• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Is 9.4 lbs considered real heavy for a 2019 R6?

poor man's burst

Active member
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
186
Yeah…for a factory relic maybe ! but aside from the binding, its not a terrible job , if that really was an attempt to relic the guitar
My bad. I was kind of kidding, as I hadn't looked carefully at the picture of inside the cutaway...Ooops!
 

tuumbaq

New member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
17
Congrats 👍
Now your next project is google how to age the plastics and hardware lightly (or search this forum for that info maybe?)
Then you'll have a cool LP R6, near perfect relic'ed..
Thanks man, I might actually try to give it a legit aged look !
 
Last edited:

pdfiddler

Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
92
The average for the original '58s was 9.14 lbs. I always thought the gold finish was a tad heavier (can't prove).
I would take that one home, by the way.
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
4,548
If the neck is good I would buy it.

The weight is well within range.

The checking don't make me askeered...
I agree with you and 9lbs is ideal for me and it will translate into the tone which you should love . Big neck and 9lbs = Big Tone ! A winner every time !
 

axeman565758

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
1,064
$2350.00 (US dollars I assume) for an R6 (especially a 2019) is a great price. Yes, 9.4 lbs is heavy, for any guitar. If the "damage" is only cosmetic, then there's no problem as long as you're ok with it. However I'm skeptical about the " taken out of the case too quickly " story. My guess is someone along the line tried home relicing. It doesn't look terrible though.
As for the neck adding weight, the weight difference between a typical R0 (say .840") and an R7/8 (say .930") is maybe 3-4 ounces. I know this first hand, as I was furnished with this info directly from Gibson Custom when I had my M2M R0 built last year. the differences fall primarily in the body weight. In my experience I haven't heard a difference in tone between big necks and thinner ones. But as always, tone is in the ear...etc...
The bottom line is, if you like the neck, are ok with the minor cosmetic "damage" and are ok with the weight, I'd jump on that before it's too late
Below is a pic from my build. My body is the 6 lb 8 oz body blank. My '20 60th Anniv R0 came in at 8 lbs even, including Grovers. BTW, unfinished, my neck at the 1st fret was over 1"....finished 1.015"
IMG_2575.JPG
 

Sol

Active member
Joined
Oct 26, 2001
Messages
746
When compared with recent Custom Shop Les Pauls, a weight of 9.4 lb can seem a little on the heavy side, but a 1950s Les Paul at 9.4 lb would not be considered heavy, and well within the normal range for a Les Paul of this period.
 

AA00475Bassman

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
3,361
Many on this board would pass 9.4 like the plague , a mile marker , 9.4 is a fine weight for a Les Paul I would buy it . There is some real nasty bitter tasting light weight KOOL - Aid on this board ! Say this ten times
Weight
does
not
define
a
guitar
Now go buy the Gold Top !
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
4,548
Many on this board would pass 9.4 like the plague , a mile marker , 9.4 is a fine weight for a Les Paul I would buy it . There is some real nasty bitter tasting light weight KOOL - Aid on this board ! Say this ten times
Weight
does
not
define
a
guitar
Now go buy the Gold Top !
I have several R9's that are in the low 8'lbs and I don't care for their tone versus the heavier ones . One of them has the Tele on steroids tone and while that is okay I still don't shop (or care for ) and pay for a R series Les Paul to sound like a Tele . The boat anchor heavy Les Paul's have never disappointed my ears and have tone for days . I don't get how people want feather weight , light weight Les Paul's or for that matter weight relieved Les Paul's as the weight/mass = tone , which is such an integral ingredient for tone from Gibson Les Paul . To each there own as we all have choices , but for me I like a nice meaty mid range growling and snarling beast of a 9lb Les Paul , which pairs so nicely with my Marshall 2555X's .
 

Peter M

New member
Joined
Aug 19, 2021
Messages
19
I've never owned a LP under 9lbs. (except for one Tribute at 8.5 lbs. which felt "too light"). I think 9lbs. or a little over feels right on a Paul.

BTW the checking on that Gold Top looks very cool.
 

MikeSlub

Administrator
Joined
Jul 15, 2001
Messages
14,906
That weight isn't too bad. Here is a link to my post of weights of vintage Les Pauls from 1952-1960.

 

Brek

Member
Joined
May 23, 2020
Messages
43
I had a 2003 R6 that weighed 9.4lbs, it wasn't as heavy as i expected on the 'shoulder'. But would say its the top end of weight for a reissue.
 

Sol

Active member
Joined
Oct 26, 2001
Messages
746
What stands out in regards to MikeSlub's post is that the weight of his Les Pauls are entirely random in nature.
While they (his Les Pauls) may represent a small cross section, they cover the entire Les Paul period, 1952 - 1960 (eight years)

The details provided in' Beauty of the Burst 'cover a period from mid 1958 to late 1960, (2.5 yrs) and are highly selective. Some construction details are given, others, such as weight are left blank, and yet this narrow window in time has been used at least in part, to establish that vintage bursts weigh approx 8.75lb.
Adding MikeSlub's Les Pauls to those recorded in the 'Beauty of the Burst' provides us a little more information on which to base our observations.
 
Top