I don't remember where I read it, but I came across an article that says everything you said is wrong (no offense, el b). According to the article (which was backed up with research) neck-throughs sustain the least, glued-ins sustain in-between and bolt-ons sustain the most. I know that this goes against conventional wisdom, and I doubted it myself, but I must agree that my humble Squier Strat, unplugged, out-sustains my glued-in and neck-through guitars. Plugged in with high gain may be another thing, but that not quite tight neck to body connection of the bolt-on has a way of vibrating for a longer time. It is a resonance that you feel in the body of the guitar.They are not weight relieved since around 2011-2012. Trads before that do have the swiss cheese weight relief method.
There are three main types of Gibson weight relieving:
1) 9 hole swiss cheese. This is the standard method Gibson has used since the late 50s. All those heavy solid Les Pauls from yesteryear that everyone raves about? Swiss cheesed.
2) Chambering. This is the one everyone seems to hate. Chambers are scooped out of the body and it affects the tone, but the weight savings is not that significant over the swiss cheese method.
3) Modern pie slices. This one is an improvement on the chambering. You still get pretty significant weight relief but without all the honky resonance of chambering.
The reason Les Pauls sustain the way they do is because the huge massive heavy body resists vibration. All that vibrating string energy stays in the string between the nut and bridge. The heavy body says "nope, I will not accept you". The body does not play along with the string's vibrations. This is also partly why jamming the tailpiece all the way down to the body can sort of help with sustain. It's not the guitar "becoming one" or the body resonating or anything stupid like that. It's just the opposite. It's a more solid contact point for the string energy to basically be reflected back into the string. Actually, it's more like a steel door refusing entry into the guitar's body. Take your fist and punch a solid steel door, and then punch a hollow core door. Actually, punch the hollow door first, then the steel door. You'll break your hand, but you'll get the point. One will absorb some impact, and one will totally refuse transferring any of your energy. It's the same with neck-through guitars. Everyone loves the sustain of a neck through. Sure, why wouldn't you? It's one huge solid piece of timber the length of the string that refuses to resonate. All of that sound energy stays in the string and finds it's way through the pickups. Pickups don't pickup from the body. They pickup from the string vibrating above it. When you go removing wood and making the guitar itself more resonant, the body can't resist that string energy so easily and it vibrates with the string. You lose string energy and that natural sustain...unless of course you're in front of a loud amp. Then none of this matters. None of it.
The moral of the story: Eat your Wheaties, hit the gym, strengthen your core, and play the heaviest Les Paul you can handle.
Just from a basic physics standpoint none of that makes sense. But whatever. I got my info from luthiers I know and Gibson reps themselves. I admit that I'm not a luthier and I am just repeating what I've been told, and my own experiences line up with it. But no big deal. I'm just sharing some ideas.
I don't mean to beat a dead horse here nor to derail the thread, but I thought you and others might find this an interesting read.
It is, but it's flawed immediately and I stopped reading. He used wav samples from some unknown source. Did he verify string condition, string gauge, pickup height, etc? For example, if the Strat has brand new .11s on it and the LP has old cruddy 9s, then of course the Strat will sustain more.
well hello there...
