a guitar that resonates well, and doesn't sound like a dead, lifeless plank. It's important that the neck and the body resonate together, with minimal damping, and that the resonating properties of the two don't cancel each other out.

 

[AprioriMark]

Someone built me a warmoth les paul and then buy me a gibson les paul (both lefty please) and I will settle this argument for everyone.

Finally a voice of reason.  Get Orpheo to build him one, stat!

-Mark