Christian Guitar Forum

Christian Guitar Forum (http://www.christianguitar.org/forums/)
-   Guitar (http://www.christianguitar.org/forums/f13/)
-   -   Gibson Les Pauls vs. Fender Strats (http://www.christianguitar.org/forums/t34160/)

JeSuSmUsIcMaN 09-03-2002 02:45 PM

Gibson Les Pauls vs. Fender Strats
 
I don't kno why, but I love these controversial threads! Have fun on voting and remember to acknoledge all of the models of both guitars!

Guitar MC 09-03-2002 03:22 PM

I like LPs, but I LOVE strats. They just feel right.

John Clark 09-03-2002 03:35 PM

Well, I've never played a real Gibson, but I just love Strats.
I...ok, it's dad's..:D...Dad has an '84 American Custom Strat. I love that thing. :kgrin: It's a great guitar. Plays nice, sounds great.

The only Les Paul I've played is the Epiphone I just bought ( see"Wanna see my new guitar" thread..Shameless, I know :D ), but I've always liked Strats.

Art 09-03-2002 04:10 PM

My friend Jeff has a Gibson... really stinking heavy! I definitely prefer the feel of the Strat, or for that matter, the telecaster. BUT the Gibson does have a distinct and wonderful sound. I do also like the sound of the strat....

Guy 09-03-2002 04:18 PM

Both great guitars, i currently own a strat and i love it for its versatility and comfortable neck. I've played a few pauls and I love the sustain and rich tones... I want my next guitar to be a les paul studio.

John Clark 09-03-2002 04:19 PM

My Epi is heavy...though I'm to understand the real Gibson's are heavier. Ouch.

Acura8591 09-03-2002 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Guy
Both great guitars, i currently own a strat and i love it for its versatility and comfortable neck. I've played a few pauls and I love the sustain and rich tones... I want my next guitar to be a les paul studio.
Dude, the studio's are like the heaviest guitars in the world... pure rosewood... i have a LP special... very nice rich tone... true gibson too... not epi... very good if you like to play punk

Guy 09-03-2002 04:24 PM

hmmm i think they weigh mabye 9 lbs?? i could be wrong but my strat weighs pretty close to 9 and its not a back breaker.

Lightinthedark 09-03-2002 06:16 PM

I voted for the Strats. Strats, in my opinion are more versatile and comfortable. With 5 pickup positions, I can get 5 completely different sounds from one level, gain, etc. setting. LPs, while a great, high end guitar, are just too darn heavy. Also, they're cut so weird that it's uncomfortable to sit with one. Just my opinion.

BluesJunkie 09-03-2002 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Acura8591
Dude, the studio's are like the heaviest guitars in the world... pure rosewood...
The only rosewood on the Studio is the fingerboard. The neck is mahogany, and the body is mahogany with a maple top.

I have several Les Pauls and Strats. The Strats don't get played much, though. It's hard to beat the sound and feel of a Paul.

GMartin2R 09-03-2002 10:30 PM

i'll probably get a strat cause i like the tone and look but LP are cool too. if they weren't so stinkin heavy i'd be more apt to get one. you have to be muscleman just to have one on. and considering i'm usually coming off of an acoustic when i play heavy guitars, the lighter the better. plus gibson necks are a bit too big for me.

Justa Graze 09-04-2002 08:43 AM

When I think of a Strat, I think of heavy distortion and hard rock.

When I think of the Les Paul, I think of blues and classic rock.

To me, they're like apples and oranges. Yes they're both fruits, but they taste completely different.

Mrstickball 09-04-2002 11:22 AM

Gibsons becuase...........


I have a cheap Epi/gibson SG , and a person i know has an american series strat. I've played his and he's played mine , and we both think that the SG can get a better tonal range than his strat.


Gibson all the way ! ( my next guitar will be a LP )

thesteve 09-04-2002 01:46 PM

I said LP, because I have a Jagstang made of solid basswood with no contours, so it's heavier than any strats I've played. I just deal with the weight.

I would've said telecaster, but it wasn't a choice.

RockinRonnie 09-04-2002 02:15 PM

I don't necessarily think any one is better than the other. I have in my possession both a strat and a les paul and also an SG style guitar. There are advantages and disadvantages to each.

The strat has a great, distinct tone, which is pretty much a trademark of its pickups. It's a fairly light guitar, yet the neck stays in place pretty well too. I personally dislike how it looks, but that's not a matter of science, rather it's my opinion. Most of the strats that are in any decent price range tend to make an annoying humming sound (which undoubtedly brought on the creation of the "hum-bucker"). As far as nice clean sustain, you can definitely find better options. It has good tone versatility, with the three pcikups, and the five way selector thingy. Also, They usually have a bolt-on neck, which for some is a bad quality, although it has yet to become apparent to me what that bad quality is. Overall I like the thing. It doesn't handle distortion as well as I'd like it to, but it works for a very wide variety of styles.

The Les Paul is probably the guitar I'll be playing when I'm old and gray. Number one, I love how it looks. Mine is a sort of dark rich honeyburst. It's a standard, full sized Les Paul, so it is at times painfully heavy. But that's a good thing too, because the weight of the body holds the neck up quite nicely. I also think that the thickness and weight of the body contributes to the sustain, which isn't rivaled by many other styles. The humbuckers in it are usually quite nice and are good for most any kind of overdrive or effect you'd like to run them through.

If anything, SGs just plain cool looking. They are lighter, but everytime I let my left hand off the neck, it wants to fall down. The thinner body takes a way a bit from the body of the sound, which would typically be present with a les paul. Other than that, the SG and the Les Paul are pretty similar. The SG does have a double cutaway look to it, making it easier to get those last few frets on top. It's fun, and you can pretend to be Angus Young.

All in all, it all just comes down to your own opinion and what you're looking for in an instrument. My favorite is the Les Paul though, even though a strat is great too.

Ryan

Pete_H 09-04-2002 02:35 PM

I like both Gibson LP's and Fender Strats. I currently own a Strat, but LP's have the best sustain of any guitar out there. This past weekend I was watching Led Zeppelin's The Song Remains the Same movie. I haven't seen it in a few years, and forgot how great Jimmy Pages sound was those 2 nights at Madison Square Garden. His guitar just sang throughout the whole movie. The one thing I dislike about LP's is the wieght, but I guess thats why they have great sustain.

GopherWood 09-04-2002 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BluesJunkie
It's hard to beat the sound and feel of a Paul.

Amen to that Junkie.


You can take a wild guess at what I voted for.




LES PAUL!!!!!!

GMartin2R 09-04-2002 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pete_H
The one thing I dislike about LP's is the wieght, but I guess thats why they have great sustain.
yeha that's what i've heard that the body weight is what gives it such good sustain.

Travis 09-05-2002 10:41 AM

I canít believe this thread (or debate) even exists, much less that people actually choose Fender. It is NO contest. Gibson wins hands down.

Travis 09-05-2002 10:44 AM

And all of you that complain about the weight are just a bunch of wusses! ;) I'm a bass player for crying out loud! My bass probably weighs more than you guys do!

thesteve 09-05-2002 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Travis
And all of you that complain about the weight are just a bunch of wusses! ;) I'm a bass player for crying out loud! My bass probably weighs more than you guys do!
This cracks me up. I dunno...the basses I've played never struck me as being overly heavy. Maybe it's because they were low end, or maybe I'm just a stud

GMartin2R 09-05-2002 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Travis
And all of you that complain about the weight are just a bunch of wusses! ;) I'm a bass player for crying out loud! My bass probably weighs more than you guys do!
it just might at that...:kgrin:

i'm just over 110 lbs... but hey cut me some slack cause i play acoustics most of the time and electric when i need to.

Lightinthedark 09-05-2002 04:46 PM

Hey, I'm 6'2", 185 lbs. a varsity football player, and I used to play bass, and I still say that LP's are too heavy. Actually, a LP probably weighs about the same as my bass. That doesn't mean I don't think that they sound great, but they're too heavy. In my humble opinion.

Guy 09-05-2002 08:13 PM

yeah travis is right, your ALL wusses!!!! HAHAHAHA BASSES ARE LIGHT!!!!

GMartin2R 09-05-2002 10:06 PM

okay so i'm an acoustic playing wuss...:ktongue:

i don't care...:ktongue:

:kgrin:

jarhead 09-05-2002 11:20 PM

HAHA, yeah sorry but if you can't handle 9 pounds (give or take depending on model) than you are a pretty big wussy. I mean your arms way 7 pounds!! Besides, it feels heavy at first but play it for a little while and you won't even notice. I can't stand strat's personally, if it's clean it sounds way to twangy, and don't even try to turn on distortion at high volumes, sheesh the feedback could kill the neighbors dog. The Les Paul is much more versatile, you can get a nice crunchy sound or a high peircing sound very easily. As far as the 5 way switch, I don't see it as very useful, I have a guitar with a 5 way and i usually just kick it into one of the 3 positions anyway (middle, bridge, neck). I think it's obvious what my vote went to. :D

thesteve 09-05-2002 11:26 PM

I think the biggest problem with the weight is that it's an extra 2 or 3 pounds all on your shoulders, and you might have that extra, unevenly distributed weight on your shoulder for 45minutes at a time. And most of the time, it's not padded.

Guy 09-06-2002 01:19 AM

Quote:

and don't even try to turn on distortion at high volumes, sheesh the feedback could kill the neighbors dog.
LMAO

Clayton 09-06-2002 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Guy
LMAO
what

I say both are nice. Out of the two i would have to pick les pauls. When I say les paul i mean the special that is the one i like a lot. It is lighter. But it has a certain simplicity about it that just makes me wanna jam. (wish i had 1) I also like the standard teles (i don't have either i got a cheap strat knock ofF) later y'all


:kwink:

jarhead 09-06-2002 06:02 PM

Cheap strat knock off, so you got the Fender kind haha sorry, had to take it. :D

Clayton 09-06-2002 06:21 PM

no offense taken



but..............

it was cheaper man :)

Pete_H 09-07-2002 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jarhead
The Les Paul is much more versatile, you can get a nice crunchy sound or a high peircing sound very easily.
I would argue that point. I would say my Fat strat is more versatile than a Les Paul. I have the best of both worlds with a bridge humbucker and single coil pup's.

Mrstickball 09-07-2002 05:12 PM

What about a LP with a coil tap ? :)

Taylormade 09-07-2002 05:34 PM

You know the toby mac song,yours,where he says,"dont even get me started"?Well im humming that right now.Dont even get me going about the unbelievable superiority of my gibson over almost any fender for most kinds of rock.THe twang of an ugly and strangely light tele or jazzmaster is welcome on more southern or country arrangements,but other than that,dont even try to compare.And about the weight...is it possible to really really rock with a light guitar?Last time i tried i had to go to the dentist.Can i get an amen from all my punk/hard/rap rockers out there?Please?

Clayton 09-07-2002 06:04 PM

it's all in the fingers yes i got punk outa a gibi and strat and tele (look @ my avature) not to say my fingers are the best but hey. Guess thats not what u wanted to here u got me stared (great song by the way)





:kspin:

thesteve 09-07-2002 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Taylormade
You know the toby mac song,yours,where he says,"dont even get me started"?Well im humming that right now.Dont even get me going about the unbelievable superiority of my gibson over almost any fender for most kinds of rock.THe twang of an ugly and strangely light tele or jazzmaster is welcome on more southern or country arrangements,but other than that,dont even try to compare.And about the weight...is it possible to really really rock with a light guitar?Last time i tried i had to go to the dentist.Can i get an amen from all my punk/hard/rap rockers out there?Please?
LoL...this post just seems really misinformed to me. Here's some reasons...

mp3.com/dieradiodie the lead guitar is an American Telecaster I believe, or a Nashville Tele.
mp3.com/culverdrive One guitar is a 1972 thinline reissue. The other is a 1972 custom reissue.
Oh yeah...then there's Bruce Springsteen...he's always played a tele.
Personally I'd be happy with either guitar. Or even better if I could get my own guitar (1996 Fender Jagstang) repaired with a new Seymour Duncan SH-4 or SH-6 humbucker.

jarhead 09-07-2002 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pete_H
I would argue that point. I would say my Fat strat is more versatile than a Les Paul. I have the best of both worlds with a bridge humbucker and single coil pup's.
I've played a fat strat and it can't even compare with the crunch of a les paul. Sure, it helps a little to throw in the humbucker but you gotta remeber that it was made by seymour duncan :rolleyes: There is no such thing as a strat that is as versatile as a Les Paul, fat or not... in my opinion of course

jarhead 09-07-2002 06:30 PM

I would say it's possible to get tele's and strats thick enough for punk rock stuff but it's much harder than it would be if you had a Les Paul, and that twang still comes out at times. May i also bring up another point about fender, their custom shop will make a guitar for anyone with enough money. The Gibson custom shop has some integrity and only makes a guitar that has some importance. I once saw a fender guitar that looked like a race car, had tide written all over it, i immediattly thought sellout.

Taylormade 09-08-2002 08:21 AM

Some thing im still getting people to understand on this (great) site is that almost every post i make is tinged and laced with sarcasm.Obviously you could get punk out of strat,but i wouldnt care if every punk band in history used one,i find everything about a gibby better for any rock involving movement.Im not even talking sound,that is whole 'nuther ballpark.

RockinRonnie 09-08-2002 12:08 PM

Many guitarists have used the strat far more than many other varieties of guitar. Look at Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton and Stevie Ray Vaughan. I guess I find it hard to ridicule their tastes in selecting instruments. Granted, they all didn't ONLY play strats, but you look at the live pictures and whatnot, that's what they usually had. Among others that played strats pretty exclusively are guys like Mark Knopfler, David Gilmour, and even Kirk Hammett used a strat style guitar. Not too shabby company. It's not like any one style of guitar is so much better than any other. Jimmy Page often played a Les Paul, but he also used some of those dinky Danelectro styles as well as a southern twangy Telecaster. The issue is far from black and white. My personal preference: Les Paul.
Ryan

Guitar MC 09-09-2002 07:42 PM

Strats are the most coppied guitars for a reason. And whoever says that the LP is the most versitile guitar is just wrong. Also I think that real Gibsons are over-priced. Sure, they are great guitars, but $2000, give me a break.

Clayton 09-12-2002 05:09 PM

Yes 2,000 is to much to play but hey you can get an awsom gibbi special les and i love, it simple down ta earth. Great guitar. You know I just think that it is awsom, I played one the other day. In case you didn't notice

:kangel:

Mrstickball 09-12-2002 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Guitar MC
Strats are the most coppied guitars for a reason. And whoever says that the LP is the most versitile guitar is just wrong. Also I think that real Gibsons are over-priced. Sure, they are great guitars, but $2000, give me a break.
You know why they copy fenders? Cheap to start with, cheap to copy.

Most guitars are overpriced, everyone has bundles to say about PRSes, but most cost just as much, or more than LPs, but most don't complain because they're such darn good guitars.

You want most versitile guitar? Get a LP with a coil-tap....Or a nice PRS with coil taps.

thesteve 09-12-2002 08:08 PM

Hehe...I think the reason that Fenders are copied more is because

1) they are an industry standard
2) the are simpler...not cheaper...simpler.

For example, You can make Strat style guitars outta alder, ash, basswood, poplar or just about whatever.

LP style guitars are almost always made out of mahogany with a flamed maple top. PRS's usually have flamed maple tops also. From what I've garnered, only maple looked like flamed maple...and flamed maple is generally expensive.

Pete_H 09-12-2002 08:13 PM

Quote:

I've played a fat strat and it can't even compare with the crunch of a les paul
I hear this arguement all the time and laugh. Am I missing something?:kconf: I thought you get great crunch sounds from an amp and any distortion effects that are plugged in. I guarantee you I can get the same crunch sounds, or probably as close to the same sounds as anyone. I will admit as I stated in a previous post the LP's have better sustain, but this argument that the guitar has great crunch sounds is laughable.

Quote:

There is no such thing as a strat that is as versatile as a Les Paul, fat or not... in my opinion of course
Thats just your opinion

thesteve 09-12-2002 11:13 PM

The only difference I would think would exist from the "crunch" sound might be because of the pickup difference. Gibson is known for using hotter humbuckers than Fenders.

If you had a Fat Strat and put in say...a Seymour Duncan or an EMG you'd get all the "crunch" you'd want probably.

jarhead 09-16-2002 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pete_H
I hear this arguement all the time and laugh. Am I missing something?:kconf: I thought you get great crunch sounds from an amp and any distortion effects that are plugged in. I guarantee you I can get the same crunch sounds, or probably as close to the same sounds as anyone. I will admit as I stated in a previous post the LP's have better sustain, but this argument that the guitar has great crunch sounds is laughable.



Thats just your opinion

Yep you are missing something, diffrent guitars are made out of diffrent wood. The wood can have a BIG effect on the crunch of a guitar. Sure you can get your fat strat to have the same crunch as a les paul but you'll have to buy a more expensive pedal, thicken in up way to much at the expensive of your highs and mid-tones, or find another solution. Given the same effects pedals, same amps, and what not I think you'll find the Les Paul much more versatile, I know i do.

Guy 09-18-2002 09:38 AM

I dont think the argument is that a paul has a thicker tone... thats just common sense. Its all personal preference... I prefer a strat.

cloakerz 09-18-2002 09:41 PM

dude, get a usa made hamer. Half the price of a les paul and 5
times the quality. I bought a used studio custom for 850 and
it plays better than a 2500 les paul.

Guy 09-18-2002 11:30 PM

Yeah man, I've heard good things about those hamers. I havent played one yet but they look nice.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:28 AM.



vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2