Great stuff guys, some really interesting thoughts.
 
What made me think of asking was that I was perusing the latest Gibson catalogue earlier and wondering:

1. If there were reasons for why the vast majority of electric guitars are shaped like acoustic guitars, if they don't need to be for any specific 'tonal' reason?
2. If the 'traditional' shape is used so often because it's comfy/ergonomic, was the reason for the introduction of Flying V and Explorer style guitars simply aesthetic, with no design consideration given to tonal properties of the shape?
3. Was the transition from the earliest 'frying pan' electrics to more traditional styles aesthetic, or merely to get more mass into the construction to improve tone?

i've built (or, had commissioned) 4 custom guitars....
 
3 strat style, one unique hybrid.
 
and all of them are completely different from each other, even when the body dimensions were the same......
there are so many variables that make a guitar sound the way it does, i don't think you can boil it down to body shape.
 
i've played 5 2008 VOS standard les pauls, back to back, and they ALL sounded and felt different.
same models, different color finishesj (and one had a different set of pickups), but acoustically, they were all different.
 
same woods, etc.....
 
 
some guys want a gretsch....
and you will not get that tone out of a strat....
etc etc, ad naseum.
 
i think ultimately, the 'why's?' don't matter as much as the hunt and discovery of one that really grabs your interest.
 
figure out WHY you like a certain thing, and then hone in on the ULTIMATE version of it.
 
you can buy a used Squire for, what, $90?
 
why does a guy spend $2500 on a vintage reissue strat?
$6500 for a 2014 reissue VOS 59 les paul?
Epiphone tribute plus paul for $699?

 

SteveStrummerUK
If there were reasons for why the vast majority of electric guitars are shaped like acoustic guitars, if they don't need to be for any specific 'tonal' reason?

 
Guitarists are largely traditionalists.
 

If the 'traditional' shape is used so often because it's comfy/ergonomic, was the reason for the introduction of Flying V and Explorer style guitars simply aesthetic, with no design consideration given to tonal properties of the shape?

 
Yes. They were designed purely to turn heads.
 

Was the transition from the earliest 'frying pan' electrics to more traditional styles aesthetic, or merely to get more mass into the construction to improve tone?

The basic idea of the solid body is that it's not supposed to take excess energy out of the string and convert it to acoustic energy, so you get more sustain.
 
 
However, the mass of the body relative to the neck can theoretically change the resonant frequency of neck.
 
 
IMO, the biggest real difference between body shapes is likely due to the neck joint. For instance a Les Paul has no upper cutaway and it supports the neck up to the 17th fret while an SG (with PU's, woods and everything else the same) has a notoriously unstable neck joint.

There is a difference in the wood where a tree grows. Before they use to use wood from trees grown on a side of a hill, because it would contain more minerals. Nowadays, trees grown in Plantations do not have the mineral content as trees from the Past because of that.
Density, and all of that of the wood plays a factor I would say in it. Some cuts of the same type wood, don't weigh as much, some weigh more, different trees, different minerals from the ground while the tree was growing, climate, and all of that also.
Wood ages also, along with the paint or outer layer of the guitar and what is used to make it.
 
In other words, if you had a Stradivarius Violin even if electrified into an amp, I think it would still sound different than another violin not made as well, as well as variances in any of that making a violin also.
 
There would be no need for prized musical instruments either then.
The moisture content of the wood, the way it is processed, all of that plays into how a guitar is made.
There are some videos on utube about wood and such for guitars.
 
 
 

I definitely agree that tone varies between instruments that for all intents and purposes are identical. I was more saying that despite that I've found I can generally know that certain characteristics will likely be present in certain body types. Like if I wanted a really bright and light tone I wouldn't pick up a big meaty Explorer. I'd reach for the SG.
 
But anecdotal evidence is obviously no replacement for hard science which is why I'd be curious to see an experiment done that took ALL parameters into account. Perhaps a good way would be to start with a large piece of wood that could be widdled down to various body styles somehow. Start with the largest body, do your tests, widdle it down to a medium sized body, do more tests then get down to the smallest. That way you are using the same piece of wood throughout. Unfortunately it would be very restricted as to which models could be tested on the same piece of wood because it would obviously be impossible to widdle a V or explorer into a Paul or an SG. lol

Proof that the guitar body isn't as important on electrics.  These little guys sound great and are SOOOO easy to take everywhere (especially on planes).  I put a set of Zackk Wylde EMG's in this one.  I must admit that at my size (6'4" & 250 lbs.) that it felt a bit like playing a toy though - lol!
 

One could argue though stick style guitars and basses have their own unique tonal qualities specifically because of their shape. Perhaps the near total absence of the body's resonance allows the electronics to be the focal point of the tone unimpeded.
 
;-p

This fred is shaping up nicely.
 
No matter what the shape of my (bass) guitar they all come out sounding like this one.

Beepster
 
But anecdotal evidence is obviously no replacement for hard science which is why I'd be curious to see an experiment done that took ALL parameters into account.

 
Unlike classical/acoustic instruments, for the most part there's not a lot of proper academic research with solid body instruments.
 
I have seen some things like a university student's paper formally testing different body woods in an electric guitar.
 
 
But it really doesn't matter, because in any audio related subject any science where the findings conflict with someone's belief systems is just rejected outright or ignored, so there's nothing to be gained by doing it.

I've pretty much reduced my preferences down to a guitar shape I really like (a Les Paul double-cut style with a tummy cut) made from a wood that won't break my back (like Korina - aka, Black Limba).  Then I add a neck that goes completely through the body which adds some serious sustain and better transfer of the string vibrations to the pickups (the second part of this is IMO - the first can definitely be verified).  Make the scale, number of frets and radius to my favorites and I'm happy. 
 
The exotic wood custom I sold to Space Cowboy was mostly made from wenge and weighed a ton, but would sustain for about two minutes - lol!