Bloody Les Pauls

merciful-evans

Blueingreen said:

I'm in an anti-Gibson phase, not just Les Pauls.

The main thing I'm sick of is tuning issues.  I've owned 8 guitars in the past several years. 3 Gibsons, 5 other brands.  I've had tuning issues with 3 guitars while 5 have had zero issues.  Guess which 3 had the tuning issues?  Yep.

They go through long periods when they are fine.  Tuning maybe not quite as stable as I'd ideally want, but well within parameters I can live with.  Then they go through another phase where any soloing that involves bending puts the B string, or G, or both, noticeably out of tune.  I can't get through a song without the tuning going off.

I know the fan boys will say "user error".  Bit of graphite.  Bit of lube. But they don't always do the trick.  And if they don't it's a visit to a tech, who in my experience can't always immediately identify or fix the problem.  So it's time and money and maybe more than one attempt to get a solution.  And there's always the risk that someone fiddling with or changing the nut fixes your tuning issue but gives you back a guitar that doesn't play quite as well.

Currently 2 of my 3 Gibsons are giving me problems.  I know it's probably the nut, I know it'll get fixed eventually.  But I shouldn't have to jump through these hoops to get two instruments that, at current new prices would cost over 8 grand to replace to stay in tune.  (Not that I paid anything like that for them btw) . Basically it's a design fault with the headstock that didn't matter in the days before players routinely bent strings but does now.

I love the feel of the instruments, the playability, the sound, the iconography.  I just want an instrument that stays in tune.

I feel your pain. I had this right from the off with my new ES-339. I put up a similar message to yours on the Gibson Forum. I agree the angled string path is the culprit that causes binding. I know it shouldn't be there, but rather than let it p you off, its not difficult to fix, or improve at least. I suggest carefully reshaping the nut slot and slanting to the direction of string angle. A piece of fine emery paper folded around a .006" feeler gauge or similar will do. Have a few goes with minor fettling until it behaves itself. Theres bound to be YT vids too. Good luck.

Philly_Q

Dead spots are not unusual.  I had a Music Man Axis which had a very noticeable one, I think it was around the 10th fret on the G string, very little sustain at that point and the note would literally die almost immediately.  And as  already mentioned, they seem to be fairly common on SGs, around the middle of the neck either side of the 12th fret.

I don't think they're indications of "bad wood" or poor quality control, they're just bad luck.  I suppose manufacturers could play every string at every fret and discard finished guitars with dead spots, but that would be... expensive.

I've read that various methods of stiffening the neck, or cancelling out certain resonances, may help prevent dead spots - carbon fibre rods, or Feline's three-piece neck construction, which is similar to what Hamer always did.

Corvus

Dead spots aren't that rare and not a quality thing as such - though could argue the obvious very bad ones at least could be caught in QC. The common thought is an unlucky resonant peak fighting a particular note, sometimes only that note at that particular fretted position.

Wood is what it is.

My Strat and Greco 335 have it though both pretty slight and rarely noticed. Like say lots of gain and trying to sustain that note a lot, type of thing. Haven't found it on my own builds yet but probably luck as much as anything else. Seen claims that massive long tenons and straight-through stops it but nah, I've had it on a straight-through as well. Anyway it's not purely a Les Paul or Gibson thing, quality, or particular construction.

Three-ColourSunburst

Revolting1 said:

    Cant comment on wether he's wrong or not- Because that wasn't the specific issue that the ones I tried had. They did'nt produce an audible harmonic at the 'dead notes'. They were considerably 'quieter' across 3 semitones 'usually' with the note in the middle being the worst(almost inaudible) and no sustain in that area. Some of the guitars did this across three separate 'freqencies'.

 Its driving me up the pole because I have in the past played some stunningly superb gibbo les pauls and SGs. I'm livid with Gibson managment for trashing their own brand/ heritage by letting such pathetic sounding quarter arsed contraptions onto the market with their name on headstock.            

           

That guy's Les Paul would show no sustain at the affected note - the harmonic only becomes dominant because he keeps on adding energy to the string via vibrato.

Three-ColourSunburst

Kittyfrisk said:

I hadn't come across 'dead spots' before reading this thread. So, I searched 'guitar dead spots' and the first few returns said that guitars affected were a tele, a strat, a PRS and of course an SG. So it seems to be a thing, but is pretty certain to be an issue with the guitar setup in some way, rather than related to a brand or basic construction issue.

No, as ICBM puts it. (Hopefully he won't be subjected to an personal attack - made from a position of ignorance - for pointing this out, as I was...)

It is a real thing and it's related to resonances in the neck, or neck/body combination - not a set-up issue.

As to what causes it, the characteristics of different pieces of wood certainly plays a role, but research (real scientific research, not "cod-science", as the ill-informed would have it) shows that the overall design also plays an important role, including such factors as the headstock design (6 in a row or 3 per side tuners etc.) Here are some links to some relevant research papers.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282913082_Fleischer_H_und_Zwicker_T_Investigating_dead_spots_of_electric_guitars_Acustica_united_with_acta_acustica_85_1999_128_-135

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281639288_Vibration_of_an_Electric_Bass_Guitar

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282567958_Diagnosing_dead_spots_of_electric_guitars_and_basses_by_measuring_the_mechanical_conductance

https://www.unibw.de/lrt4/veroeffentlichungen/2000_3_gerhard_krump.pdf

Blueingreen

merciful-evans said:

Blueingreen said:

I'm in an anti-Gibson phase, not just Les Pauls.

The main thing I'm sick of is tuning issues.  I've owned 8 guitars in the past several years. 3 Gibsons, 5 other brands.  I've had tuning issues with 3 guitars while 5 have had zero issues.  Guess which 3 had the tuning issues?  Yep.

They go through long periods when they are fine.  Tuning maybe not quite as stable as I'd ideally want, but well within parameters I can live with.  Then they go through another phase where any soloing that involves bending puts the B string, or G, or both, noticeably out of tune.  I can't get through a song without the tuning going off.

I know the fan boys will say "user error".  Bit of graphite.  Bit of lube. But they don't always do the trick.  And if they don't it's a visit to a tech, who in my experience can't always immediately identify or fix the problem.  So it's time and money and maybe more than one attempt to get a solution.  And there's always the risk that someone fiddling with or changing the nut fixes your tuning issue but gives you back a guitar that doesn't play quite as well.

Currently 2 of my 3 Gibsons are giving me problems.  I know it's probably the nut, I know it'll get fixed eventually.  But I shouldn't have to jump through these hoops to get two instruments that, at current new prices would cost over 8 grand to replace to stay in tune.  (Not that I paid anything like that for them btw) . Basically it's a design fault with the headstock that didn't matter in the days before players routinely bent strings but does now.

I love the feel of the instruments, the playability, the sound, the iconography.  I just want an instrument that stays in tune.

I feel your pain. I had this right from the off with my new ES-339. I put up a similar message to yours on the Gibson Forum. I agree the angled string path is the culprit that causes binding. I know it shouldn't be there, but rather than let it p you off, its not difficult to fix, or improve at least. I suggest carefully reshaping the nut slot and slanting to the direction of string angle. A piece of fine emery paper folded around a .006" feeler gauge or similar will do. Have a few goes with minor fettling until it behaves itself. Theres bound to be YT vids too. Good luck.

It's not the sort of thing I'd attempt myself tbh.

I have a 339 that had exactly the same issues.  Ironically it's the 1 of the 3 that currently stays in tune pretty well, but it was a real pain at the time.  I took it to 2 different luthiers, the second one more than once (and I actually think the second guy is good, he's done very good work for me at other times).  The bizarre thing is that I still don't know what fixed it - I put on some Nut Sauce and it seemed to work and it's been fine since.  But I know the luthier was also putting on plenty of lube so why it worked this time I don't know.

The conventional wisdom is that  it's a simple mechanism and there's a very limited number of things that can be causing this problem so it should be easy to identify and fix.  I completely follow that logic, but my experience doesn't bear it out.

Three-ColourSunburst

Philly_Q said:

Dead spots are not unusual.  I had a Music Man Axis which had a very noticeable one, I think it was around the 10th fret on the G string, very little sustain at that point and the note would literally die almost immediately.  And as  already mentioned, they seem to be fairly common on SGs, around the middle of the neck either side of the 12th fret.

I don't think they're indications of "bad wood" or poor quality control, they're just bad luck.  I suppose manufacturers could play every string at every fret and discard finished guitars with dead spots, but that would be... expensive.

I've read that various methods of stiffening the neck, or cancelling out certain resonances, may help prevent dead spots - carbon fibre rods, or Feline's three-piece neck construction, which is similar to what Hamer always did.

The real answer is to abandon the use of wood for constructing the neck and bridge interface of electric guitars and instead make them from something with much greater structural integrity and homogeneity, such as carbon composite, with the emphasis being on preventing the energy of the string - and so its sustain and harmonic richness -  from being dissipated through the body and neck, and in turn making dead spots a thing of the past.

Of course this will probably never happen, given the traditionalism and belief in magic and folk-science that is so common in the guitar community - and people do like to feel that string energy leaking away into the body giving that sought-after 'a bit like playing an acoustic' vibe.

MagicPigDetective

Three-ColourSunburst said:

Philly_Q said:

Dead spots are not unusual.  I had a Music Man Axis which had a very noticeable one, I think it was around the 10th fret on the G string, very little sustain at that point and the note would literally die almost immediately.  And as  already mentioned, they seem to be fairly common on SGs, around the middle of the neck either side of the 12th fret.

I don't think they're indications of "bad wood" or poor quality control, they're just bad luck.  I suppose manufacturers could play every string at every fret and discard finished guitars with dead spots, but that would be... expensive.

I've read that various methods of stiffening the neck, or cancelling out certain resonances, may help prevent dead spots - carbon fibre rods, or Feline's three-piece neck construction, which is similar to what Hamer always did.

The real answer is to abandon the use of wood for constructing the neck and bridge interface of electric guitars and instead make them from something with much greater structural integrity and homogeneity, such as carbon composite, with the emphasis being on preventing the energy of the string - and so its sustain and harmonic richness -  from being dissipated through the body and neck, and in turn making dead spots a thing of the past.

Of course this will probably never happen, given the traditionalism and belief in magic and folk-science that is so common in the guitar community - and people do like to feel that string energy leaking away into the body giving that sought-after 'a bit like playing an acoustic' vibe.

Or aluminium?

https://www.electricalguitarcompany.com/models/

Revolting1

crunchman said:

p90fool said:

crunchman said:

It is possible to make Les Pauls without dead spots.  I don't know what causes them on some guitars and not others.

Possible? It's a doddle, just make them 10lbs and put a chunky neck on them. 

I've not noticed dead spots on any of the 3 I've owned, and they have all been well under 10lbs.  The first one might be the lightest properly solid Les Paul I've ever come across - although it wasn't the best sounding.

    Its relatively straightforward to make a LP without dead spots.

   Gibson have managed it for decades  untill the last few years.

       Quality control or Lawsuits- Its a no brainer        

Philly_Q

Three-ColourSunburst said:

Philly_Q said:

Dead spots are not unusual.  I had a Music Man Axis which had a very noticeable one, I think it was around the 10th fret on the G string, very little sustain at that point and the note would literally die almost immediately.  And as  already mentioned, they seem to be fairly common on SGs, around the middle of the neck either side of the 12th fret.

I don't think they're indications of "bad wood" or poor quality control, they're just bad luck.  I suppose manufacturers could play every string at every fret and discard finished guitars with dead spots, but that would be... expensive.

I've read that various methods of stiffening the neck, or cancelling out certain resonances, may help prevent dead spots - carbon fibre rods, or Feline's three-piece neck construction, which is similar to what Hamer always did.

The real answer is to abandon the use of wood for constructing the neck and bridge interface of electric guitars and instead make them from something with much greater structural integrity and homogeneity, such as carbon composite, with the emphasis being on preventing the energy of the string - and so its sustain and harmonic richness -  from being dissipated through the body and neck, and in turn making dead spots a thing of the past.

Of course this will probably never happen, given the traditionalism and belief in magic and folk-science that is so common in the guitar community - and people do like to feel that string energy leaking away into the body giving that sought-after 'a bit like playing an acoustic' vibe.

Which brings me back to my question on the previous page - what guitars do you actually own, given your disdain for all things wooden and resonant?

C'mon @Three-ColourSunburst, show us your collection of Steinies, Velenos and Gittlers.

Skipped

We have moved on a lot from the original post.

Perhaps we will have another debate about "tonewoods" when the new (2019)  Classic Vibe Stratocasters become readily visible to forum members ? (Happening right now).

The body is made of Cottonwood. Is that correct?

https://skinflint.co.uk/fender-squier-classic-vibe-70s-stratocaster-il-black-0374020506-a2022058.html

A poster on  mandolincafe.com says that Colorado cottonwood "smells like urine when worked on", is not suitable for anything that needs to last, and, " It isn't even that good as firewood".

https://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/threads/130940-Cottonwood

But if the guitars are lightweight, and sound good, they will sell in huge numbers. 

Three-ColourSunburst

impmann said:

All of my guitars are light because of my back injury. All of my guitars are resonant. All of my guitars sound great. And no, none have 'dead spots'. Try playing a Parker Fly - light as a feather, very resonant and sustain for days.

You clearly don't know the very important difference between 'forced vibration' and resonance.

As to the Parker Fly, the reason it vibrates noticeably and yet still has good sustain is directly related to that other factor you mention - its low weight - it simply takes less energy to make it vibrate. If this transference of string energy could be reduced its sustain would be even better.

Acoustic instruments purposely have very light soundboards and bridges as this make it easier for the energy in the string to be transferred to the body (unlike an electric guitar the impdance value is relatively low). In turn this energy is then quickly dissipated as the soundboard vibrates the air, so the instrument has less sustain than a solid-body guitar.

A violin is probably the classic example of a low impedance instrument designed to efficiently transfer the energy of the string - via the bridge and soundboard - to the air. As a result a violin has almost no natural sustain (plucked notes sound Pizzicato), hence the need for a bow to give a sustained sound.

Even in a violin there is only significant string-body coupling in certain circumstances - generally associated with the 'wolf note'. For decades this phenomenon was not fully understood, then in 1981 C.E. Gough published the paper 'The Theory of String Resonance on Musical Instruments' which finally explained what was going on and gave a robust mathematical model of the phenomena. Anyone who understands this paper will also understand why the notion of electric guitar 'tone wood' is a nonsense - 1) the string / body impedance is simply too high for the necessary conditions for string-body coupling to occur - 2) even if such coupling did occur it would only have a significant effect at the (true) resonant frequencies of the body, and 3) in a solid body guitar occur any resonant frequencies that do exist occur at too low a frequency to affect the higher harmonics.

https://www.violinacoustics.com/Acustica 1981 Theory of String Resonances.pdf

impmann

And 3TS is off again.

So the wood makes no difference in sound to an electric guitar (a nonsense, huh)?

Haven’t we been here before chum?

Its time to put you back on block...

sweepy

Dons lightweight tinfoil hat

jdgm

I finally bought a Gibson LP Custom (with P90s) in 2012.

One of the best things I ever did, it has made a huge difference to my playing.

SteveRobinson

Revolting1 said:

    Its relatively straightforward to make a LP without dead spots.

   Gibson have managed it for decades  untill the last few years.

       Quality control or Lawsuits- Its a no brainer        

I once owned a 1990 Les Paul Reissue. Lovely looking guitar but it just sucked up E5, making it impossible to play Parisian Walkways

Revolting1

SteveRobinson said:

Revolting1 said:

    Its relatively straightforward to make a LP without dead spots.

   Gibson have managed it for decades  untill the last few years.

       Quality control or Lawsuits- Its a no brainer        

I once owned a 1990 Les Paul Reissue. Lovely looking guitar but it just sucked up E5, making it impossible to play Parisian Walkways

   Oh dear, worse that I thought-  any advance on 3 decades?

Revolting1

Three-ColourSunburst said:

Revolting1 said:

    Cant comment on wether he's wrong or not- Because that wasn't the specific issue that the ones I tried had. They did'nt produce an audible harmonic at the 'dead notes'. They were considerably 'quieter' across 3 semitones 'usually' with the note in the middle being the worst(almost inaudible) and no sustain in that area. Some of the guitars did this across three separate 'freqencies'.

 Its driving me up the pole because I have in the past played some stunningly superb gibbo les pauls and SGs. I'm livid with Gibson managment for trashing their own brand/ heritage by letting such pathetic sounding quarter arsed contraptions onto the market with their name on headstock.            

           

That guy's Les Paul would show no sustain at the affected note - the harmonic only becomes dominant because he keeps on adding energy to the string via vibrato.

   From the video his LP was nowhere near as bad as the ones I've tried lately,

 

    Thats probably why they were for sale........

     

thegummy

ICBM said:

Kittyfrisk said:

I hadn't come across 'dead spots' before reading this thread.

So, I searched 'guitar dead spots' and the first few returns said that guitars affected were a tele, a strat, a PRS and of course an SG. 
So it seems to be a thing, but is pretty certain to be an issue with the guitar setup in some way, rather than related to a brand or basic construction issue.

It is a real thing and it's related to resonances in the neck, or neck/body combination - not a set-up issue.

My borrowed Fender Mustang Bass has a bad one at the 6th fret Eb on the A string - the note just sounds weak and dies in about half the time of any other (even other Ebs) on the bass. I changed the string gauge, raised the action, and it still did it.

But kittyfrisk read a few Google results, do you have that level of experience and expertise?

thegummy

DeeTee said:

What's the best way to check for dead spots? I haven't noticed any before (except on an old Gould, but that had a ton of issues).

I'm wondering if it's the kind of thing I would have just failed to notice.

I think the only way you wouldn't have noticed is if you had never played the affected note. The ones I've found aren't just a subtle tonal difference or "only sustains for 4 bars rather than 8", it's like suddenly that note is muted every time you play it.

So basically just play every note on the fretboard cleanly and if any are dead it will jump out at you.

Incidentally, I recently played probably the lightest guitar I've ever felt (with a long skinny neck) and it had several dead spots.