SG vs Les Paul

[mrkrausman]

I have owned SG's in the past and am considering a Les Paul. What are the differnces between the two as far as tone and playability?

[fillmore nyc]

I have owned SG's in the past and am considering a Les Paul. What are the differnces between the two as far as tone and playability?

I've owned a few of each, and currently own one of each. Played thru the same amp on the same settings, I think the difference in tone is in "thickness". A LP typically has a fatter, thicker tone on either pickup. The neck pickups in particular sound different because of the pickups location relative to the bridge... an SG's neck pickup is located closer to the bridge cause its spaced further from the neck. Thats done out of necessity to increase the available gluing area and wood needed to keep the neck joint from becoming too weak... which, on early SG's is a real problem. I've had a couple that have developed cracks at the neck joint for that reason. Newer SG's seem less prone to that problem for some reason.
That big fat slab of mahogany and the maple top (usually) on a LP Std just translate into a big, giant tone thats pretty difficult to replicate in almost any other guitar, especially if the guitar has the '58/'59 neck profile. That combination, with the guitars inherent 24 3/4" scale, and a good pair of 'buckers produces a monster tone. Of course, a massive amount of the overall tone is due to the amp, but all things being equal...

Typically, SG's have a thin, wide neck, which some guys like for its feel, but a lot of players (including me) seem to be of the opinion that a big fat neck produces a bigger, fatter tone. For me, a guitars neck almost cant be too big. An 1 3/4" nut width, a baseball bat back profile and mega-huge frets is a thing of beauty as far as Im concerned.

I love both sounds, and for slide playing, actually prefer the SG. I think the SG has a bit more note to note clarity, and for slide, seems to translate better for me. My favorite guitar for slide is a Firebird, which kicks the clarity concept up even a few more notches when compared to a LP or an SG.
Slide on a LP is no joke either, but its definitely a fatter, meatier tone with less note definition.
Its not to say that a big fat tone cant be found in an SG, cause it can, but all things being equal, the LP wins in that category, IMO.

Like all things concerning tone and playability, the "bee's are in the eyes of the beauty holder", ya know??

[darkbluemurder]

I basically agree to the tone assessment. The Les Paul has the thicker tone in general due to its bigger body mass.

As far as playability is concerned both have disadvantages. LPs tend to be heavy and difficult to access to the upper register of the fretboard. SGs tend to be unbalanced, i.e. headstock heavy.

Just my 0.02c.

[Roe]

I basically agree to the tone assessment. The Les Paul has the thicker tone in general due to its bigger body mass.

As far as playability is concerned both have disadvantages. LPs tend to be heavy and difficult to access to the upper register of the fretboard. SGs tend to be unbalanced, i.e. headstock heavy.

Just my 0.02c.

the low mids are also due to the heel

[fillmore nyc]

As far as playability is concerned both have disadvantages. LPs tend to be heavy and difficult to access to the upper register of the fretboard. SGs tend to be unbalanced, i.e. headstock heavy.

Just my 0.02c.

Hmmm... I never noticed an SG being headstock heavy, but maybe thats cause Im used to Firebirds, which are probably the most head heavy guitar ever. I agree with the LP being a little more difficult to access the upper frets. SG'S and Firebird's have no such issues, but DO have their own particular quirks.

(Like the FB's tendency to become decapitated if the guitar comes off the strap, or if that head comes in contact with just about anything).