Chambered Heritage 150

[VJonathan]

Gentleman.....do any of you own (or ever played)  the chambered H 150s now coming off the production line in Zoo Land?  I understand they're quite nice.  I have always been a purist and have favored the solid body design. That said,  there has been much discussion about the chambered body concept on the Les Paul which has yielded positive results in maintaining the integrity of the tonewood not to mention weight.    Any thoughts on this?

[GuitArtMan]

I'm somehwat curios about this as well.

 

I did own a G word Custom Shop Les Paul Florentine.  This is a semi-hollow Les Paul with f-holes.  I found it brighter than my Les Paul Standard and eventually ended up selling it.

[Thundersteel]

I just bought one last month--love the sound! It has a "woody" character to the tone.

 

It's not much lighter in weight to the regular solid bodies--maybe a pound or 2 less at the most.

 

Caution: before you get one, be sure to open the volume/tone control cover plate and look for loose/missing "ears" that hold the cover plate on. Mine had one that was broken and made a rattling noise inside, and another one that was ready to go, so I removed it the rest of the way. Now, the cover plate is being held on by only 2 screws.  .  It seems that the wooden ears split when the screws were installed. I was angry at first (I still am somewhat), but I don't feel like sending it back to Heritage for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong wait for them to repair it--at least not yet. Thats my only gripe about it--otherwise, it looks and sounds amazing!

H150Full.JPG

H150Full.JPG_thumb

H150Cover.JPG

H150Cover.JPG_thumb

[Gitfiddler]

I've not yet played one of Heritage's chambered H150's, but I do own a LP Supreme that is chambered.  Put simply, it sounds great!  Chambering/weight relief holes/ interior tonally carved guitars have a unique sound.  If done properly (i.e. with the tone improvement motive over the weight relief motive), the tone can be a hybrid between a good solid and semi-hollow body guitar.

 

Thundersteel:  There is no way you should live with that terrible back cavity work.  

 

I bet you are already thinking about sending it back...but why not put them on written notice now (with pics, of course) so you do not have an 'out of warranty' problem?   

[skydog]

Is this the same model that they're marketing as the LW (light weight)?

[Thundersteel]

Is this the same model that they're marketing as the LW (light weight)?

 

YES!

[Paul P]

Caution: before you get one, be sure to open the volume/tone control cover plate and look for loose/missing "ears" that hold the cover plate on. Mine had one that was broken and made a rattling noise inside, and another one that was ready to go, so I removed it the rest of the way.

 

Bummer.  They should have seen that coming.  The two remaining holes should be ok since the grain of the wood is perpendicular

to the cavity and the wood can't break across the grain.  Not sure what would be best for the two other holes.  That looks like solid

wood and any kind of wedging effect into the grain will cause the wood to pop off easily.  Even if you used a T-nut so as not to

wedge the wood apart with the screw you'd still have to be careful if there is any kind of space between the cover and the wing

so as not to break wing by by bending it.

 

I think what I'd do is glue the wings back on and, at the same time if possible, glue small strips of wood cut with the grain going

across the grain of the break to the underside where it shouldn't show.  This will prevent the wood from separating along the grain

like it did.  I'd still be careful not to overtighten the screws when you reinstall the cover.  I'd use epoxy.

 

You probably wouldn't have had any problem if the back had been plywood.

 

Paul P

[skydog]

I think the current "light weight" fad can be misinterpreted. I say fad b/c it wasn't long ago that heavy guitars were thought to sustain better, etc. Anyway, like in the case of swamp ash, (not to be confused with Sam) the lighter weight bodies are said to resonate better b/c they grew under water which opened the cells. Thus when they dried they were airy. Chambering to achieve a light weight body isn't the same thing. I'm not saying one result is better or worse than the other. Just different.

[Thundersteel]

I think what I'd do is glue the wings back on and, at the same time if possible, glue small strips of wood cut with the grain going

across the grain of the break to the underside where it shouldn't show.

 

Well, I would if I still had both wings. I kept one, and I think the salesman threw the other one away. You see, when I first bought it, I noticed a rattle inside it. The salesman opened up the back cover, told me he found a wood chip inside, and threw it away. I had no idea that it was one of the "wings" that was discarded.  >

 

Heritage should build the LW model like the Guild Bluesbirds. I had one (should have never sold that one!), and there were no "wings." The control cavity was just like a regular solid body, but the rest of the body was hollow.

 

I still haven't decided whether or not to send it back to Heritage--what could they do?

[drewzee87t]

Send it back and have them fix or replace. Or get in touch with your local guy and fix it. I would ship it back.

[les paulverizer]

I know in the last few years everybody's talkin' about the benefits of lightweight guitars, sayin' that they resonate more, bla bla bla.......!

Well, the fact is that the best sounding guitars out of all the ones I've had have always been the heaviest, period.

I strictly believe that a "heavish" body will impart guts, (obviously) body and authorithy to the sound; obviously I'm not talkin' about heavy for heavy's sake; it's got to be top quality wood to start with.

This's also a view shared with a very good luthier I know; he's made some light guitars, like a korina Les Paul among others, and they always turned out lame.

[GuitArtMan]

I know in the last few years everybody's talkin' about the benefits of lightweight guitars, sayin' that they resonate more, bla bla bla.......!

Well, the fact is that the best sounding guitars out of all the ones I've had have always been the heaviest, period.

I strictly believe that a "heavish" body will impart guts, (obviously) body and authorithy to the sound; obviously I'm not talkin' about heavy for heavy's sake; it's got to be top quality wood to start with.

This's also a view shared with a very good luthier I know; he's made some light guitars, like a korina Les Paul among others, and they always turned out lame.

Weird, I can honestly say out of all the vintage Gibsons (oops I said it), Fenders, Gretchs, etc. that I've played the better ones all had one thing in common: light weight and super resonant.  They were also stiff as hell (the wood didn't shift).  I've played some vintage Les Pauls that were well under 8lbs, had sustain for days and tone, Tone, TONE!

[Gitfiddler]

It all depends on the style of music one plays on chambered, semi-hollow or solid guitars.  Blues, Jazz, Fusion, R&B, Funk and some Pop stuff sounds fantastic on an articulate, musical, and lightweight instrument.  However, Country Western and Heavy Metal don't quite make the cut with those same instruments.

 

Some of the country's best luthiers are venturing into new waters with semi-hollow, chambered and interior carved gits., with incredible sonic results.  But they do not work for all music/playing styles.  And isn't that what's so darned cool about the guitar?  It is an extremely versatile, and ever-evolving instrument. 

 

All of this is just my opinion, however.  Your mileage may vary.

[skydog]

I only got to play one for about 5 minutes as the guy that ordered it and was picking it up wanted to leave. I found it in "no man's land". Sort of like a 335, and sort of like a traditional 150. not different enough to warrant getting one as i already have both the aforementioned!

[JohnCovach]

If you're looking for a lighter Les Paul style guitar, you might check out the Millennium 155.  I've got two of those and both are superb instruments.

[les paulverizer]

GITFIDDLER, you hit the proverbial nail on the head, it depends a lot by the style of music; I never thought of that.

I play Blues based Classic Rock, it's loud, high energy, definitely not Heavy Metal but aggressive (Nugent, Zep type) nevertheless; and I'm also a Country fan on the side too.....so you can see how your reply hit home with me.

I play "heavish" guitars but I tend to go for low/medium output pup's, my favorite at the moment are unpotted Seymour Duncan Antiquity's, so that I get the "body" from....hum...the body of my guitar, and all the "air" I need from the pup's.

As I said before, after reading your reply it all made more sense to me.

And I still subscribe to heavy bodied guitars.....period 8) ;D

[yoslate]

Nice thread!  A refreshing break from "Who's 'better'...."  I think Gitfiddler has this one reduced to simplest terms.  Whattya gonna do with it?  I'm a fan of everything from jazzbox to my wonderful, mighty heavy old Paul.  What I choose to play for a given application is usually a question of tone.  Tone usually boils down to p'up character and resonance.  I've always thought resonance a question of what's moving around most, air, or lumber and hardware?  I think that's one of the reasons many of us have several different guitars: different combinations of stuff moving around in differing proportions.  A chambered 150?  Not for me!  I don't see the point in a "compromise"  between lumber and air.  But that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.  I'll try not to be so technical in my next posting. 

[Cryoman]

Those broken "ears" are annoying.  I would not be happy.  I'd probably shape a flat wiith Exacto, razor blade, tiny plane, to which I could scarf in a small piece / block of replacement wood and then using the cover plate as my template mark & drill new, correctly positioned holes into the new small wood blocks.  I'd sleep better (for some strange reason) knowing that 4 screws (as per the guitar's design) held the cover plate on rather than 2...  If you sent it back to Heritage (at your expense and hassle), this is all they would/could do...

 

Bad news is that Heritage is not machining that back cavity (and ears) precisely enough OR they are not jigging the drilling operations to the ears well enough. Bad news in either case and something Heritage can easily and should immediately remedy.

 

Cheers, Cryoman

[Thundersteel]

I bought a piece of 1/8" maple stock to reinforce the ears once I glue them back in. That way, they will almost be double in thickness.

 

In a previous post, I mentioned that Guild Bluesbirds are hollow, but their routing of the control pocket is identical to a solidbody. Why Heritage didn't do that is beyond me.

[Kuz]

Chambered guitars do have their benefits. Robben Ford has played chambered guitars for years (his Fender sig, Baker, and the new Japanese American luthier he is using I forget the name).

Billy Gibbons who is recognize for serious vintage tone, has his signature Gretch chambered.

 

PRS is chambering (wt relieving) all their single cuts with the exception of the Tremonti. Their 255 which is marketed for heavy metal is even wt relieved.

 

One point of interest for tone is if the guitar is weight relieved or chambered there is a difference. Weight relived is done like swiss cheese all over the body and is designed to retain the original "solid body" tone- I think PRS does an excellent job of this I can't tell the difference, although some say they can. Chambered guitars are just that chambered to effect the tone, more semi-hollow sounding.

 

Now If we can find outif these which company makes true chambered vs true wt relieved, we can see if this tone is for us (I know PRS is wt relieved but have some limited runs on chambered semi-hollow guitars. Gibbys LP are wt relieved although I was told their method is less reliable than PRS is, I don't know if  Heritage uses wt relived or chambered)

 

Hope that helps!