More mids? SG or LP??

[papersoul]

I get confused because some say that LPs are very scooped.....lots of bass and highs...others say they are midrange monsters. I find the lighter LPs to have good mids and that is why the Duncan C-5 seems like a good fit for ALL styles of music, very balanced. Heavier LPs in my mind and ears have big bass and highs.

Same thing about SGs. A friend of mine said the SG has way more mids than a Les Paul and yet finds the C-5 thin and small in an SG.....

What gives?

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

I think your friend is both right and wrong. The neck on a SG is so long that it flaps in the breeze and the body thin and flexable, resulting in a loss of bass, IMO. That might make a SG appear to have more mids...but, IMO, it's because the SG is lacking in deep solid bass. The Les Paul neck is shorter, being a single cutaway, and because it's shorter it's stiffer and retains lows and lower mids better and has a thicker, deeper tone and the highs are less nasal and more bell like. Again, just my opinion. And don't get me wrong: I like the tone of SGs just fine. Clapton's tone with Cream is one of my favorites of all time. But the Les Paul has a fatter, deeper tone. Lew

 

[Gearjoneser]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

Lew's right about that. I've had a 61 Reissue, and sold it shortly thereafter, mostly because the thin taper neck seemed to drain the life out of an otherwise toneful guitar.
If I bought another one, I'd get a Std. or Custom. SG's seem to elude me.
All of them slightly miss the mark IMO, but the ingredients of all their models put together would be a REAL SG. I wish I could step in like Ted McCarty did with PRS,
and design an awesome SG. These would be the specs to make a great sounding SG.

Same body as the 61 SG, with the small pickguard. Pickups on rings. Body made
a little thicker, like PRS did with the McCarty.

Same neck profile as the 59 Paul with a heel that's flush with the bottom of the body.
Right now, there's that little ledge.

Headstock that is the same as a LP. The 61 splays out, making the strings angle into the nut.

Put pickups in it that are a little bolder and edgier.

Do those things, and you'd have a great sounding SG! In my opinion, of course!

 

[sweet_lou]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

Lew's right about that. I've had a 61 Reissue, and sold it shortly thereafter, mostly because the thin taper neck seemed to drain the life out of an otherwise toneful guitar.
If I bought another one, I'd get a Std. or Custom. SG's seem to elude me.
All of them slightly miss the mark IMO, but the ingredients of all their models put together would be a REAL SG. I wish I could step in like Ted McCarty did with PRS,
and design an awesome SG. These would be the specs to make a great sounding SG.

Same body as the 61 SG, with the small pickguard. Pickups on rings. Body made
a little thicker, like PRS did with the McCarty.

Same neck profile as the 59 Paul with a heel that's flush with the bottom of the body.
Right now, there's that little ledge.

Headstock that is the same as a LP. The 61 splays out, making the strings angle into the nut.

Put pickups in it that are a little bolder and edgier.

Do those things, and you'd have a great sounding SG! In my opinion, of
course!

OK the noobe hear . It sounds like an LP STD with a 60s neck would be less bassy sounding than a LP std with the regular neck, right? I am concerned because I find the 60s neck easier to play than the others.
Could you make up for this with the right pickups.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

OK the noobe hear . It sounds like an LP STD with a 60s neck would be less bassy sounding than a LP std with the regular neck, right? I am concerned because I find the 60s neck easier to play than the others.
Could you make up for this with the right pickups.

Go with the neck that you find most comfortable to make music on...it's all about the music. The differences in tone between fat necks and thin necks are subtle enough that I wouldn't worry about it. I'd go for the one that made me feel like playing. Lew

 

[papersoul]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

Talking about necks.....the new 50s neck makes me want to play. I do not like the 60s neck.

That said.....I have a friend who gigs with an SG Special and get;s killer tone....but he hates the unbalanced feel.

I have a hard time vibing with SGs.

I think my next guitar would be a Dean Hard Tail or PRS McCarty!

 

[orbiter]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

Mr Lew is dead on .. the sg tone is a bit more focused on mids. and the necks are thin.

Which is what lead me to the SG special .. 59 neckshape adds stability and TONE! seems certain yrs are better than others . but the added beef on the neck does alot for sustain etc..

overall a LP will cover alot more ground.. but the SG has a nice lil sweet spot .. all its own.

just my $0.02

 

[Spoonman]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

In my humble opinion:

I tend to think SG's are a bit trebly & thin, although that can depend greatly on pickups & EQ's.

Les Pauls have nice, fat midrange. The heavier ones, like customs, usually have more bass and still all kinds of mids. Never played a trebly les paul, except for a classic with the 500T bridge, and thats why it was screechy.

 

[59paul]

Re: More mids? SG or LP??

Agreed. Some LP's are a little brighter than others, but for the most part ,they Live Right in that Midrange zone.