Les Paul vs SG

Once Keef, Beck and Clapton started playing Les Pauls the price of Pauls on the secondary market exploded. Ironically this is around the time Les Paul was going through the divorce with Mary Ford. He did not renew his deal with Gibson because he didn't want Mary to get those funds. By 68 he was 4 years out of the marriage and the price of used Les Pauls was skyrocketing. Les and Gibson then agreed to put them back into production.
 
Securb said:
Once Keef, Beck and Clapton started playing Les Pauls the price of Pauls on the secondary market exploded. Ironically this is around the time Les Paul was going through the divorce with Mary Ford. He did not renew his deal with Gibson because he didn't want Mary to get those funds. By 68 he was 4 years out of the marriage and the price of used Les Pauls was skyrocketing. Les and Gibson then agreed to put them back into production.
Click to expand...

He should have married a Chevy.
 
80's_Thrash_Metal said:
Same, I never really looked at one with any desire...

And then one day I met one at a pawn shop for a great price, took her home and fixed her up.... Then I was like "where have you been all my life?"
Click to expand...

Same. Never liked 'em. Ugly, crappy sound. Then strummed a used one at GC and it was like the sky opened up. Warm, woody, beautiful.
 
SG for me -better in every way to play, and has usually a less dark tone and with the good pickups can sound just like anything LP you need.
 
I grab a Les Paul when I want my inner Bonnamassa to come out. Sunglasses magically appear on my face.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LLL
Both have their strengths and weaknesses. LP's have more low end from the thick body, and more high end from the maples cap. More sustain from the single cutaway. SG's have better neck access and reduced weight, and a lot of midrange from the mahogany & rosewood. Both are great designs.

If I had to pick one, it would an LP.
 
Love the lp sound but dislike the neck heel
love the SG playability but dislike how easy it is to bend the neck, and neck dive on some stock models
Last time I had the chance to choose I choose SG for playability and really liked it, only sold it cuz I changed jobs without enough in the bank to fall back on :(

Maybe I need a Paul with a sculpted heel
 
I totally agree with the ergonomics that have already been discussed.. what's important to me is that they provide totally different timbers..
​​​​​​
In general, Les Paul's are thick massive and fat... Superb for filling massive amounts of space with chords or melodies. But it takes some work to thin them out to play more articulate rhythms.. Knoffler used Les Paul's for the fat sound and strats for the thin sounds. Tom Schultz is one of the few to tame a Les Paul to get the short little thin tones that don't come easily to the Les Paul.

The SG on the other hand, covers it all. It's sitting smack in the middle of the mid-range space and it's easy to use pedals and amps to push it into the heavy thickness that is natural to Les Paul's.

But they also clean up easily.. Don't fear the Reaper is the perfect example of the clean arpeggio and the sustained leads.

So for me it comes down to requirements.. single guitar hard rock band? Metal? Need tons of sustain and thickness? A perfect spot for a Les Paul.

Need a lot more variety? That's an SG to me..

Again I love them both.
 
I found my SG fairly interchangeable with my LPs. It didn’t bring enough unique to the table so I sold it. Sold the Explorer for the same reason… basically had a bunch of guitars that did more or less the same thing.
 
Actually, my real answer is the guitar that bests them both and is sort of half of each.

1960 LP Special DC

s-l1600.jpg
 
some_dude said:
I found my SG fairly interchangeable with my LPs. It didn’t bring enough unique to the table so I sold it. Sold the Explorer for the same reason… basically had a bunch of guitars that did more or less the same thing.
Click to expand...

This is pretty common. While I can certainly feel the difference when playing these guitars, there is a lot of overlap in the sound.
 
Mincer said:
This is pretty common. While I can certainly feel the difference when playing these guitars, there is a lot of overlap in the sound.
Click to expand...

While they both sound distinctly different, they both nail the Gibson with a humbucker thing,
 
I think the Les Paul is prettier. Soundwise, they kinda do the same thing for me - humbucker guitars with a short scale.
 
I’ll be the oddball and say I think a Les Paul is more comfortable than an SG. Maybe it’s the flimsy ass neck joint, or that I’ve spent most of my time with Strat style guitars, but SGs feel delicate to me. I don’t know, just not my thing I guess.
 
LP hands down.

For me the sg is so god damn ugly I could never bring myself to so much as play one.

And in the incredibly unlikely case that changed, I would want to try an original and would go Yamaha.

:9:
 
NegativeEase said:
Actually, my real answer is the guitar that bests them both and is sort of half of each.

1960 LP Special DC

s-l1600.jpg
Click to expand...

Awesome.

I have an SG that I love, and am still trying to figure out how to either tame the fat mids or use them musically. It's been challenging for any scenario outside of me jamming either jazz or hard rock by myself at home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top