SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

I have a 61 reissue and LOVE it. it is not as comfortable to play sitting down as my other guitars but the upper access and lighter weight (mine isn't THAT light @ just about 8lbs.. but lighter than my others) make it a joy to play standing up which is usually how i play wether practicing or whatever..

I have no tuning issues anymore but i put sperzels on it. I also swapped the nut out for brass and that thing sings for days and is so articulate it just makes me smile when i play it.

I swapped the pups for an APH-1 in the neck and a custom in the bridge and i prefer them both hands down over the 57 classics. Although the classics were not "bad" and i though the neck one was actually pretty good sounding I am much happier with the changes.

As far as the 60's neck I think it is very comfortable. My favorites tend to be thicker, my warmoth has the "59 rounded profile" which is the same as on my '79 "the paul" and i do like the big bat for its solid feel. but I also have a '90 PRS CU24 withe the wide thin profile and that's fun to play too. My tele which is my favorite player is slightly tinner then the "59 rounded" profile and not quite as thin as the SG but I like having different guitars that sound and play differrent.. it makes me try different things.


can't go wrong with a '61 though.. I had been lusting for an SG for years and finally got one and I am stoked with it. I just maybe wish i had had the patience to save up a little more scratch to get the custom shop one because I am a snob ;) but i found one with a sweet subtle flame in the wood and i love the **** thing.
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Sounds like you want your 74 back...why don't you look for one on the Bay? I mean a brand new Gibson would be sweet, but not as a sweet as a vintage one...
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

I have a 61 reissue and LOVE it. it is not as comfortable to play sitting down as my other guitars but the upper access and lighter weight (mine isn't THAT light @ just about 8lbs.. but lighter than my others)
It should weigh about 6-6.5lbs. My Classic is about 6.5.

No SG should EVER, EVER, EVER weigh more than 7.5lbs (roughly what a new production Std is).
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

No SG should EVER, EVER, EVER weigh more than 7.5lbs (roughly what a new production Std is).


Eh, i guess i got a real nice dense slab of wood but i think you're probably right in that it is closer to 7.5 than 8 lb.. i will throw it on the bathroom scale and re-check when i get home. It is a very solid feeling SG though not flimsy and neck heavy like many i have picked up. :beerchug:
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

dear god....this thread is so, so, so, so, so, so old.
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

The 61 RI is probably a better made guitar but I like the added stability of the Standard's neck joint.
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Anyway, on topic, as far as looks and sound go I'd take the '61, but the lower price and added strength of the Std is tempting, especially considering the pickups can be swapped and electronics improved upon.

How about the CS/VOS historic SG Std? Supposedly like a '61RI but with a thicker neck/longer joint and a faded finish. I'd buy one of those. Everything I like about the '61RI, about the Std and the faded Specials in one. Too bad they cost so **** much...
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

EveryMn was right. I double checked and my '61 is 6.9lbs. but doesn't feel flimsy and I have a bunch of meaty gtrs to compare with.
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

EveryMn was right. I double checked and my '61 is 6.9lbs. but doesn't feel flimsy and I have a bunch of meaty gtrs to compare with.
SGs are pretty sturdy guitars, neck joint aside. Really solid-feeling bodies... probably makes it seem heavier.

Oddly enough, I was talking to a guy at another site who says he's seen the CS '62 SG (w/ the better joint & thicker neck) for less than $2000 frequently, and once as low as $1500. Not bad.
 
Last edited:
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Simon, I don't know about your budget but from what I have seen the Historic SGs really are slicker and nicer than the regular ones. Very special. YMMV, etc.
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Hey guys - this thread is from 2004!! (Thanks grendeltone....) :D

For anyone who's interested, I solved my "which SG" dilemma in October 2004 by buying another Les Paul.

<------------------------ This one :drive:
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Hey guys - this thread is from 2004!! (Thanks grendeltone....) :D

For anyone who's interested, I solved my "which SG" dilemma in October 2004 by buying another Les Paul.

<------------------------ This one :drive:

Sorry Simon,

Some of us are a little slow on the uptake:32:

The Les Paul was the right decsion!
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

Wow I didn't even notice the date...you should still try to score a vintage SG, in my opinion...

-X
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

funny-pictures-zombie-survival-kit-1cs.jpg
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

I played both side to side and preferred the Standard, but that's my personal preference. The 57 classic pickups on the '61 sounded very flat and lame compared to the 490/498 on the Standard. The '61 uses higher quality wood, often resulting in a lighter colored finish than the Standard- I prefer the grain on the Standard. I preferred the thicker neck profile of the standard.
 
Re: SGs - Standard vs. '61 Reissue

I played both side to side and preferred the Standard, but that's my personal preference. The 57 classic pickups on the '61 sounded very flat and lame compared to the 490/498 on the Standard. The '61 uses higher quality wood, often resulting in a lighter colored finish than the Standard- I prefer the grain on the Standard. I preferred the thicker neck profile of the standard.
'57s sounding flat compared to a 490/498?

You're the first and only person I've ever heard say that... ever. :omg:
 
Back
Top