# ESP Eclipse owners, enlight me!



## Duraesu (Oct 10, 2012)

So, i'm planning to get a ESP Eclipse, but i'm torn between the regular version and the Full Thickness version.

For those who actually owned both, is there such a huge difference in weight and sound? the FT looks better to me but i want to keep my shoulder and back healthy and pain free when gigging 

If someone could weight them and tell me how much both weight i would really apreciate it! 

For example, i have a '95 Gibby studio that weights 4kg and something, and after an 1h standing up the weight starts taking its toll... 

...so, am i being a p*ssy and just need to beef up (lol) or this actually makes sense?


cheers guys!


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 10, 2012)

I was actually really surprised at just how much heavier the full thickness is compared to a regular Eclipse II Standard and even a Les Paul Custom. I remember the full thickness I tried being around a pound and a half heavier than the 90's Les Paul Custom, and a full two or so pounds more than the Eclipse Standard. As for tone, while the full thickness was much louder unplugged, once plugged in it sounded nearly identical to the Standard. Both guitars had the SD combo and were played through a Rectoverb and TSL100. I will say that the Standard also felt significantly smaller thanks to the tummy cut. 

Basically, I don't think that the weight difference is anything that can't be compensated with a proper, padded strap. It's the feel that really gets you.


----------



## mniel8195 (Oct 10, 2012)

i gave my eclipse to my brother but what i can remember it was incredibly light. never played a full thickness.


----------



## Garnoch (Oct 10, 2012)

I have only an Alder full thickness so can't compare but can tell you I love it and it's 10 1/2 lbs.


----------



## jordanky (Oct 10, 2012)

My regular thickness (not the full thickness) Eclipse was right at 7lbs. Beautiful guitar and played GREAT, but when you're used to playing 12lb Les Paul's, it just doesn't feel right.


----------



## MetalDaze (Oct 10, 2012)

Someone on the lefty site I read just got a full thickness Eclipse. Here's what he said (not sure about the chambered comment)




> Ok guys, I think you're going to like this one......yesterday, my brand new ESP Eclipse FULL THICKNESS arrived. What is a full thickness Eclipse? It's an eclipse that has a massive body the same size as a Les Paul/Les Paul Custom. It's a tone machine basically.
> 
> I used to have a standard US Eclipse, but then I sold it to raise money to get this bad boy.....and damn was it worth it. The difference between a US Eclipse II and a (never allowed in the US before this year) US Eclipse II FT is like night and day. My "normal" Eclipse was thin sounding...not THIS THING! My god it kicks so much ass and it's a lot of fun to play. The ebony board on this thing is just blowing me away. It's a very classy model. I almost feel like I can play a wedding with this thing if I wanted to HAHA.
> 
> ...


----------



## capoeiraesp (Oct 11, 2012)

I own a non-FT eclipse (pictured below) and its definitely my go to guitar. I would certainly say its not 'thin' sounding at all. I have played FT eclipses before and have enjoyed the two equally, however I have never been able to discern a huge tonal difference between them. 

My mate recently got a satin black FT eclipse with emgs and already had a gloss black non-FT eclipse with Mick Thompson blackouts. Although he thinks the FT with emgs sounds better than any guitar he's heard with emgs he still prefers his non-FT. 

Personally, I prefer the non-FT eclipse because it's such a comfortable weight and my one in particular just rocks.


----------



## Duraesu (Oct 11, 2012)

so, some people say the FT is heavy, some say its not that heavy at all... maybe what is heavy to some is light for others, i dont know. I just know that more than 4kg is heavy for me 

and about the thin sound thingy...i've read that a quite a lot, but i'm guessing thats because of the EMG versions most people get. I'm pretty sure that with a nice pair of ballsy passives it will sound massive 

thanks people, i may stick to the regular versions! i'm actually considering a Viper but... the neck dive issue worries me.


cheers!


----------



## feraledge (Oct 11, 2012)

My standard Eclipse is on my never sell list. I love it. I haven't had a FT ESP Eclipse, but I had the LTD 400 series one and I didn't think the weight differences were super noticeable, but I'm not huge on Gibson LPs because of the thickness. 
But I wouldn't rule out the darker sound of a regular Eclipse, mine has a noticeably different tone than my old Horizon or any other mahogany body super strat or even my old Gibson Explorer, although the tone was closer to the Explorer than anything else. I'm sure the FT Eclipse is denser sounding, but if you're keeping the EMGs I agree that it'd be less noticeable than if you were using passives.


----------



## Duraesu (Oct 11, 2012)

feraledge said:


> My standard Eclipse is on my never sell list. I love it. I haven't had a FT ESP Eclipse, but I had the LTD 400 series one and I didn't think the weight differences were super noticeable, but I'm not huge on Gibson LPs because of the thickness.
> But I wouldn't rule out the darker sound of a regular Eclipse, mine has a noticeably different tone than my old Horizon or any other mahogany body super strat or even my old Gibson Explorer, although the tone was closer to the Explorer than anything else. I'm sure the FT Eclipse is denser sounding, but if you're keeping the EMGs I agree that it'd be less noticeable than if you were using passives.







yeah, and was thinking about what Max said about straps! makes sense. I was digging the webz about good straps for heavy guitars and i found these "Betty" straps from a company called Mono. They started off doing luggage and then they decided to venture on music stuff and they claim that their "betty" strap is pretty made for heavy guitars, all paded, all 'hightech' material and so on...supposedly makes the guitar feel lighter! and they are not expensive.

this gave me a second thought about the FT. But there's this guy on youtube that claims his FT weights about 10lbs, and that is super heavy by my standards! oh well... back to the start. I wish i could try a FT but i dont know anyone here in Portugal who actually owns one, not even stores. I tried out a regular Eclipse once and i really enjoyed it.


----------



## TemjinStrife (Oct 11, 2012)

10 lbs. is too heavy? Someone's clearly not a bass player!

My '78 P-bass weighs somewhere between 12 and 15 lbs.


----------



## feraledge (Oct 11, 2012)

_velkan said:


> yeah, and was thinking about what Max said about straps! makes sense. I was digging the webz about good straps for heavy guitars and i found these "Betty" straps from a company called Mono. They started off doing luggage and then they decided to venture on music stuff and they claim that their "betty" strap is pretty made for heavy guitars, all paded, all 'hightech' material and so on...supposedly makes the guitar feel lighter! and they are not expensive.
> 
> this gave me a second thought about the FT. But there's this guy on youtube that claims his FT weights about 10lbs, and that is super heavy by my standards! oh well... back to the start. I wish i could try a FT but i dont know anyone here in Portugal who actually owns one, not even stores. I tried out a regular Eclipse once and i really enjoyed it.



I'm a little skeptical about how much I'd put into a strap for making the experience of a guitar different. I imagine it'd make a difference, but if I think I'd need a special strap to make the weight of the guitar manageable, then I'd think twice about it. But I also have OCD about gear and have the same strap on every guitar. There are some things that I don't ever want to think about or change up when playing live.
The flip side of not trying out the FT Eclipse is that it's aiming to be LP specs. Obviously there will be some difference with the sound, but if you don't like the feel of a Gibson LP, then you won't like the FT Eclipse. The neck is the same on both ESPs, but for weight and feel, it's comparable to Gibson.


----------



## jordanky (Oct 11, 2012)

TemjinStrife said:


> 10 lbs. is too heavy? Someone's clearly not a bass player!
> 
> My '78 P-bass weighs somewhere between 12 and 15 lbs.



No kidding man. Our bass player uses a 70's model P-Bass and I think it weighs about 14lbs. Serious weight there.


----------



## Duraesu (Oct 11, 2012)

TemjinStrife said:


> 10 lbs. is too heavy? Someone's clearly not a bass player!
> 
> My '78 P-bass weighs somewhere between 12 and 15 lbs.






and thats why i'm not a bass player  just kidding, i actually like playing bass but with such weight...no thanks


----------



## xxx128 (Oct 13, 2012)

Garnoch said:


> I have only an Alder full thickness so can't compare but can tell you I love it and it's 10 1/2 lbs.



Please tell me more about that guitar. Thats not the Jeff Hanneman is it? Photos perhaps? Thanks, greatly appreciated.


----------



## Miek (Oct 14, 2012)

I'd go for the standard thickness unless you want the full thickness because the body's thicker. It is, in essence, an aesthetic decision in the purest sense.



MaxOfMetal said:


> I was actually really surprised at just how much heavier the full thickness is compared to a regular Eclipse II Standard and even a Les Paul Custom. I remember the full thickness I tried being around a pound and a half heavier than the 90's Les Paul Custom, and a full two or so pounds more than the Eclipse Standard. As for tone, while the full thickness was much louder unplugged, once plugged in it sounded nearly identical to the Standard. Both guitars had the SD combo and were played through a Rectoverb and TSL100. I will say that the Standard also felt significantly smaller thanks to the tummy cut.
> 
> Basically, I don't think that the weight difference is anything that can't be compensated with a proper, padded strap. It's the feel that really gets you.


I totally agree with you about the weight, but with some exceptions. Jesus, some of the old Ibanez Artists were fucking heavy.


----------



## Garnoch (Oct 14, 2012)

xxx128 said:


> Please tell me more about that guitar. Thats not the Jeff Hanneman is it? Photos perhaps? Thanks, greatly appreciated.



Yeah, exactly. I wanted a full thickness EC, but I wanted a Kahler more so I was going to buy a JH-600 this year. So when they announced the EC, it was perfect timing. I love it. Here are the pics you asked for....

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/standard-guitars/204861-ngd-esp-ltd-jh-600-ec.html#post3103992


----------



## Bloodbath Salt (Oct 26, 2012)

mniel8195 said:


> i gave my eclipse to my brother but what i can remember it was incredibly light. never played a full thickness.


 
True. It also makes them extremely top heavy and unbalanced. Go with the full thickness version.


----------



## rty13ibz98 (Oct 26, 2012)

i have an edwards sykes model and an LTD EC-400. both have duncans, but the EC has more top end and the notes are slighlty less full. it also lacks some of the sustain of the edwards, but neither of which sound bad. these are both my "les pauls" and represent 2 different schools of LP type tone. the mids are there, but the variations help in choosing what the track needs(studio only) and both are indispensable.

rich


----------



## feraledge (Oct 27, 2012)

Bloodbath Salt said:


> True. It also makes them extremely top heavy and unbalanced. Go with the full thickness version.



I had neck dive issues with 2 LTD ECs, a 400 and 1000 series, but not with my standard series Eclipse in the slightest despite having no real jump in weight.


----------



## 1b4n3z (Oct 27, 2012)

Me neither, very very comfortable guitar to play, the Eclipse. And I come from the superstrat world.


----------



## capoeiraesp (Oct 27, 2012)

Bloodbath Salt said:


> True. It also makes them extremely top heavy and unbalanced. Go with the full thickness version.



Total bollocks. My ESP eclipse balances perfectly well. To say that they're 'extremely' top heavy is an a overstatement even in situations where LTD versions are concerned.


----------



## vanhendrix (Oct 28, 2012)

I've also got a regular Eclipse-II. It hangs amazingly balanced and is about average weight for my fleet of guitars. It certainly isn't thin sounding plugged or unplugged. Love it


----------



## Duraesu (Oct 29, 2012)

thank you all for your input! i have decided a while ago and went with a FT... and its arriving today so expect a NGD today or tomorrow =) 

oh and its a... semi-custom 


cheers


----------



## Drowner (Oct 31, 2012)

Two completely different guitars, but for shape and size comparison only. I currently own an Eclipse II Standard, and have owned an Epi LP Custom in the past. The Epi sounded good, but the body was heavy and was uncomfortable to sit down with due to no cutaway the back. That was the only reason I sold it.


----------

