sg standard vs late 60's sg neck angle ?

[electricskychurch]

it would be nice to see some pictures of the 62' sg as well (neck angle and bridge and neck pu's angle to the strings)

[908ssp]

...i'm talking about the angle of the bridge pu to the strings of your late 60's SG with large pickguard ....

You must be asking someone else I don't have a late 60s SG only the 62 Les Paul/SG. Yea I meant pickup rings when I said frames.

[Mynameisfritz]

Here it is.

[electricskychurch]

thanks for the picture

it's strange, the neck pu doesn't have the same angle to the body as the bridge pu !
it seems the neck pu is quiet parallel to the strings unlike the bridge pu.
i'd like to find a way that the pu's stay parallel to the strings on my SG standard.

as you said for your 74' sg , the pu's are too close to the strings, i noticed it's also the case on my 2x 59' les paul ri's unlike on my les paul standard where the pu's rings are smaller and let the pu's be setup farther from the strings (without beeing really close to the rings) and with more pu's height setup possibilities.

i checked on the "beauty of the burst" book and i saw some late 50's les paul seem to have the strings very close to the pu's rings (and pu's covers) and ususaly the pu's are setup very close to the pu's rings (they don't really have the choice if they don't want a really high action) when some seem to have more space beetwen the pu's rings top (without beeing setup with the action really high from what i saw) and the strings, letting the ability to set the pu's higher over the pu's rings and not just at the same level.

is it due to a slightly different neck angle as i would suppose ?

[Mynameisfritz]

It's only by accident that the neck PU is parallel to the strings. I don't care about it too much. 'G

[electricskychurch]

on my SG'S , i have no problem with the strings beeing too close to the pu's as on teh sg61ri, the pu's rings (frames) are not as tall as the ones on the les paul 59' ri , so you have more space to setup the pu's height.
on teh SG standard , i don't have the problem either as the neck angle is very important and there are no pu's rings but on teh les paul 59' , i haven't seen any other solution than using some les paul standard (smaller) rings !

so i was wondering if the original late 50's les paul's had the same "problem" and it seems so despite some late 50's les paul seem to do not have the strings that close to the pu's.
so i was wondering if the neck angle was slightly changing but maybe the maple cap is a reason.

[electricskychurch]

i compared the accoustic / unplugged tone of my sg standard with a custom shop sg i have that is built the same way as the sg standard ( same neck angle and type of neck but this one was made for a gibson employee , with a small pickguard and P90's), the tone is quiet similar in the way that it has less mids (and low end as well maybe) than my Ssg61 ri's , sg classic (with p90's) or les paul guitars (standad or custom shop ones).
as i heard that similarity unplugged, i suppose it might come from the neck angle (more than the pu's angle to the neck)

[Mynameisfritz]

I wouldn't go so far... too many other things involved here.