Les Paul Studio v Standard

Slartibartfarst42

Mine is a 2013 Les Paul Studio and I deliberately bought it then as it was the last of the Studios to feature a mahogany neck, which in my mind makes it a 'proper' Les Paul. It's ebony with gold hardware and I love it but that comes with a few caveats. Firstly, I changed the pickups to a set built to my own specifications as the stock ones, especially the 490R, weren't good enough. The first one I got was awful so the dealer had to replace it but the replacement was excellent. Quality seems a bit hit and miss on them. Finally, while I love my Les Paul Studio and it's the most expensive guitar I own, my Mexican Fender Stratocaster Standard is far better built and my PRS SE Custom 24 is so much better built it's embarrassing.

thegummy

Slartibartfarst42 said:

Mine is a 2013 Les Paul Studio and I deliberately bought it then as it was the last of the Studios to feature a mahogany neck, which in my mind makes it a 'proper' Les Paul. It's ebony with gold hardware and I love it but that comes with a few caveats. Firstly, I changed the pickups to a set built to my own specifications as the stock ones, especially the 490R, weren't good enough. The first one I got was awful so the dealer had to replace it but the replacement was excellent. Quality seems a bit hit and miss on them. Finally, while I love my Les Paul Studio and it's the most expensive guitar I own, my Mexican Fender Stratocaster Standard is far better built and my PRS SE Custom 24 is so much better built it's embarrassing.

That last part is a bit worrying, what is wrong with the les Paul that makes it worse than a Mexican Strat?

Slartibartfarst42

Sometimes with guitars it's difficult to pinpoint what makes one better or worse but I suppose it's a lot of little things. The frets aren't quite as well finished, the setup from the factory isn't as good, the quality of the wood doesn't seem the same and the tone, while great, isn't exactly what you expect. Now don't get me wrong, while the first Studio I bought was ridiculously poor, this replacement is very good but I've heard enough people talk about the hit and miss quality control of many Gibsons to believe that my experience wasn't a one-off. I've always loved players who use Les Pauls as the tone is exactly what I'm primarily after in a Rock guitar. In isolation, the guitar is superb and is as good as any Les Paul Studio I've ever played. The upgrade to the pickups made a massive difference but when you hold it, there's something that just doesn't feel as solid and 'complete' as you'd hope. 

I can't remember exactly what any of my guitars cost after all these years but I think the Studio in 2013 cost me about £800. I've played guitars up to £1,000 before and I love my Les Paul for what it is but in my hands it doesn't feel like one of those - not even close. That Granadillo wood they used for the fretboard in place of Rosewood looks and feels like a cheap alternative for instance. I've played a Vintage Les Paul that had a better finished fretboard! In fact, that Vintage impressed me so much for £200 that it convinced me to buy a proper Gibson. The Gibson is better but it sure doesn't feel like a guitar that's three times the price. In comparison, the Mexican Stratocaster feels damn close to the American version and feels exactly like a Strat should. The frets are beautifully finished and the whole thing feels like it should. I still changed the pickups but at £450 it was close to half the price of the Gibson. When I play the Strat, I have no desire at all to spend the extra on an American version because what I have is so good. When I hold that guitar, it feels exactly like it should and other than the pickups, it's tough to see where else they've saved money. I'm not a huge fan of the bridge but that might just be me as I'm not that keen on the Fender tremolo bridge system at all. At £800 the Gibson feels overpriced for what it is whereas the Fender feels like a bargain. I appreciate I paid for the fact it was made in America but frankly, why bother if you can get a better made guitar or at LEAST one as good for half the price if it's made in Mexico?

Of course the one that trumps them all is my PRS SE Custom 24. Wow!!!  And bear in mind that this guitar is made in Korea. Mine cost me £570 at the time and it only cost that much because I bought one with an OFR bridge. Had I bought a standard CU24 it would have been more like £425 and quite honestly, for what you get it's a steal. The rosewood fretboard is one of fantastic quality and this one isn't a one-off as it's my third CU24 and all three have been incredible instruments in every respect. Frets, setup, paintwork, tuners and all other hardware have been exemplary on every one. To either look at or play, the PRS comes across as a guitar worth hundreds of pounds more than the Gibson. Just look at the fretboards side by side and touch them and you'd think the Gibson was a budget model while the PRS is simply sublime.

I don't want to sell any of my guitars as I love all three. Tonally, the Gibson is where my heart is. That raw Rock tone is heaven. I've always been a humbucker man and the rawness you can wring from a Gibson is beyond compare but with the Gibson, it's my heart that makes me love it, not my head. In terms of ergonomics and basic 'feel' it has to be the Fender for me. The design is the perfect synergy of form and function and it's exactly what it's meant to be. At £450 it's a bargain compared to the Gibson by any measure but it's still not where my head would be. The PRS doesn't quite have the soul of the Gibson or even the Fender but by God it is absolutely sublime to play and by any objective measure it's a superior instrument to the Fender and vastly superior to the Gibson. The CU24 also does everything you could ask of it so if you needed one guitar to do everything, that is beautifully built, it's the PRS I'd be buying every time. Without the OFR bridge you get a guitar that's better built in every respect, more versatile, has a higher specification and is the cheapest guitar of the three, costing at the time of my purchase, almost half what the Gibson did. A look at the prices today suggests that PRS realise that when I bought mine they were pricing themselves too cheaply compared to the likes of Gibson. A new Les Paul Studio is £900 but at least for that money they've gone back to a rosewood fingerboard and mahogany neck but a PRS SE Custom 24 is now much closer at £725 or £900 if, like me, you go with an OFR bridge. That's a lot of money for a Korean guitar but having had three of them I'd have to say that if a Gibson Les Paul Studio is worth that much, the PRS is worth at least that all day long. When I bought my guitars, the PRS was the best buy by a mile but today I think that Mexican Fender looks like a very astute buy as it's still only £525.

Rabs

I have a Standard a Classic a DC Special and a Tribute Studio... 

To me the studio is just as good in sound and playability...  In fact I really love the satin finish on the neck.. If you don't care about the binding and other bling then a studio is a great option. They are made in the same place by the same people who make all the other USA models..

The 2018s actually have neck binding too so are one step closer..

http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/2018/USA/Les-Paul-Studio-2018.aspx

https://i.imgur.com/fGY6kPD.jpg

thegummy

@Slartibartfarst42 thanks for writing such a detailed reply.

I, too, have a SE Custom 24 and like the quality of it. Actually, out the guitars I have (which also includes an American standard Strat, high end Mexican precision bass, Schecter jazz bass and a Yamaha acoustic) I'm very happy with the build quality of them all, maybe I'm spoiled with well made instruments.

I am going to buy a les Paul though so am weary of all the talk of quality problems. Ironic, since they're expensive guitars.

I'm wondering if some of the complaints are actually due to the price and people are expecting to get something that stands out as great?

jaygtr

With regard to Gibson quality, I've played quite a few recently whilst on my ongoing search for a new amp, and I haven't played a bad one. 

They were all reasonable and couple have been excellent, so finding a nice one should be no problem.


with regard to buying a standard or a studio, I went for a standard, as I just know if I'd gone for a studio I would have always wished I'd spent the extra, regardless of whether it was better or not. 

thegummy

jaygtr said:

With regard to Gibson quality, I've played quite a few recently whilst on my ongoing search for a new amp, and I haven't played a bad one. 

They were all reasonable and couple have been excellent, so finding a nice one should be no problem.


with regard to buying a standard or a studio, I went for a standard, as I just know if I'd gone for a studio I would have always wished I'd spent the extra, regardless of whether it was better or not. 

That is pretty much the main, if not sole, reason that's been driving me to get a Gibson rather than Epiphone.

I suppose in a way it's a gamble; if I bought an epi would I eventually get a Gibson and lose about 250 quid? Or if I got the Gibson when the epi would have done me fine, would I have wasted a lot more than that?

sgosden

*Shameless plug alert *

If anyone wanted to try a studio ...

http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/119192/fs-90s-gibson-les-paul-studio-black-450-ono-price-dropped?new=1

90's studio = nice one.

*shameless plug over*

chrisj1602

Do studios actually have a thinner body? I know there were some a few years back with a noticeable thinner body and smaller inlays, a friend had one, but I thought it was only for a year or so. I had a 50s tribute at the same time as an R7 and didn't notice the body depths were different.

Legionreturns

@Slartibartfarst42 ...total thread derailment, but; great name! 

rivercider

My Studio (2016) has a slightly thinner body than the Standard my mate uses. 
I'm not a big fan of the neck binding on a Standard as I don't really like those nibs - the few I tried (admittedly when shopping SGs recently) weren't fantastic, quality-wise, and although new and not worn in at all, there were places on these where the top E would catch and 'ping' in the gap where that nib is.  Nerdy I know, but I'm just as happy without that neck binding on Gibsons, so my Studio is sufficient.  However, I paid a grand for it in 2016 (wow - sounds a lot now) and yet in actual fact the Bernie Marsden PRS I had was just as well made, on the whole, costing way less.  I don't have that Bernie any more but I recently picked up a Chris Robertson PRS, brand new for 599, with the US humbucker. That PRS feels better to me, build wise, than the Studio, and was virtually half the price. 
The feel and 'mojo' of a Gibson is certainly nice, but I do feel that I paid a premium for just that, feel and the name on the headstock.  To others the extra aesthetic touches of a Standard may well be just what they're looking for, but personally I couldn't justify the extra money on them; I think it's just about how you prioritise your 'wants' list when choosing, and then match that to your budget.  For people who can hear a noticeable difference between the models, i.e. the few extra mm on the body etc are apparent to them sonically, then great, I'm happy for them if they can afford the Standard and choose that model, but I'm not that discerning. 
One other thing - when I bought my Studio I was initially impressed by the coil tap option, but have subsequently found I very rarely use it.  Now, compared to the pickup in the Chris Robertson model (which also coil taps)  I'd have to say this 'feature' is of no value to me as it sounds muddy and indistinct, although of course others may feel differently.  I don't know how many LP players actually use coil tap options but I would suspect it's not that popular.  

ellwood

thegummy said:

@Slartibartfarst42 thanks for writing such a detailed reply.

I, too, have a SE Custom 24 and like the quality of it. Actually, out the guitars I have (which also includes an American standard Strat, high end Mexican precision bass, Schecter jazz bass and a Yamaha acoustic) I'm very happy with the build quality of them all, maybe I'm spoiled with well made instruments.

I am going to buy a les Paul though so am weary of all the talk of quality problems. Ironic, since they're expensive guitars.

I'm wondering if some of the complaints are actually due to the price and people are expecting to get something that stands out as great?

I have one or two Les Pauls and my 2017 Trad is absolutely superb - and second hand was a decent buy. I’ve had studios, and if you can get a 90s one at sensible money they are superb. I don’t really agree that they equate to a PRS SE (i’ve Got a couple of SE’s). The SE range is superb but the poly topcoat (which adds to the superb finishing) doesn’t feel as good as the Gibson finish.

Musicman20

The 2017 Tributes with reveal binding are/were fantastic. Some of them were under £600 for a USA Les Paul with decent pickups, plain tops, nice reverse (I hate the back of LP's to be painted thickly) and a decent padded Gibson soft case.

Mine is great fun. It's not perfection, but then again, what is?! I'm a snob when it comes to QC and this one is 90% there for me so I'm happy.

Slartibartfarst42

Perhaps I was unlucky with the first one I got and I think a lot of it is probably down to the price. To me the Studio just didn't feel like a guitar costing close to £1,000 whereas, having owned a £1,000 Japanese Jackson, the PRS does. What I will say is that when I graduated from the Vintage, I tried lots of options for a singlecut, Les Paul-style guitar and there's just nothing like a Gibson. The Epiphones just don't sound right and while the Gibsons may not feel like they're worth quite that much money, the Epiphones just didn't feel special at all. I also tried LTD and Ibanez options and my attitude was very much 'take it or leave it'. Despite everything I've said about the Gibsons, there's nothing else that captures that raw tone in my experience. I can forgive my Gibson for feeling a little less well put together than the other two and for having the horribly cheap and nasty Granadillo fretboard because it sounds awesome with the right pickups and through the right amp. It's all down to that 'soul' I was talking about. A PRS singlecut was far better in objective terms but its refinement was exactly the problem. The PRS was like sophisticated Progressive Rock whereas the Gibson was like Punk; it grabbed you by the scruff of the neck and made you smile. If you don't want to spend the money on a Gibson, just get a Vintage because that was better than any Epiphone, LTD or Ibanez that I tried but for me, I don't regret going for the Gibson. My PRS is better in every way but my Gibson makes me smile more and you can't put a price on that.

rivercider

ellwood said:

thegummy said:

@Slartibartfarst42 thanks for writing such a detailed reply.

I, too, have a SE Custom 24 and like the quality of it. Actually, out the guitars I have (which also includes an American standard Strat, high end Mexican precision bass, Schecter jazz bass and a Yamaha acoustic) I'm very happy with the build quality of them all, maybe I'm spoiled with well made instruments.

I am going to buy a les Paul though so am weary of all the talk of quality problems. Ironic, since they're expensive guitars.

I'm wondering if some of the complaints are actually due to the price and people are expecting to get something that stands out as great?

I have one or two Les Pauls and my 2017 Trad is absolutely superb - and second hand was a decent buy. I’ve had studios, and if you can get a 90s one at sensible money they are superb. I don’t really agree that they equate to a PRS SE (i’ve Got a couple of SE’s). The SE range is superb but the poly topcoat (which adds to the superb finishing) doesn’t feel as good as the Gibson finish.

That's a good point - the nitro finish on the Studio I have (in vintage sunburst) is definitely lovely.....didn't factor that in when writing my post. The QC, build and even initial setup from the shop on the PRS's (both my SE and my S2) are ahead of the Studio, but the Studio has that lovely looking (and smelling!) finish....and a powerful tone from its 498T pup, it should be added. Bit unsophisticated, that 498, perhaps, but it does a job and does do it well. 
I looked for nitro on Fenders and its kinda hard to find below a grand at all, unless you go for one of their Road Worn models.  At least Gibson still use proper nitro, or the modern day version of it, rather than Fender's 'flash coat lacquer' or whatever that is. 

57Deluxe

The Studio can look every bit as imperious as a Standard or Custom - you just have to make the right choices.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/52/9b/22/529b224c4c97bd7faab4373212154ff0.jpg

Slartibartfarst42

rivercider said:

  ....and a powerful tone from its 498T pup, it should be added. Bit unsophisticated, that 498, perhaps, but it does a job and does do it well. 

When I bought my Studio I had loads of people telling me the stock pickups were rubbish and while I'd agree the 490R is very poor, I actually really liked the 498T. It was a bit overpowering in the upper mids but when I had my new pickups made for me, I specifically asked for the bridge pup to be essentially a 498T with the upper mids tamed just a little. For the neck I went in a completely different direction as the 490R was so poor so that one was an A2 magnet with 42.5AWG wire. It's arguably the best set of pickups I've ever owned and I've owned plenty, including lots of Bare Knuckles yet ironically, by specifying my own wind and having them custom made for me, they're also the cheapest set I've ever bought.