Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

KLINKDETROIT

New member
I like the price and sound of this classic I played at guitar center. I wonder if its the 500t pickups that are not as harsh as the burstbucker pros in the standard. Would a standard sound better than a classic with the same 500t pickups in it? Other than appearanc what real difference is there between the two? I already checked the Gibson website but now I want the real dirt from those who know. I just bought a studio 2 weeks ago and find it a little dark sounding (it has 498t) bridge and 490r neck pickups in it. I disconnected the tone on the bridge and it seems to have brightened it up a little. Someone told me to change the pots to 500k? I know the studio has a thinner maple top and I am thinking that is contributing to the darkness of the guitar as well.

I will keep the studio but also want another guitar with a 60s neck like the classic or standard so what should I buy, The standard or the classic?
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Back before 2003 when standards had plain tops, they were still about $400 more than a classic. I've played both, my observation was that the classics tend to be made with a heavier (cheaper) grade or species of mahogany than the standards. This seems to be leftover stock from the 70's/80's. I was under the impression that the recent standards have 1 piece backs, classics and studios have multi piece back of a cheaper grade of mahogany. It's still a great grade, just cheaper. The historic line uses the same species of mahogany used on the standards, but they use the lightest pieces

Except for the piss yellow inlays, I prefer the tone of the classic. The Standard with a sunburst flame top is just prettier.

Other than that, they're both great guitars. Just a slight difference which changes the price
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

well first of all standards do not have better grade wood than classics, the flame maple top is the only difference. Gibsons inconsistency is the main factor here, I saw a guy who had 2 premium plus standards and he thought they were 1 piece mahogany backs until he looked really close and realized they were both expertly matched 2 piece glued bodies. I have a classic and it is has a 1 Piece back. And it is impossible for gibson to use leftover bodies from the 70's because back then they used pancaked style bodies. Just find one that speaks to you'll want to change the sock pickups on those because they suck compared to aftermarket IMO...
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Okay. I will go with the classic. I compared a coppertop classic to an ebony. The cppoertop has no paint on the back of it and the ebony does. The ebony sounds a little meatier is this because of the paint on the neck and back of the body or just that they were made from a different tree? I relly like the way the coppertop looks but the ebony sounds better. I know this seems like a no brainer but if I could have a coppertop with a painted backside that would be perfect. Unless its not the paint that is making the tonal difference. Any help resolving this?????
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

I have a classic, but wish I would have gone for the standard now. Don't get me wrong, my Classic plays and sounds great. But, the 60's slim taper neck, though "fast", fatigues my hand faster when doing more complicated barre chord stuff. For rockin' it's great. If you want to go into jazzin or playing that requires more complicated chordage you might consider a thicker neck so your hand doesn't tire so quickly.
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

How about the sound of the classic compared to the standard and the studio 2004 model?
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Prior to 2003, both the Standards and Classics had plain maple tops, and the Standard was still about $400 more than a Classic. The AA flame maple on the standards today is worth about a $50 upcharge, not the $400 or so that Gibson was charging.

Today the difference in price is only $250, but still, there must be some more cost cutting somewhere else.

As someone indicated above, there are alot of inconsistencies with Gibson, so you're better off picking one out you like. Les Paul customs depreciate quite a bit, new they go for 2800, but I've seen mint condition used ones for 1800 at Guitar Center. The Standards and Classics seem to hold their value, but on the used market a custom is a better buy.
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

I went through this decision semi recently, and for me it was no contest becuse id always wanted a standard forever, but i still tried both.

The classic sounds much fatter because of the ceramic pickups, those things are hot as! And the standard comes with burst bucker pros which are okay and the neck actually sounds really good clean for jazzy stuff, and with a nice thick amp the bridge sounds good too but its definitely thinner and brighter sounding than the ceramics...but thats just the pickups not the guitars fault. If you had the same pickups in each guitar you would probably like the sound of the standard better if you could tell the difference at all.

One of the main differences would be if you were looking at a 50s (fat) neck standard compared to a classic, but if you are going with a thinner 60s neck anyway then they will both feel similar. Only the standard will have a more flamed top if you get a transparent finish and wont have "piss yellow" (brilliant call that one, i laughed heaps jmh151!) inlays. The standards i think look better, but that is of course in the eye of the beholder.

And also, the standard probably wont come with the pickguard already installed and routed if you would want to leave it off...like me ;)
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

I thought the classic had a chambared body and the standards had a solid body???
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

i dont like 500T's....as a matter of fact, i dont like gibson pickups altogether, eventhough i own one in my GAX70.

What's the point of having an awesome axe like a les paul classic or standard, and holding back its tone potential by not giving it good pups?
If i were going to shell out 1500+ on a gibson, i would, for sure, spend the extra 200-250 for antiquity pickups.
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

pureoldsound said:
I thought the classic had a chambared body and the standards had a solid body???

A classic definitely does NOT have a chambered body, just like the standard.

The newer les paul supreme however DOES have a chambered body.
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Young Angus said:
A classic definitely does NOT have a chambered body, just like the standard.

The newer les paul supreme however DOES have a chambered body.


...and a tasty compound radius fretboard. Yum.

As for what you should buy KLINKDETROIT, play them all and see which one talkes to you the most. I like Classics, but I've owned Standards and Customs. Classics, to me, make a great everyday guitar. I'm not fond of the stock pups, but that's easy enough to fix. So if you like the pickups, and the neck, go for it. If you haven't played a Standard though, and it's within your price range, a little comparison is nerver a bad thing.
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Beutiful Les Paul. How much did you pay? I like the classic 60s neck so I may go with that. Do you think aside from looks and the neck that if they had the same pickups they would sound the same. I realize they are from a different tree also.
I bought one of these limited edition Guitar Center Les Paul Studios (black with brushed chrome hardware) about 2 weeks ago and am wondering about trading it in towards either a classic or standard. Although I did find a used custom for $1800. Is the studio a great difference in quality/tone compared to these others? What to do?????
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Young Angus said:
I went through this decision semi recently, and for me it was no contest becuse id always wanted a standard forever, but i still tried both.

The classic sounds much fatter because of the ceramic pickups, those things are hot as! And the standard comes with burst bucker pros which are okay and the neck actually sounds really good clean for jazzy stuff, and with a nice thick amp the bridge sounds good too but its definitely thinner and brighter sounding than the ceramics...but thats just the pickups not the guitars fault. If you had the same pickups in each guitar you would probably like the sound of the standard better if you could tell the difference at all.

One of the main differences would be if you were looking at a 50s (fat) neck standard compared to a classic, but if you are going with a thinner 60s neck anyway then they will both feel similar. Only the standard will have a more flamed top if you get a transparent finish and wont have "piss yellow" (brilliant call that one, i laughed heaps jmh151!) inlays. The standards i think look better, but that is of course in the eye of the beholder.

And also, the standard probably wont come with the pickguard already installed and routed if you would want to leave it off...like me ;)



Your analysis is right on the money. Do you think they sound different with the same pickups? I dont like the burstbuckers. Actually my favorite pickup so far is the c5. Does Gibson make a c5 equivalent other than the 498t thats in my Les Paul studio? I have these brushed chrome covers in the Gibson and want to keep them but like the sound of the c5.
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

I'd choose standard simply for the 50's profile neck. Can't stand those slimmer 60's! But I guess you can...
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Don't ever forget the saying, you get what you pay for. Guys who have owned one or two LP's will always stand by the one they decided to buy, but having owned a friggin grip of Les Pauls, I can tell you that their pricing makes sense from low to high.

While the Studio's are a good entry into the domain of 'the real Les Pauls', both the build quality and tone are a few notches below a Standard and Custom. Still, very good sounding guitars, but they lack the tonal refinement that comes on the more expensive models. You only really notice it by A/Bing. That's not to knock the Studios, because they'll hold their own, but there's a reason they're $1200, not $2000.

The Classics were intended to be Gibson's answer to the "shredder" looking to get into a classic looking Gibson. They provided a faster, thinner neck and hotter pickups, and made the hardware the vintage early 60's type....with the wire retainer and less mass. The result was a very good guitar that was less well recieved by Gibson die-hards, mostly because the components equalled 'lesser tone' than the Stds and Customs. This is why I believe they priced them lower. After owning a Classic 60 in Bullion gold, I soon discovered that the pickups were useless to me, and the thinner neck resulted in a thinner tone, as well as fatiguing my left thumb muscle after a few hours of playing. At one point, I had two goldtops...a Std and Classic 60.
Both had a JB/59 combo, and the Standard had the better tone. I sold the Classic.

Moving along to the Customs....even many LP players stand by the idea that the Standard best represents the Les Paul feel and sound. The differences between the Standard and Custom are usually based on weight, headstock binding, and ebony board that comes on the Customs. They have a more 'in your face' bluntness to the sound and less resonant than Standards. However, the string to string balance is better and the articulation of the notes within chords is better.

All in all, I'd say most Les Paul fanatics choose the Standard Model, claiming that it's the perfect Les Paul. I tend to agree, and I haven't even begun to narrow it down to the fact that certain finishes sound different, as well as weights. The Historic division puts out some amazing Les Paul Standards, but even the best production models can equal them in tone and playability. Past the $2000 mark, you're really splitting hairs regarding preferences, but there will always be a player with a razor blade ready to go to work. LOL And most of them would be better off playing than splitting those hairs.
 
Last edited:
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Gearjoneser said:
Don't ever forget the saying, you get what you pay for. Guys who have owned one or two LP's will always stand by the one they decided to buy, but having owned a friggin grip of Les Pauls, I can tell you that their pricing makes sense from low to high.

While the Studio's are a good entry into the domain of 'the real Les Pauls', both the build quality and tone are a few notches below a Standard and Custom. Still, very good sounding guitars, but they lack the tonal refinement that comes on the more expensive models. You only really notice it by A/Bing. That's not to knock the Studios, because they'll hold their own, but there's a reason they're $1200, not $2000.

The Classics were intended to be Gibson's answer to the "shredder" looking to get into a classic looking Gibson. They provided a faster, thinner neck and hotter pickups, and made the hardware the vintage early 60's type....with the wire retainer and less mass. The result was a very good guitar that was less well recieved by Gibson die-hards, mostly because the components equalled 'lesser tone' than the Stds and Customs. This is why I believe they priced them lower. After owning a Classic 60 in Bullion gold, I soon discovered that the pickups were useless to me, and the thinner neck resulted in a thinner tone, as well as fatiguing my left thumb muscle after a few hours of playing. At one point, I had two goldtops...a Std and Classic 60.
Both had a JB/59 combo, and the Standard had the better tone. I sold the Classic.

Moving along to the Customs....even many LP players stand by the idea that the Standard best represents the Les Paul feel and sound. The differences between the Standard and Custom are usually based on weight, headstock binding, and ebony board that comes on the Customs. They have a more 'in your face' bluntness to the sound and less resonant than Standards. However, the string to string balance is better and the articulation of the notes within chords is better.

All in all, I'd say most Les Paul fanatics choose the Standard Model, claiming that it's the perfect Les Paul. I tend to agree, and I haven't even begun to narrow it down to the fact that certain finishes sound different, as well as weights. The Historic division puts out some amazing Les Paul Standards, but even the best production models can equal them in tone and playability. Past the $2000 mark, you're really splitting hairs regarding preferences, but there will always be a player with a razor blade ready to go to work. LOL And most of them would be better off playing than splitting those hairs.
Great reveiw. I ended up trading my studio for a used 1994 goldtop classic.
What is the oppinions on this guitar. I noticed it has a one peice back and is as tight as my buddys standard. What do ya think?? I can tell you know these guitars so I would value your oppinion. Thanks
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

that'll be one sweet guitar with some duncans...really the only thing people have against these guitars is the neck because it doesn't suit those guys with monkey hands very well :laugh2:
 
Re: Whats better. A gibson les paul classic/ or standard?

Luckily, 94 was a good year for Gibsons, because the new Historic Custom shop forced Gibson to raise the bar on all the production models. The entire 90's was good.
If you have a Goldtop Classic, just chuck the pickups. Buy either of these pickup combos.

Custom/59 Close to the 500T's, but sound better.
C-5/59 my favorite. A perfect cross between vintage and modern.
If you want the guitar to sound warmer and fatter than it is now, get a CC/APII
 
Back
Top