Guitar Advice

Posted by: winkyincanada on 15 March 2010

Thinking of a new solid-body electric. Currently looking at a LP Custom



or a PRS Custom 24



Any thoughts? I'm not really interested in re-issues or faux-vintage as seems to be the style now.
Posted on: 15 March 2010 by Steve O
I've always loved the looks of the Les Paul. More importantly I find the sound so much more enjoyable than that of the Fenders. Hope you enjoy it.
It looks so classy in white too.
Regards,
Steve.
Posted on: 15 March 2010 by BigH47
Les Paul in white but NO to the gold fittings , any guitar with them just looks trashy IMO.
Posted on: 15 March 2010 by winkyincanada
quote:
Originally posted by BigH47:
Les Paul in white but NO to the gold fittings , any guitar with them just looks trashy IMO.


Yeah, I can't decide if I like the gold or not. Maybe not.
Posted on: 15 March 2010 by BigH47
Just look at the machine heads of an "oldie" and see what they look like when the gold plating starts to wear. Silver/chrome is at least steel colour.
Posted on: 15 March 2010 by BigH47
Posted on: 16 March 2010 by Flame
Hi winky;

What kind of music do you play? The Gibson you're showing looks cool. I always had a thing for PRS as it seemed more "exotic" than the common Les Paul and Strat. If you mostly play lead guitar then why don't you take a look at Ibanez too?

Regards...
Posted on: 16 March 2010 by winkyincanada
Never really considered Ibanez. Don't know why. I don't really play lead much. More of a background type of guy.
Posted on: 16 March 2010 by Flame
quote:
Originally posted by winkyincanada:
Never really considered Ibanez. Don't know why. I don't really play lead much. More of a background type of guy.


Then I guess you're better off with the Gibson. The absence of a tremelo also means that your guitar is gonna stay in tune for a longer time. I owned a replica as my first ever guitar and have tried a few original LPs after that. You can't fault the sound. It sounds gorgeous fronting Marshal tube amps. Good luck Smile

Regards...
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by winkyincanada
quote:
Originally posted by Flame:
quote:
Originally posted by winkyincanada:
Never really considered Ibanez. Don't know why. I don't really play lead much. More of a background type of guy.


Then I guess you're better off with the Gibson. The absence of a tremelo also means that your guitar is gonna stay in tune for a longer time. I owned a replica as my first ever guitar and have tried a few original LPs after that. You can't fault the sound. It sounds gorgeous fronting Marshal tube amps. Good luck Smile

Regards...


I occasionally read of people saying that the new LPs aren't anywhere near as good as the old ones. Not that I could afford an old one, but do you think that the quality has dropped off, or is it just "snobbery" to say that the '62 (or whatever) was the last great LP? When I look at, and try new LPs, they seem very good to me.

I actually do find the new Strats are a bit "cheap" in places, but in my expereince that always been the case to some extent. Not that they aren't great playing guitars, of course.
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by PhillyB
I have a 2003 LP standard. I did look at customs, but couldn't really see enough benefits over a std to buy it so unless you are hell bent on that colour combination, may be worth saving a few $ and looking at the standard ones. They are hand made after all, so some things look a bit crap, but the sound that comes out of it is fantastic. No shame in having a non 60's one either. They are not as good apparently, but hey, it is still a LP and I'm sure you would love it regardless.
Gold does look tacky I think, but it is your money so if you like it, bling it up man,

As for PRS, they are still new kids on the block in my mind and although very good are no way worth the price that they are, especially for a custom 24. Could buy a nice car for the money!! Also food for thought, if you ever needed to sell it, you would loose a lot less on a Gibson.

For that amount of money you could have a look at some signature Strats just out of interest. I recently purchased a Dave Murray sig model and its ace. Just a shade cheaper than a standard LP.

Good luck anyway and hope you get a nice new toy to play with soon,.
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by Flame
quote:
Originally posted by winkyincanada:


I occasionally read of people saying that the new LPs aren't anywhere near as good as the old ones. Not that I could afford an old one, but do you think that the quality has dropped off


I haven't heard the original "vintage" models so I can't give any useful comments on the matter Smile

Regards...
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by Rockingdoc
The Les Paul is a more specialised, and hence restricted, instrument than say a Stratocaster.
The Les Paul is harder to play, harder to keep in tune, harder to set-up, heavier and more expensive.
The Les Paul is more of a style/prestige statement. Unless you exclusively play lead blues or metal it will be a pain, and even if you do there are more versatile alternatives.
If you want a versatile, easy to play guitar, it is hard to beat a Strat. I suppose it depends if you are using it for playing or looking at. You seem to suggest that you are mainly playing chords. Every working guitarist I know has owned a Les Paul but currently uses a Strat. Les Pauls, well most electric Gibsons actually, tend to live in bedrooms and get polished rather than played.
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by Flame
Doc;

Why do you feel that the Les Paul is more difficult to play than a strat? Are you referring to technical aspects?

You also talk about the "versatility" of stratocasters. Apart of a tremelo, I can't see anything else that can be done with a strat and not with an LP. Would love to hear your thoughts on that matter.

For me, I find that beyond looks, the most obvious difference between the two is the pickup mechanism. One is a humbucker and the other is a coil. The humbucker sound is thicker and more sustained but lacking in detail and finesse.

In all cases, I'm following this thread with great interest as it has been well over 5 years since I last played an electric guitar and I'm looking forward to getting back into action Smile

Regards...
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by jayd
quote:
Originally posted by Rockingdoc:
The Les Paul is harder to play

Exact opposite of my experience. For me, the Les Paul is a skilled partner to dance with; the Strat is a worthy adversary to wrestle with.
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by Flame
quote:
Originally posted by jayd:
quote:
Originally posted by Rockingdoc:
The Les Paul is harder to play

Exact opposite of my experience. For me, the Les Paul is a skilled partner to dance with; the Strat is a worthy adversary to wrestle with.


Elaboration??
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by Flame
Good evening Munch. Been a while.
Posted on: 17 March 2010 by winkyincanada
quote:
Originally posted by Rockingdoc:
The Les Paul is a more specialised, and hence restricted, instrument than say a Stratocaster.
The Les Paul is harder to play, harder to keep in tune, harder to set-up, heavier and more expensive.
The Les Paul is more of a style/prestige statement. Unless you exclusively play lead blues or metal it will be a pain, and even if you do there are more versatile alternatives.
If you want a versatile, easy to play guitar, it is hard to beat a Strat. I suppose it depends if you are using it for playing or looking at. You seem to suggest that you are mainly playing chords. Every working guitarist I know has owned a Les Paul but currently uses a Strat. Les Pauls, well most electric Gibsons actually, tend to live in bedrooms and get polished rather than played.


I don't quite get this. LP more "specialised"? Harder to play? But I will certainly take this view on board as I continue my research.

The bridge on the LP seems much better engineered and more stable than the modern Strat bridges with those cheesy pressed metal units. OK, individual string height adjustment is perhaps trickier on the LP (need a file?), but it is a once in a lifetime adjustment unless the neck does something weird, or if I change string gauge dramtically.

The angled headstock on the LP is more fragile if you drop the guitar but provides more consistent angles across the nut and doesn't need those little saddles that Strats have. Although I note that some newer Strats have different "stack heights" on the tuners to help get around this issue.

My current guitar is a Strat copy, and I do like the contoured body. For me, with the LP it will come down to being comfortable with the "corner" under my right wrist, and how stable and comfortable I find the hand position when resting the heel of my hand on the bridge for R/H muting and stability/reference when picking out single/double/triple strings. I do this a lot when playing.

I don't need/want tremolo.

The neck shape is not such a big issue as I have many (acoustic) guitars with different necks and can get on with them all. I'm not a fan of huge frets. I dislike the way that they cause intonation errors with variable fretting pressure. It's a variable I don't use much and don't want to have to control.

The other big difference is the distance the strings are from the body on the LP. I'll just have to try some more and see how it bothers me, if at all.

As for sound, I nearly always play with a heavily compressed/distorted sound and I think the humbuckers are a better option for this, although I note that some signature Strats offer hotter pickup options. If I want something cleaner or with more attack/decay I can go back to my acoustic guitars (or go for a semi).

I'm inclined to agree that the gold hardware is naff. I'll keep looking.

The PRS Custom 24 isn't as expensive as is alleged. I don't mean one custom made, but just the standard one that they confusingly call a "Custom". It's about the same price as a LP Custom (which is also NOT custom). They've only been making them for 25 years so they only have half the heritage of a Strat or LP.
Posted on: 18 March 2010 by Rockingdoc
quote:
Originally posted by Flame:
Doc;

"Why do you feel that the Les Paul is more difficult to play than a strat? Are you referring to technical aspects?"


Les Paul's wider, flatter fingerboard, good for bending strings in high positions, but less good for general low and mid-neck chording.
Shorter neck makes for less finger room in complex chord shapes.
Body sculpting on Strat make it more comfortable in playing positions, particularly sitting down.
Double cut-away on Strat makes higher position access better.
Three pickups give more tonal options than two.
Strat seems to handle lighter strings better without buzzing.


"You also talk about the "versatility" of stratocasters. Apart of a tremelo, I can't see anything else that can be done with a strat and not with an LP. Would love to hear your thoughts on that matter."

I would always use the trem-block locked down, so not the trem.
I mean if you are playing covers (and lets face it, most of have to if you want a gig), it is more likely you will get nearer the original sound on a Strat-type than a Les Paul. Unless you are in a Free tribute band I suppose.

"For me, I find that beyond looks, the most obvious difference between the two is the pickup mechanism. One is a humbucker and the other is a coil. The humbucker sound is thicker and more sustained but lacking in detail and finesse."

Agreed.

My point is just that I know so many people, including myself, who dreamed of a real Les Paul since boyhood, but when we eventually got them couldn't make it work in a gigging situation. Anyway, what do I know, I'm a bass player.

Posted on: 18 March 2010 by PhillyB
LP is not at all difficult to play, so not sure where there idea came from. It is different to a Strat for sure. But it is an enjoyable instrument to play, albeit a tad heavy at times.
If you are going to rock it up. Personally i'd say this is the way to go. Still gives nice clean tones when required.

I was talking about PRS Customs prices in UK really, guess they are cheaper over your way.
A custom 24 in the UK can cost £2500 upwards depending on finish and fittings. I have seen really nice ones for £3700 and they are not special order or anything, just a standard C24 but with top grade maple. UK is a rip off so if you can get something like that way cheaper then you are a lucky man ;-)
Posted on: 18 March 2010 by winkyincanada
quote:
Originally posted by PhillyB:
LP is not at all difficult to play, so not sure where there idea came from. It is different to a Strat for sure. But it is an enjoyable instrument to play, albeit a tad heavy at times.
If you are going to rock it up. Personally i'd say this is the way to go. Still gives nice clean tones when required.

I was talking about PRS Customs prices in UK really, guess they are cheaper over your way.
A custom 24 in the UK can cost £2500 upwards depending on finish and fittings. I have seen really nice ones for £3700 and they are not special order or anything, just a standard C24 but with top grade maple. UK is a rip off so if you can get something like that way cheaper then you are a lucky man ;-)


PRS custom 24s don't seem to be that expensive here, but I might be wrong. My current Strat copy is pretty heavy anyway, so a LP might not be such a pain (relatively).

Anyway, thanks to all for the advice. I'll let you know how it all goes.
Posted on: 18 March 2010 by Gianno
Let me drop my 2 cents; I've been a semi professional musician for about 16 years. I own about 20 electrics. 5 of them are LP's and just one is a strat (relic). I also played some PRS guitars.

To me the LP is the winner because it has that massive rock sound (I do upgrade all electronics and pickups myself). There's less accessabilty to higher frets, no ergonomic body contour as on a strat and no light weight, but the sound more than makes up for it IMHO.

If you want a fast and easy girl, get a Jackson or Ibanez. If you want a real woman, get a Les Paul.

Ps have you ever considered a PRS singlecut? They have the looks of the LP with better accessabilty, more sounds and a little less weight. To me they sounded a bit thinner, but they play like a dream.

Goodluck!
Posted on: 20 March 2010 by Flame
quote:
Originally posted by Gianno:

If you want a fast and easy girl, get a Jackson or Ibanez. If you want a real woman, get a Les Paul.


Gianno;

Loved your comment. I used to play lead guitar in a heavy metal band back in highschool. I had an LP replica but wanted a "fast and easy" guitar and ended up with a washburn. Fastest guitar I ever played maybe only cause I haven't tried an Ibanez.

Regards...
Posted on: 20 March 2010 by Flame
quote:
Originally posted by Rockingdoc:
quote:
Originally posted by Flame:
Doc;

"Why do you feel that the Les Paul is more difficult to play than a strat? Are you referring to technical aspects?"


Les Paul's wider, flatter fingerboard, good for bending strings in high positions, but less good for general low and mid-neck chording.
Shorter neck makes for less finger room in complex chord shapes.
Body sculpting on Strat make it more comfortable in playing positions, particularly sitting down.
Double cut-away on Strat makes higher position access better.
Three pickups give more tonal options than two.
Strat seems to handle lighter strings better without buzzing.


"You also talk about the "versatility" of stratocasters. Apart of a tremelo, I can't see anything else that can be done with a strat and not with an LP. Would love to hear your thoughts on that matter."

I would always use the trem-block locked down, so not the trem.
I mean if you are playing covers (and lets face it, most of have to if you want a gig), it is more likely you will get nearer the original sound on a Strat-type than a Les Paul. Unless you are in a Free tribute band I suppose.

"For me, I find that beyond looks, the most obvious difference between the two is the pickup mechanism. One is a humbucker and the other is a coil. The humbucker sound is thicker and more sustained but lacking in detail and finesse."

Agreed.

My point is just that I know so many people, including myself, who dreamed of a real Les Paul since boyhood, but when we eventually got them couldn't make it work in a gigging situation. Anyway, what do I know, I'm a bass player.



Thanks for the feedback Doc. You've opened my eyes to a few things I wasn't aware about Smile

Regards...
Posted on: 20 March 2010 by BigH47
Apparently after I made comment about having LP type humbuckers on Chris Rea's Strat, my mate said his '59 Strat has humbuckers. They look similar to original Strat ones without the pole pieces showing.
Posted on: 21 March 2010 by winkyincanada


I don't mind this. It is an Ibanez S5470F. About the same price as an LP standard, I think.