Help! I Thought All Les Pauls Were The Same...

jaxn slim said:
They definitely serve a purpose. Scale length, pickups, building materials, etc. can give you about 90% of an idea what the guitar will sound like. YMMV They explain obvious differences, like why a strat won't sound like an SG, or something substantial like that. And if you know that there's one spec that especially tickles your fancy, it helps you narrow down options.
Click to expand...

so if i know that a certain bridge feels right and i'm looking for that, why is that acceptable, but something as important as how the neck is attached to the body isn't?

But unless someone already knows exactly what they want the guitar to sound like, why rule anything out? If you just want a guitar that sounds and feels exceptional for a good price, you probably want to cast a wide net, right?
Click to expand...

so for those of us who do know exactly what they want a guitar to sound like, the how the neck is attached is reasonable criteria. just not for the unwashed masses?

Why do they keep changing? Probably a dozen reasons. It definitely keeps people talking about them.
Click to expand...

we agree here. guitarists will believe just about anything you put in marketing copy, just as long as Jimmy Page played one.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
so if i know that a certain bridge feels right and i'm looking for that, why is that acceptable, but something as important as how the neck is attached to the body isn't?
Click to expand...

Because the style of bridge impacts several aspects of how you play the guitar and how it sounds. When you get into minutia like different types of metals and shapes of saddles, it's when I lose faith. Sort of like long and short tenons which could impact the sound, but they don't consistently. It's probably comparable to the difference between one mahogany tree and the one right next to it in the forest.

so for those of us who do know exactly what they want a guitar to sound like, the how the neck is attached is reasonable criteria. just not for the unwashed masses?
Click to expand...
Neck-through design vs. bolt-on vs. glued on are all pretty substantial differences. Long tenon vs. short tenon is considerably less substantial.

we agree here. guitarists will believe just about anything you put in marketing copy, just as long as Jimmy Page played one.
Click to expand...

Yep
 
And I should clarify, it has nothing to do with unwashed masses. I have specs that I like more than others, but at the end of the day I just want as many great sounding guitars as I can afford - short scale, long scale, Bigsby, Kahler, Wilkinson, long tenon, bolt-on, neck-through, short tenon - they can (and in the case of mine DO!) all sound good.

Hell, my Danelectro isn't anything all that great on paper, but it sounds and feels fantastic!
 
Last edited:
jaxn slim said:
Because the style of bridge impacts several aspects of how you play the guitar and how it sounds. When you get into minutia like different types of metals and shapes of saddles, it's when I lose faith. Sort of like long and short tenons which could impact the sound, but they don't consistently. It's probably comparable to the difference between one mahogany tree and the one right next to it in the forest.


Neck-through design vs. bolt-on vs. glued on are all pretty substantial differences. Long tenon vs. short tenon is considerably less substantial.
Click to expand...

it's about cost cutting and consistency. companies have enough difficulty just keeping consistency with their wood supply. introducing manufacturing shortcuts only invites unwanted variation.

Yep
Click to expand...

see, we can agree on something! you're coming around! :grin:
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
it's about cost cutting and consistency. companies have enough difficulty just keeping consistency with their wood supply. introducing manufacturing shortcuts only invites unwanted variation.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying any of that. But they can cut costs and be inconsistent and still manage to make some stellar instruments every now and then. The Norlin years might have been their darkest era, but there are some really impressive '70s and '80s Gibsons out there.

see, we can agree on something! you're coming around! :grin:
Click to expand...
We agree on a lot of things. Particularly when it comes to New Jersey.
 
jaxn slim said:
But they can cut costs and be inconsistent and still manage to make some stellar instruments every now and then.
Click to expand...

again, this is just me, but that's just not good enough. there's enough competition out there that somebody is making a better instrument at every pricepoint, with significantly fewer consistency issues and design flaws. but i'm also one of those people who doesn't have to have a certain brand. i just want the best instrument. that's where specs come in. it allows me to separate what i want from what i will accept from what i won't touch with Baimun's disc sander.
 
Last edited:
Help!I'maRock! said:
again, this is just me, but that's just not good enough. there's enough competition out there that somebody is making a better instrument at every pricepoint, with significantly fewer consistency issues and design flaws. but i'm also one of those people who doesn't have to have a certain brand. i just want the best instrument.
Click to expand...

Did I ever tell you how badly I fell in love with that McCarty I used to have? It was so articulate and comfortable, I felt like it was the new ONE. I rehearsed with it, gigged with it. We had some good times. Then I picked up my Les Paul again and immediately noticed the difference in sound and feel. I then put the McCarty back in its case for a few months until I eventually sold it. :embarrassed:
 
jaxn slim said:
Did I ever tell you how badly I fell in love with that McCarty I used to have? It was so articulate and comfortable, I felt like it was the new ONE. I rehearsed with it, gigged with it. We had some good times. Then I picked up my Les Paul again and immediately noticed the difference in sound and feel. I then put the McCarty back in its case for a few months until I eventually sold it. :embarrassed:
Click to expand...

OTOH, i absolutely loved the sound of my SG and hated everything about how it played. when replacing it, i felt the same way about the Les Pauls i tried. my PRS solved all the playability problems and gave me the tone i was looking for.

IMO, there is no correct answer other than "yes, this is the one". the trick is, when you find that instrument, not buying 30 more in an attempt to recreate it. that's why i stopped buying guitars.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
OTOH, i absolutely loved the sound of my SG and hated everything about how it played. when replacing it, i felt the same way about the Les Pauls i tried. my PRS solved all the playability problems and gave me the tone i was looking for.

IMO, there is no correct answer other than "yes, this is the one". the trick is, when you find that instrument, not buying 30 more in an attempt to recreate it. that's why i stopped buying guitars.
Click to expand...

Hey! 30?! Get out of my head!
 
Sorry to open up such a big can of worms.

Since I am being mistaken for Jack Black due to the name I picked, does this mean that I will be getting a bunch of free gear?
 
I have 4 Les Paul's, and each one is different. As far as differences between the Studio and Standard (and up) models -- besides the cosmetics, they are using better woods on the higher models. Still, that doesn't necessarily make it a better guitar. It's the law of diminishing returns after awhile, I think.

Also, obviously Howie prefers PRS to Gibson, and I get that. But, like everything else, it's a matter of opinion. Although they're clearly great guitars, I personally do not care for PRS -- they don't fit my hand the way I like, and they don't sound like a Les Paul to me. YMMV.
 
You guys are killing me because I had to go to Youtube to see what a PRS Custom 24 is all about.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
essentially, a Custom 24 is a strat/LP hybrid. as soon as you make the scale 25" and give it humbuckers and an overbuilt fender style vibrato, you completely remove any ability to sound like it's predecessors. it's a different beast altogether. IMO, it has more to do with Ibanez, Jackson, and Charvel superstrats, and the "blingification" of them, than it does Fenders and Gibsons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top