Diff. Between SG and LP

WITH FULL DISTORTION

F. Hails Railsologist
Hails guys. i want to make sure i know all the tonal/sound differences btween gibson SG and gibson Les paul.

can you clear all that to me?
which one has more sustain, which one has MORE BOTTOM END, MORE MIDS, MORE HIGHS, MORE CRUNCHY, MORE UNHOLY SOUND?
ahahahahaha
HAILS
J.P
 
Re: Diff. Between SG and LP

a Les Paul has a smoother, sweeter tone, with a bit more sustain and bottom. It's kind of hard to play, with the clumsy heel and single cutaway.

an SG is more rude and grungy. It's lighter than a Les Paul, and easier to play on the upper frets. Easier than a strat, IMO.

For a classic LP tone, listen to Gary Moore and Slash.

For classic SG, Pete Townshend, Angus Young and Tony Iommi. I find Tony Iommi's tone in particular, to be just what you described.
Frank Zappa also used an SG a lot. If his tone ain't rude and obscene, i don't know what is... Not really metal, tho.
 
Re: Diff. Between SG and LP

How a guitar plays is a personal thing and I actually find LPs the easiest of guitars to play.....they fit me like a glove. I have a hard time playing anything that is not a singlecut, angled neck design. LP....PRS Singlecuts...etc.
 
Re: Diff. Between SG and LP

To me LP's have more bottom end and smoother highs. The SG has killer mids and crunch. But both have awesome sustain and an unholy sound.
 
Re: Diff. Between SG and LP

The Les paul has a deeper bottom end, more high end, and the mids are lower. The SG is more open sounding to me with a nice mid quality. Both guitars have a full, warm tone to my ears.

Neither is better than the other IMO, just different.

MCG
 
Re: Diff. Between SG and LP

Dirtyking said:
To me LP's have more bottom end and smoother highs. The SG has killer mids and crunch. But both have awesome sustain and an unholy sound.
Yep.

I do like the bite that the SG has. And I find it extremely playable...but that's personal preference. I just can't work the LP due to the heel.
 
Back
Top