guitar weight
- chrisjedijane
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3322
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:32 pm
- Location: Northern Ireland
Re: guitar weight
Weight never really bothered me much with my guitars - my Jazzmaster is probably the heaviest of all my guitars, and all the AVRI's I've played have been much heavier than any CIJ I've ever played. Like Jonas, my two most-played guitars are my heaviest (JM) and lightest (SG), and I switch between the two with relative ease.
"we lack the motion to move to the new beat"
- fuzzjunkie
- Expat
- Posts: 7871
- Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:32 am
- Location: Seattle
Re: guitar weight
my 2 favorite guitars are the lightest and most resonant acoustically; the '61 Tele and '63 JM, while the heaviest guitar i've owned was an '85 Rick 360. seems wrong being a semi-hollow body, but they're made from carved maple and weigh as much as a Les Paul. they're aren't "toy" light though.
oh, and acoustically the Tele was louder than the Rick as well...in fact it's so loud i've miced it and used it on an acoustic track more than once.
oh, and acoustically the Tele was louder than the Rick as well...in fact it's so loud i've miced it and used it on an acoustic track more than once.
sleeping on a bed of fuzz and feedback
- PorkyPrimeCut
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 24568
- Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 7:46 am
- Location: Leipzig
- Contact:
Re: guitar weight
My '59 Jazzmaster weighs 7.4lb, I've never compared its resonance with other 50's & 60's JM's but it strikes me as being pretty loud & bright when I play it unplugged. I've played a few Japanese JM's & AVRI's that are no where near as loud.
My ES-125T weighs 4.8lb, it's almost as loud as my acoustic & louder that the Gretsch & Hofner semi-acoustics I played recently. I actually use it as an acoustic more than an electric at the mo.
My Vox Ultrasonic weighs 7.4lb - the same as my JM. I'm sure this has a lot to do with the chrome & electronics although the neck must be pretty heavy too as it suffers from "nose-dive" or whatever you call it. Unplugged its not as loud as the ES-125 but it's close. As it's a 12-string (well, was anyway) & sounds gorgeous with or without an amp.
I weigh much more than the 3 combined & sound pretty terrible however you try to play me!
My ES-125T weighs 4.8lb, it's almost as loud as my acoustic & louder that the Gretsch & Hofner semi-acoustics I played recently. I actually use it as an acoustic more than an electric at the mo.
My Vox Ultrasonic weighs 7.4lb - the same as my JM. I'm sure this has a lot to do with the chrome & electronics although the neck must be pretty heavy too as it suffers from "nose-dive" or whatever you call it. Unplugged its not as loud as the ES-125 but it's close. As it's a 12-string (well, was anyway) & sounds gorgeous with or without an amp.
I weigh much more than the 3 combined & sound pretty terrible however you try to play me!
You think you can't, you wish you could, I know you can, I wish you would. Slip inside this house as you pass by.
- rickenmetal
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2554
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:49 am
Re: guitar weight
That's really weird the Ultrasonic neck dives. The Apollo IV does not neck dive and is well balanced, even though the body seems flimsy and the instrument is very light. I guess it also depends on the neck-body joint and that the bass neck is actually thinner.
Just curious, do you know if Wyman basses neck dive? I am not talking about the Contellation basses, those do it without a doubt, the headstock is huge on those things.
Just curious, do you know if Wyman basses neck dive? I am not talking about the Contellation basses, those do it without a doubt, the headstock is huge on those things.
- PorkyPrimeCut
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 24568
- Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 7:46 am
- Location: Leipzig
- Contact:
Re: guitar weight
I couldn't tell you.rickenmetal wrote: That's really weird the Ultrasonic neck dives. The Apollo IV does not neck dive and is well balanced, even though the body seems flimsy and the instrument is very light. I guess it also depends on the neck-body joint and that the bass neck is actually thinner.
Just curious, do you know if Wyman basses neck dive? I am not talking about the Contellation basses, those do it without a doubt, the headstock is huge on those things.
The Ultrasonic only does it slightly. Its almost perfectly balanced. It kinda picks up momentum if you don't catch it straight away. Its kept me on my toes a few times!
Come to think of it, since I took off the 6 extra strings & tuners it doesn't do it as much. Those things must weigh an ounce each!!

You think you can't, you wish you could, I know you can, I wish you would. Slip inside this house as you pass by.
- rickenmetal
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2554
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:49 am
Re: guitar weight
Well, if it has a 12 string headstock that's also a reason why it's not as balanced.
I was thinking that the Gibson ES-335 (and others in the series) are actually very well thought out, especially when they put mahogany necks on the maple bodies. Probably not the best tone for blues, better for jazz, but great balance, even better with a Bigsby on. Then on the ES-330 they originally moved the neck farther in the body, limiting access to the higher frets, but providing better balance, especially when the model lacked the solid center part in the body, although later they moved the neck further off the body, which was worse for the neck joint as well. Not to say all Gibsons are well designed, the double cutaway Les Pauls and SGs are not as well designed, neither were the guitars in the Corvus series with a small body and big routs in the body which made them off balance.
The original Mustang was a good design, the poplar body tends to be a little heavier then ash or alder, and they are well balanced, although somewhat too light. The first Japanese reissues with basswood bodies are not as thought out, neither was the Musicmaster bass.
I was thinking that the Gibson ES-335 (and others in the series) are actually very well thought out, especially when they put mahogany necks on the maple bodies. Probably not the best tone for blues, better for jazz, but great balance, even better with a Bigsby on. Then on the ES-330 they originally moved the neck farther in the body, limiting access to the higher frets, but providing better balance, especially when the model lacked the solid center part in the body, although later they moved the neck further off the body, which was worse for the neck joint as well. Not to say all Gibsons are well designed, the double cutaway Les Pauls and SGs are not as well designed, neither were the guitars in the Corvus series with a small body and big routs in the body which made them off balance.
The original Mustang was a good design, the poplar body tends to be a little heavier then ash or alder, and they are well balanced, although somewhat too light. The first Japanese reissues with basswood bodies are not as thought out, neither was the Musicmaster bass.
- Rich
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:35 pm
- Location: Virginia Beach,VA
Re: guitar weight
I'm not real picky about the weight of my guitars. As long as they're not below 6lbs or above 13lbs I don't think wieght would even be a consideration to me. It never has been when choosing a guitar in the past.
Like some other people who have already posted, my two main guitars are my lightest and heaviest, my AVRI Jazzmaster and my 1972 Music Master.
Like some other people who have already posted, my two main guitars are my lightest and heaviest, my AVRI Jazzmaster and my 1972 Music Master.
- K-Line
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:12 am
- Location: St. Louis
- Contact:
Re: guitar weight
Weight is of no thought to me as well. Some light guitars just do not hang right and can neck dive. I also do not like them when they leave the shoulder aching at the end of the night. Sound, no diff. It is all about the whole package.
Chris
K-Line Guitars
K-Line Guitars