Les Paul standard vs. Studio
- Thread starter tumbler
- Start date
Lucid_Lunatic
Rebelyellologist
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
Maple is AA or AAA grade flamed, body binding, neck binding, pearl logo, from what I have experieced, the mahogany is a better grade on the back and neck. Sound is very similare between the two.
Maple is AA or AAA grade flamed, body binding, neck binding, pearl logo, from what I have experieced, the mahogany is a better grade on the back and neck. Sound is very similare between the two.
super rad stuff
Skaforlifeologist
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
standards also come with different pickups, but IMO they're not better, just different. basically you get higher grade wood, binding/pearloid headstock inlay, "better" paint, and different pickups(BBpros in the regular standard and '57s in the traditional). studios come with the 490r/498t set(which isn't half bad if you set them up right). if you really want the nicer looking one, go for it.
standards also come with different pickups, but IMO they're not better, just different. basically you get higher grade wood, binding/pearloid headstock inlay, "better" paint, and different pickups(BBpros in the regular standard and '57s in the traditional). studios come with the 490r/498t set(which isn't half bad if you set them up right). if you really want the nicer looking one, go for it.
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
this seems interesting, especially its price
http://www.thomann.de/fi/gibson_gary_moore_les_paul_bfg.htm
wonder how it sounds
this seems interesting, especially its price
http://www.thomann.de/fi/gibson_gary_moore_les_paul_bfg.htm
wonder how it sounds
Last edited:
projectx1106
New member
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
It's all aesthetics, really. There may be a "higher grade wood" and a brighter sounding maple cap, but there is no real sonic difference I believe.
It's all aesthetics, really. There may be a "higher grade wood" and a brighter sounding maple cap, but there is no real sonic difference I believe.
Boogie Bill
New member
ImmortalSix
John Mayer's Mankini
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
The look
The look
Boogie Bill
New member
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
I think Standards and Customs DO sound a bit different than Studios. I like the look and feel of the more expensive guitars. I have a beautiful Wine Red Studio that I bought brand new in 2006 and I never played; and now I'm selling it. A friend talked me into buying that guitar; but to me a Les Paul is a great burst finish with some tasteful inlay and binding.
If all you need are the basics, the Studio is a good value.
Bill
I think Standards and Customs DO sound a bit different than Studios. I like the look and feel of the more expensive guitars. I have a beautiful Wine Red Studio that I bought brand new in 2006 and I never played; and now I'm selling it. A friend talked me into buying that guitar; but to me a Les Paul is a great burst finish with some tasteful inlay and binding.
If all you need are the basics, the Studio is a good value.
Bill
projectx1106
New member
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
I value your argument, but some find more simplistic guitars more comfortable and easy to abuse :14:
I value your argument, but some find more simplistic guitars more comfortable and easy to abuse :14:
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
I bought a new classic white studio at a MF year end blowout in 2006 for $999.( they are over $1300 new now)
The nitro finish is starting to yellow just a little and it looks stunning and plays great. I actually like the 490/498 pickup combination. I've yet to change them out and I generally change pickups in everything I own at some point.
I'd love to have a standard, but I just can't bring myself to pay over double the price I bought my studio for . The only problem I have with it are the crappy tuners, which is standard for most Gibsons anyway. Those green key gotohs
have got to be the worst tuners ever made. I have a $300 Agile that has grovers and it stays in perfect tune. Why in the hell can't Gibson put decent tuners on ALL their guitars.
I just traded for an Edwards LP (thanks Adam !) with a fellow forum member.
Now that's a stunning looking Guitar with all the bells and whistles! Its got all the features of a standard and actually stays in tune ! The neck profile is almost identical to my Studio. I'm putting a Seth Lover in the neck and an Antiquity in the bridge next week. I love Seth's, so I bet the Edwards is going to be a hammer !
I'd love to have a standard, but I'd have to give up the Studio and the Edwards to be able to buy one. I'd really rather have the two guitars !
As far as looks, the Agile looks great, and surprisingly good quality,especially for the price. I'd have to have shoulder/back surgery if I played it for long.
It weighs about 13 lbs ! I put 59's in it and it sounds **** good.
If I do go the standard route, I might go for one of those faded models from
CV guitars with the Peter Green mod's. Those have my interest tweaked !
I bought a new classic white studio at a MF year end blowout in 2006 for $999.( they are over $1300 new now)
The nitro finish is starting to yellow just a little and it looks stunning and plays great. I actually like the 490/498 pickup combination. I've yet to change them out and I generally change pickups in everything I own at some point.
I'd love to have a standard, but I just can't bring myself to pay over double the price I bought my studio for . The only problem I have with it are the crappy tuners, which is standard for most Gibsons anyway. Those green key gotohs
have got to be the worst tuners ever made. I have a $300 Agile that has grovers and it stays in perfect tune. Why in the hell can't Gibson put decent tuners on ALL their guitars.
I just traded for an Edwards LP (thanks Adam !) with a fellow forum member.
Now that's a stunning looking Guitar with all the bells and whistles! Its got all the features of a standard and actually stays in tune ! The neck profile is almost identical to my Studio. I'm putting a Seth Lover in the neck and an Antiquity in the bridge next week. I love Seth's, so I bet the Edwards is going to be a hammer !
I'd love to have a standard, but I'd have to give up the Studio and the Edwards to be able to buy one. I'd really rather have the two guitars !
As far as looks, the Agile looks great, and surprisingly good quality,especially for the price. I'd have to have shoulder/back surgery if I played it for long.
It weighs about 13 lbs ! I put 59's in it and it sounds **** good.
If I do go the standard route, I might go for one of those faded models from
CV guitars with the Peter Green mod's. Those have my interest tweaked !
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
You have to remember that standards and customs are constructed differently, an ebony board definitely gives the custom a bit more edge than a standard
You have to remember that standards and customs are constructed differently, an ebony board definitely gives the custom a bit more edge than a standard
C-Martin
New member
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
biggest difference between the two is the obvious that already been mention about binding, inlay, etc... cosmetics, with imo makes the standard look way better and more like a real lp to me, but the most important and significant difference to me is studios don't have a maple cap, standards do, so they will sound darker than standards
biggest difference between the two is the obvious that already been mention about binding, inlay, etc... cosmetics, with imo makes the standard look way better and more like a real lp to me, but the most important and significant difference to me is studios don't have a maple cap, standards do, so they will sound darker than standards
krankguitarist
Krankitupologist
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
Aye, this is incorrect. There are some "special" studio models out there that do not have a maple cap, but the base model les paul studio does.
http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/Les-Paul-Studio/Features.aspx
Aye, this is incorrect. There are some "special" studio models out there that do not have a maple cap, but the base model les paul studio does.
http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/Les-Paul-Studio/Features.aspx
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
The dude said I hear a difference between standards and customs, standards don't have ebony boards, he wasn't even talking about studios
The dude said I hear a difference between standards and customs, standards don't have ebony boards, he wasn't even talking about studios
Lucid_Lunatic
Rebelyellologist
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
So does my 91 Studio Lite. Both my Standard and Studio have the same pickups. The Standard is a bit more full sounding.
The last 2 regular model Studios I played were considerably heavier than my Standard, which isn't really a light guitar by any means. Felt like an anchor around your neck. I figure it was just Gibson using heavier, lower grade woods on the cheaper Studio model.
So does my 91 Studio Lite. Both my Standard and Studio have the same pickups. The Standard is a bit more full sounding.
The last 2 regular model Studios I played were considerably heavier than my Standard, which isn't really a light guitar by any means. Felt like an anchor around your neck. I figure it was just Gibson using heavier, lower grade woods on the cheaper Studio model.
Boogie Bill
New member
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
Gibson, like most mfgs., grades most of their wood on cosmetic factors. The only guitar I know that they seek out LW wood is for the '59 R9 and '60 R0 Historics. I have nine Les Pauls, and they all have weights between 8.0 and 9.6 lbs. The 2006 Wine Red Studio solidbody is the heaviest; and the lightest are the two GOTW Classic Antiques. I have four others that all weight 9.1 lbs. Though 9.6 is not a heavy Les Paul; the Studio is the least favorite of my Les Pauls--more for cosmetic reasons than anything else, and I currently have it listed for sale.
They all have subtle differerences, but they are all special guitars that I hand picked. I'd have a hard time picking any one LP as my favorite.
Bill
Gibson, like most mfgs., grades most of their wood on cosmetic factors. The only guitar I know that they seek out LW wood is for the '59 R9 and '60 R0 Historics. I have nine Les Pauls, and they all have weights between 8.0 and 9.6 lbs. The 2006 Wine Red Studio solidbody is the heaviest; and the lightest are the two GOTW Classic Antiques. I have four others that all weight 9.1 lbs. Though 9.6 is not a heavy Les Paul; the Studio is the least favorite of my Les Pauls--more for cosmetic reasons than anything else, and I currently have it listed for sale.
They all have subtle differerences, but they are all special guitars that I hand picked. I'd have a hard time picking any one LP as my favorite.
Bill
Re: Les Paul standard vs. Studio
sorry about re linking but
http://www.thomann.de/fi/gibson_gary_moore_les_paul_bfg.htm
does anyone happen to have one?
sorry about re linking but
http://www.thomann.de/fi/gibson_gary_moore_les_paul_bfg.htm
does anyone happen to have one?
