SG vs Les Paul

[Guitar Toad]

What's the diff between these two? I know the shape is different! Beyond the shape is there a real tonal difference? Scale lengths are the same. Mahogany body.

Why do you choose one over the other?

 

[danglybanger]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

SGs are thinner in the body. A bit brighter to my ears. Different placed neck pickups... they seem a bit more trebly in an SG.

I didn't choose one over the other... I got an SG width Les Paul

slade

 

[JacksonMIA]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

Some people have an easier time playing a double cutaway. Some people prefer the arch top of the Les Paul either for looks or for the tonal difference from the maple.

 

[Quencho092]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

paul's have a maple top, sg's dont.

 

[pac112]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

SGs are significantly lighter than LPs. the heayvness of the LP contributes to the tone.

 

[Guitar Toad]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

What does the maple top do for the tone?

 

[danglybanger]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

What does the maple top do for the tone?

adds top end.

Though the thinner body on the SG adds more brightness from my experience.

slade

 

[Boleslaw Gers 666]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

SG's are thinner. I think Les Pauls have maple tops with mahogany bodies. Les Pauls are more expensive, better sustain, thicker, and smoother. SG's are cheaper, grittier, nastier, and raunchier. Good examples of SG tone are Angus Young, Tony Iommi, Pete Townshend (69-70). Good examples of Paul tones are Slash's live tone, Jimmy Page, Warren Haynes, etc. It's preference.

 

[rspst14]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

SG's tend to have thinner necks, but they use Gibson's long neck tenon. Only the reissue LP models that are meant to copy guitars made before 1969 have that feature. SG's have much better access to the upper frets due to the extreme double cutaways and thinner bodies.

To me, they are more different than they are alike, although I like both of them.

Ryan

 

[Dills]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

From my ears, the maple adds More topend prescence and upper midrange bite, the mahogany provides the warmth, the maple provides that extra high end and upper midrange attack. I like the chunky (bigger) tone of a lespaul better and the more complex midrange attributes. The weight of the sg is nicer on your shoulders and it is also cheaper cos there is less time involved in making one. The other thing is that some sg's like mine have the strap button on the heel rather than the horn which makes it more uncomfortable to play, and it can be neck heavy at times.

 

[SpeedDemon]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

Personally, SG all the way. LP's are great and all but i definatly prefer SG's there tone is more aggressive and snappier. Plus, Iommi used one, nuff' said.

 

[Johtosotku]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

What about the pickup position difference? I always thought that SG's pickups were positioned closer to the bridge?

 

[danglybanger]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

What about the pickup position difference? I always thought that SG's pickups were positioned closer to the bridge?

yep. more trebly.

slade

 

[theboatcandream]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

Sg is middier and brighter. The Les Paul is bright, but more bassy than middy. The Les Paul has a deeper and more complex sound to my ears, the complex part is a bit hard to explain. There's just more levels to it. Les Pauls can sound muddy and thumpy if dialled in wrong, but I prefer theirs cleans to those of an SG.

 

[JeffB]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

Most of the diffs have been explained here.

SG's sound great but they don't sound the same as a LP. The Single cut on a LP is a big key to the sound. Thats why alot of the double cut "LP" style guitars that are almost identical otherwise don't sound the same as a Les Paul....Hamer studio's for instance. I suspect that's one reason Gibson is so anal about protecting the singlecut (i.e. the PRS singlecut lawsuit)

Plus the added mass, the maple top, positioning of the pups, etc etc etc. make for more diffs from a Paul.

IMO, SG's are not neccessarily as "bright" as a LP, just there is more emphasis on treble frequencies. They also sound "thinner" (though that's relative, they sound much less thin than some other guitars).

As for playing them, the double cut sure makes upper fret access easier for most, and the light weight and thin body make for a very comfy guitar. Some can get too neck heavy though like an Explorer and tend to want to dive..which is annoying to me.

SG's rock tho. I haven't had one in many years, but I'd like to pick up a 62 reissue someday.

 

[theboatcandream]

Re: SG vs Les Paul

The difference between the single cut and the double cut I think is a matter of mass. There's less depth and body to the double cut, but there's the same overall character I think

With the SG, the big difference is definately from the lack of the maple cap, as well as the mass. Compare the SG to single cut les paul designs that lack a maple cap, or a good example is the godin lg. The godin lg is a great guitar and is a single cut, but it does not sound like a les paul; It's much closer to the sg, it lacks the complexity of a les paul.