Anatomy of a Cloud 9

[DANELECTRO]

I received my CR8 last week from Music Machine. It weighs in at 7.41 lbs and sounds terrific. One of the things I had to do shortly after first plugging it in and jamming on, was to remove the covers to check out the internal routing. This guitar is really hollowed out. Basically, the back and sides of the guitar are about ½” thick. Since there have been questions here on the forum about the degree of chambering, I figured I try to clear a few things up. But, first things first, let me introduce you to CR84018…



Here are a few photos looking into the cavity pockets:









The pickup routing is identical to a standard Historic RI, although the wire channel is wider.



To be continued.....

[DANELECTRO]

A couple of years ago, I started to create a 3D CAD model of a Les Paul. I had planned to model every piece down to the last detail, but I never got around to completing it. I did have the body completed so it was a good starting point to create a model showing the chambering of the Cloud 9 body.

I performed a proctology examination on my guitar using calipers, mirrors and a few other instruments. I was able to measure the internal chamber dimensions with reasonable accuracy. I then modified my CAD model to represent the chambering. The images below show the internal features of the Cloud 9 body and how they compare to that of a standard Historic body.

Note that much of the routing is done after the maple cap has been glued on, so I've depicted the slab as it would look prior to applying the maple cap, and then as if you removed the maple cap after all routing has been completed.









And now for a math lesson…

One of the benefits of having an accurate 3D CAD model is that I can also extract mass properties information. I found that the volume of an R9’s mahogany slab is 244 cu/in. The volume of a Cloud 9 slab is 149 cu/in, a difference of 95 cu/in. I found a useful website (About Various Woods ) which lists the specific gravity of the various species of wood used for guitar building. According to the website, Honduran Mahogany varies between .40-.68, averaging about .60. A specific gravity of .60 equates to .0216 lbs/cu-in. Thus, the mahogany slab of an average Historic Les Paul would be 5.27 lbs. The slab on an average Cloud 9 would be only 3.22 lbs. Given that a Les Paul were made from an average weight chunk of mahogany, it would weigh about 2.05 lbs less if the body were chambered.

[DANELECTRO]

It appears as though once the body has been chambered and the maple top is glued on, then all of the pocket routing (pickups, switch, control) is identical to that of a standard Historic.

One thing that I found peculiar is that the angled rout in the bottom of the control cavity (which also includes the so called "chew marks") of my guitar was done after the guitar body was filled, tinted, and lacquered. I'm not sure why this is, unless somehow this step was inadvertantly missed when the body was made. I don't see any production-related reason to have done this afterwards.

[DANELECTRO]

By the way, kudos go out to Nathan at Music Machine. He held this guitar for me for about a month while I searched for a new owner for my R8 to help fund it. This really worked to my advantage, because the cost of the guitar dropped several times while it was on hold, plus he upgraded my case to a Lifton and threw in a few more perks as well.

[moonweasel]

Danelectro,

HOLY CRAP. GREAT post. Thank you!

I was under the impression that Cloud 9's were just swiss cheesed out to make them lighter. I actually designed an LP like this in my head once... Sort of a Les Paul Es-336.....

You might have just sold me on one...

[clayville]

:dude
very nice guitar, and very nice thread

[Gitfiddler]

Danelectro:

Excellent CAD work!

Interesting how similar the C9 interior looks compared to a USA LP Supreme!!

[55Custom]

Danelectro -- fantastic work!

3 weeks ago I posted a link here to the Frampton LP at Gibson -- the one that's been there for years, and shows a pic of how the guitar is chambered.
Since that thread Gibson has taken down that webpage. My, what a coincidence.
Did anyone save a copy of that pic to compare to the cloud 9? I don't see how they differ.

[Aris]

danelectro, what finish is that - washed cherry?

great pics.

[CR9]

Danelectro...FANTASTIC job. I wish I would have saved the Frampton chamber photo, but from memory, yours is pretty exact if not completely exact. Just a little different from the Supreme as you can tell when you look into the control cavity. Now all we need is someone to x-ray a Cloud 9 for us....

[C-4]

Suberb post and math! Congradulations on joining the Cloud Nine Player's Club, and for the amazing calculations!
Upon looking at my Cloud Nine and my 356, I noticed very similar routing to both guitars, but nothing compared to your super disection, Dano!
Stephen

[sparky]

55Custom,
the Frampton LP is still on the Custom Shop site.
http://www.gibsoncustom.com/flash/pr...rFrampton.html

[stompbox]

Originally Posted by DANELECTRO

It appears as though once the body has been chambered and the maple top is glued on, then all of the pocket routing (pickups, switch, control) is identical to that of a standard Historic.

One thing that I found peculiar is that the angled rout in the bottom of the control cavity (which also includes the so called "chew marks") of my guitar was done after the guitar body was filled, tinted, and lacquered. I'm not sure why this is, unless somehow this step was inadvertantly missed when the body was made. I don't see any production-related reason to have done this afterwards.

what is the yellow spray on the maple in the cavity?

[DANELECTRO]

Originally Posted by stompbox

what is the yellow spray on the maple in the cavity?

Overspray from the lacquer clearcoat on the back.

[55Custom]

sparky, that's the new Frampton link, which doesn't show the chambering picture. The old one, from 2000, did and it was still available in Gibson's archives as of 4-13-05 when it was discussed here. The chambering looked just like the scans posted above.

[blauserk]

Originally Posted by 55Custom

sparky, that's the new Frampton link, which doesn't show the chambering picture. The old one, from 2000, did and it was still available in Gibson's archives as of 4-13-05 when it was discussed here. The chambering looked just like the scans posted above.

I saved the Frampton photo and hosted it. Here's a photo. I haven't done a detailed comparison to Danelectro's CADs, but I agree with 55Custom--it looks quite similar to me.

[wilder]

Originally Posted by DANELECTRO

By the way, kudos go out to Nathan at Music Machine. He held this guitar for me for about a month while I searched for a new owner for my R8 to help fund it. This really worked to my advantage, because the cost of the guitar dropped several times while it was on hold, plus he upgraded my case to a Lifton and threw in a few more perks as well.

I'm glad it all worked out. I'm still really enjoying your old R8. I'll be taking it to the studio this evening for some recording. Great pics of the Cloud 9! The whole time I was looking at the pics I was wondering how much the removed wood would weigh. It seems from your calculations that many of the Cloud 9s would be well over 9 lbs if not chambered. This makes it seem that they could have been made even lighter if Gibson had chosen to do so. However, If they were much lighter, I doubt they would balance well enough to be acceptable. One would think that these body blanks would have to have been carefully selected with this in mind. I guess there's no way to know for sure since we don't know the specific gravity of this wood exactly, but it's interesting to think about.

Chris

[Dave Carpenter]

The great thing about Cloud Nines is that they are built with “Historic Spec Woods”. I had Gibson build many variations of Chambered Les Pauls before the Cloud Nine series, but I could never get them to use Historic Spec Woods. The Cloud Nine run would not have been this successful or as great if the guitar would have been built to an exact Historic appearance and then not used Historic Spec Woods. For me and the two other great dealers, it was all about the woods. I worked for a long time to bring about the Cloud Nine series of guitars for my good friend Tom Ivory. Tom has real back trouble and wanted a great Gibson guitar that looked and felt in his hands like the best of the 59 Reissues he had played, just less weight. Initially I had ideas about how we might chamber them, but Mike McGuire said trust me. He said that he had done a lot of R&D and knew just what to do. Mike built the prototype and then myself, Dave Rogers and Steve Mesple flew out to play it and we were greatly impressed. I am so glad to see so many other people enjoying this great guitar series. It is very gratifying.

[Mike R.]

This is a great thread. Informative and awesome photos. Very nice.

[Kossoff_Fan]

I love my Cloud 9. Best guitar I've ever owned. :dude

Thanks for the great pics and CAD drawings Danelectro!

Kudos to Dave Carpenter and everyone involved in the Cloud 9 series. And thank you to Mark Bishop for the Cloud 9 I bought from him.

:dude

[Rayvyn]

Great post... I had some pictures of the Class 5 chambering a while back (can't find it right now) and it was nothing like this... The class 5 chambers looked like a maze running up and down almost the entire body... I guess there is a big difference between weight relief and tonal chambering...

[clayville]

Dave's comment about the chambering R&D got me wondering about the history of development for the 336/356, the chambered models, the Johnny A and others that started as solid mahogany... and I don't mean to hijack off into oblivion... but can anyone relate a succinct sort of timeline history of the weight-reliefed or otherwise heavily routed models? Which came first, and so on?

[58lespaulman]

I agree that the Cloud 9 chambering and the Framton Chambering is exactly the same.. This makes perfect sence.. Why would they retool just to make a series.. why not just make the framton guitar with Historic outer apperance.. And everybody would love it because it looks like the historics we all love.. This was all Marketing, and a good job at it...

[Cream Fan]

Anybody own a Frampton who could compare it weight-wise to the Cloud 9s? Obviously, the third pickup would add something.

[donw35]

That C9 looks just like my 97 florentine...

[DANELECTRO]

Originally Posted by Aris

danelectro, what finish is that - washed cherry?

great pics.

Iced Tea

[tele00]

Well ( most of you ) will be happy to know that LPNV59's cloud nine now has a new home, A proud owner , and a set of Filmores......This guitar is a BLAST to play ....THANKS MARK'S ....and if anyone is Gassing for the iced tea CR9 at Marks site.....it is even nicer in person..........Fantastic images Danelectro..I'm sure you spent quite a bit of time on this one :dude

http://members.aol.com/Telecaster00/newhome.jpg

[Aris]

man, those iced tea finishes are killer.

[transblack59]

Great post!!!

[56jnr]

Fascinating thread! I`m curious if a C9 is similar,tonally to a 336 which employs the same construction principle.Also how does the average C9 compare to the average R9?

[stonertone]

Well done !!! I got mine from MM and its incredible.

[Yardbird Mac]

Originally Posted by DANELECTRO

A couple of years ago, I started to create a 3D CAD model of a Les Paul. I had planned to model every piece down to the last detail, but I never got around to completing it. I did have the body completed so it was a good starting point to create a model showing the chambering of the Cloud 9 body.

I performed a proctology examination on my guitar using calipers, mirrors and a few other instruments. I was able to measure the internal chamber dimensions with reasonable accuracy. I then modified my CAD model to represent the chambering. The images below show the internal features of the Cloud 9 body and how they compare to that of a standard Historic body.

Note that much of the routing is done after the maple cap has been glued on, so I've depicted the slab as it would look prior to applying the maple cap, and then as if you removed the maple cap after all routing has been completed.









And now for a math lesson…

One of the benefits of having an accurate 3D CAD model is that I can also extract mass properties information. I found that the volume of an R9’s mahogany slab is 244 cu/in. The volume of a Cloud 9 slab is 149 cu/in, a difference of 95 cu/in. I found a useful website (About Various Woods ) which lists the specific gravity of the various species of wood used for guitar building. According to the website, Honduran Mahogany varies between .40-.68, averaging about .60. A specific gravity of .60 equates to .0216 lbs/cu-in. Thus, the mahogany slab of an average Historic Les Paul would be 5.27 lbs. The slab on an average Cloud 9 would be only 3.22 lbs. Given that a Les Paul were made from an average weight chunk of mahogany, it would weigh about 2.05 lbs less if the body were chambered.

Hope this clears things up a bit. Now, if I could just figure out why my wife sometimes calls me a nerd.

Just out of curiosity... what CAD program did you use for this project? I dabble a little with INVENTOR R6 and ALIBRE' Design. I thought I might try a solid model (carved top and all) at some point.

[jeffcoop]

Thanks for these posts, Danelectro--and great work!

[jwalker]

Wow, nice CR8! I love the hint of flame.

[tele00]

Originally Posted by 56jnr

Fascinating thread! I`m curious if a C9 is similar,tonally to a 336 which employs the same construction principle.Also how does the average C9 compare to the average R9?

After playing my new cloud nine ...Heres my impression.....

My old 336 didnt seem to sustain as long as the C9.....the decay was closer to that of my 335s....and the tone was a bit thinner on the 336..although the (semi hollowish ) overtones and warm round notes were simmilar.....

Its hard to explain but you can actually " feel " the notes bouncing around and reverberating in the C9 as you play it through an amp that is pushed to overdrive....and you can anticipate the feedback as you feel it prior to it happening ( yet it is very controlable ) ...

I also have a Very light R9 ( 7lbs/ 14 oz ) That also has a soft attack , but there is more seperation between the notes and fewer overtones ...its just more defined....and a bit more agressive.....and as the notes sustain they stay more consistant to their original charachter.......

Keep in mind none of the electronics were the same in these guitars

the C9 has a set of Filmores
the 336 had 57 classics
my lemonburst r9 has Tims..

But I will say that what is felt acoustically in all these guitars...mimics the " plugged in " results that I described above....in many ways

and for those who have never played a cloud 9 unplugged..the acoustic volume is suprising...These are VERY cool guitars.......

[Dave Carpenter]

Originally Posted by clayville

Dave's comment about the chambering R&D got me wondering about the history of development for the 336/356, the chambered models, the Johnny A and others that started as solid mahogany... and I don't mean to hijack off into oblivion... but can anyone relate a succinct sort of timeline history of the weight-reliefed or otherwise heavily routed models? Which came first, and so on?

I can't be succinct, but weight Relieving has been around. The chambering we know and love now comes about with the hiring of Mike McGuire. Mike was the previous owner of Valley Arts Guitar Company in Los Angeles. The time period when Mike owned Valley Arts was the hey day of the session players in LA and all of the session players hung out at Mike’s facility where he made custom guitars to satisfy the needs of these great players. A guitar like the CS 336 came about with Mike at the helm and a serious commitment and belief on Gibson’s part in what Mike might be able to do with the new tooling. Once Mike convinced Rick to convince Gibson to invest in the tooling to do the 336 it made new exciting models possible. The investment on Gibson’s part was huge. But now we can have a Frampton, Florentine, and yes The Cloud Nine series. It is a wonderful team they have assembled at the Gibson Custom Shop and I am looking forward to the future.

[DANELECTRO]

Originally Posted by Yardbird Mac

Just out of curiosity... what CAD program did you use for this project? I dabble a little with INVENTOR R6 and ALIBRE' Design. I thought I might try a solid model (carved top and all) at some point.

I used Pro/Engineer. The guitar thing started about 6-7 years ago when I picked up a book called "The Fender Stratocaster" by A.R. Duchossoir. In the book are a number of Fender's engineering drawings for the Stratocaster. I thought it would cool to model a guitar in 3D, so on my lunch hour each day, I would work on creating the solid models of the various parts of the Strat. There weren't drawings for all of the parts, so I used my own Strat as a reference, measuring the parts with calipers. Eventually, I modeled every part of the guitar and put them all together in an assembly. I scanned in wood textures and applied them to the surfaces of the models, so I was able to get a somewhat photo-realistic model when it was shaded. Next, I decided to model a Les Paul, but I got burnt out and never finished it. I just started to seem too much like work. Anyway, I found my old files on a backup CD and used those as the stating point for the Cloud 9 models above. Here's a few images of the original Strat model that I created.







This is as far as the Les Paul got:

[Dave Carpenter]

Originally Posted by Rayvyn

Great post... I had some pictures of the Class 5 chambering a while back (can't find it right now) and it was nothing like this... The class 5 chambers looked like a maze running up and down almost the entire body... I guess there is a big difference between weight relief and tonal chambering...

A Class 5 is a completely different animal from any of the chambered guitar products. It’s origins come from the success of weight relieving experiments. A heavier back billet has a very direct tone and it was found that the essence of this tone could be retained, yet the weight relieved, by the use of strategic weight relief pockets. The customers that love the Gibson Class 5 tend to be very good players who sometimes go from the cleanest clean sound to heavily distorted sounds. I am told that the weight relieving in a Class Five has the most neutral effect on the tone and chambering like in the Cloud Nines has the maximum effect on the tone. I know people who have, understand and use all three for different things. By three I mean, Historics, Class 5, and Chambered. Gibson is giving us an ever larger pallet of sounds to choose from.

[Dave Carpenter]

Originally Posted by DANELECTRO

A couple of years ago, I started to create a 3D CAD model of a Les Paul. I had planned to model every piece down to the last detail, but I never got around to completing it. I did have the body completed so it was a good starting point to create a model showing the chambering of the Cloud 9 body.

I performed a proctology examination on my guitar using calipers, mirrors and a few other instruments. I was able to measure the internal chamber dimensions with reasonable accuracy. I then modified my CAD model to represent the chambering. The images below show the internal features of the Cloud 9 body and how they compare to that of a standard Historic body.

Note that much of the routing is done after the maple cap has been glued on, so I've depicted the slab as it would look prior to applying the maple cap, and then as if you removed the maple cap after all routing has been completed.









And now for a math lesson…

One of the benefits of having an accurate 3D CAD model is that I can also extract mass properties information. I found that the volume of an R9’s mahogany slab is 244 cu/in. The volume of a Cloud 9 slab is 149 cu/in, a difference of 95 cu/in. I found a useful website (About Various Woods ) which lists the specific gravity of the various species of wood used for guitar building. According to the website, Honduran Mahogany varies between .40-.68, averaging about .60. A specific gravity of .60 equates to .0216 lbs/cu-in. Thus, the mahogany slab of an average Historic Les Paul would be 5.27 lbs. The slab on an average Cloud 9 would be only 3.22 lbs. Given that a Les Paul were made from an average weight chunk of mahogany, it would weigh about 2.05 lbs less if the body were chambered.

Hope this clears things up a bit. Now, if I could just figure out why my wife sometimes calls me a nerd.

This is awesome! Very good work! With very good reason you selected the average weight range of Mahogany to use for your calculations. Most of us would do that exact same thing. However by a selection process the Historic Les Paul uses the lightest weight wood. By selection the top can be very heavy as it is eastern maple. To get that sound from the golden era this is a must in the recipe for a Historic Les Paul. If we consider the weight contribution of the hardware and pick ups which is about two pounds, a back of 5.27 pounds would only allow for a contribution of under two pounds for the neck and the top of the body. I know it would be too much to ask you model the carved top and the neck, but it would sure be cool and very interesting for all. If you modeled the neck and the top and accounted for the hardware we could zero in on the weight reduction from the chambering. I am in South Bend right now working to set up my new Custom Shop showcase and I do not have my notes, my notes are at home in Kennewick. From memory I believe Gibson calculated around 1 and ½ pounds weight reduction from the chambering, using the lightweight Historic woods. If I get a chance I will call Steve Mesple and Dave Rogers to see if they still have their notes handy. Thanks so much for your efforts. I love your work. Your work is very enlightening.

[catfood]

Has anybody got any photos or anatomy details for the CS336?