Guitar Shootout Video: Gibson Les Pauls, SG, Ric 360, Tele

fiveightandten · Post by **fiveightandten** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:39 am

I put this up on youtube a while back, but I figured it might be of interest to some people here. No fancy shredding, nothing extravagant, just every guitar I own played back to back through the same small amp with the same EQ settings and the same mic placement so you can hear the differences between them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRwCqSERUMM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

-Nick

myboss57 · Post by **myboss57** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:33 am

Oh man! I wish I hadn't just got to work, argh! I'll be watching this later. An SG, Ric, and Tele back to back like this is something I've really wanted to hear. I used to own a 360 (wish I still had it, and been gasing for a 620 too), currently own/play an SG. A Tele is another one I keep coming back to as well.

DiabloS · Post by **DiabloS** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:26 am

Great job on this video! I'm an SG guy so that was my fav for rhythm. I'd probably give the upper hand to the Les Paul Standard for leads though. Each of those guitars could be the right tool for a specific job though, but that's my overall preference, thanks for posting!

ironlung40 · Post by **ironlung40** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:19 pm

Great video!

Without a doubt, I liked the SG RI the best in the video. It justifies my ownership of one. I'm very glad that I preferred it over the others as I don't need more G.A.S.

I liked the warmer Ric tones, very cool and the Tele spank was awesome as well. The tele would be a great guitar to add to my collection for a nice change-up in tone, although I do have a LP special with p90's that does this already...but you can't beat a good fender sometimes.

rufus · Post by **rufus** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:26 pm

Great video.
To my own surprise i thought these where the best sounds...
1-ric
2-tele
3-sg
4-lp std
5-lp studio

The ric really sounded tight, dark and a little bit fuzzy in a good way to my ears.

OrangePaul · Post by **OrangePaul** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:37 pm

Great comparison Video!

Hard to pick an overall favourite from that though... My least favourites were the Rick and LP Studio, sounding on there a bit too soft for my own personal taste.

Thanks for posting.

Edit: listening to it some more I think the SG shades it for me, closely followed by the LP standard.

a.hun · Post by **a.hun** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:51 pm

Laney LC-14? Nick?!!!

Good stuff, nice comparison. Though of course like all these things (guitar shootouts, speaker shootouts, whatever) you'd normally set the amp up differently for the different guitars, speakers, whatevers. Doesn't matter though - that wasn't the point.

Andy.

Spaceboy1 · Post by **Spaceboy1** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:10 pm

tele and studio were best for my tastes

yossarian83 · Post by **yossarian83** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:10 am

Those Gibby's sound reeeaaaalllly close. Given the same pickups, I wonder if there'd be any difference at all.

ironlung40 · Post by **ironlung40** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:25 am

Listened to it through better speakers......

Still liking the SG best, but it's a VERY tough call between it and the Standard for me. Imo that is a testament to the 57 classics and the SG/Mahogany combo, no maple in that body and it still sounds about as full and mean as that LP.

myboss57 · Post by **myboss57** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:33 pm

Jesus! Thanks a lot, now I really want to grab a Tele.... the SG sounded really good too. I was surprised, I didn't like the Ric as much as I remembered liking it. Maybe it was the different pup you had in there?

Great vid though, really awesome to have such a good comparison, and I appreciate the editing with putting them right after another with no pauses - really helps to hear the differences!

Les Paul Lover · Post by **Les Paul Lover** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:45 pm

Very neat video!

One of the most helpful comparison between guitars that I have seen. Most excellent work indeed!

Iambetacloud · Post by **Iambetacloud** » Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:15 am

man, that was a really excellent demo!

fiveightandten · Post by **fiveightandten** » Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:55 am

Glad you guys found this useful. It's interesting to see people's preferences. I felt this was the best way to do things, and hopefully it provides some sort of insight. As Andy mentioned, there's obviously no replacement for being in the room and being able to adjust the amp to bring out the best of each guitar. By setting the amp up and EQ'ing a fit-all, the Gibsons were probably at an advantage and the Ric at the biggest disadvantage. That guitar has so much bottom end, if you don't shave some off, it gives the illusion of it sounding muddy. It's not muddy.

I also tend to play the Tele with the tone knob rolled back a bit. This makes it sound less shrill, but also accentuates the mids a bit more and fattens it up.

Anyways, here's a quick take for anyone curious to hear some more input on these guitars:

The Studio and Standard are pretty similar. The standard is slightly thicker and has a more upscale feel with the neck binding. The neck size is different, the frets are different. They have different feels. The Studio has a little more harmonic content to it, it sounds better clean. It has a little more midrange crunch when overdriven.

The Standard is smoother, but also has a little more upper register bite, if that makes any sense. The cleans are more bell-like, as opposed to the warm vintage-esque cleans the studio can approximate (I say approximate, as the '61 RI takes the cake in that department). It has a bit more bottom to it, and the top end is a little more clear. Leads are smoother and less raw than the studio.

The 61 RI has the best clean tone of the Gibsons, with the Studio following behind. It has the most harmonic content when overdriven. But this also brings a little more "garbage" in with the tone. The Pauls are a little more pure. The 61 RI sounds more raw. Even still, it has a great midrange bark with a ton of character to it.

I've become very very familiar with these Gibsons recently, as i'm tracking guitars for a CD and i've spent a lot of time comparing them with the different amps I have to find the right sounds. For recording, i've mainly been using the Studio for all my distorted stuff and a lot of clean as well. The 61 RI has made it on many clean tracks and some overdriven stuff too. The standard has been used, but so far it hasn't been making it into many final mixes. It sounds great live, but the other 2 have more character that makes them a little more favorable for recording.

The standard is a great guitar. Anyone that picks it up loves it. Then they pick up the studio. The studio is a little banged up. It doesn't play as well. It could use a fret dressing. It doesn't feel as upscale or look as nice. I think I prefer it, and a few people I know feel the same way. It just has a certain character to it that makes you want to play it. I bought that guitar for $320. It had a headstock crack (not break) repair in 1996, when it was a year old. It's a hell of a guitar for $320.

The tele is a tele. I've since changed the bridge pickup out for a one out of a Custom shop tele. It definitely made the guitar sound better. IMO, Fenders low end (this is a Mexican Tele) guitars are much nicer than Gibsons monetary equalivents. I love this Tele. I go through periods where I use it every gig, and periods when I barely play it. Same with the Ric. But it's a quintessential Tele in every sense, and has most of qualities of more expensive Teles for a lot less cash.

The Ric is its own animal. I have a love/hate relationship with this guitar. For months on end, it's my favorite guitar and I refuse to play anything else. Then it sits in the case for months when i'm on a Les Paul kick. It obviously does the Ric jangle. But I do believe they are type cast a bit. You can definitely get a nice distorted rock tone out of this guitar. It probably built nicer than my Gibsons are. But it's a quirky thing, with its dual truss rods, lacquered fingerboard, and floating bridge. It's finicky with setups and more susceptible to changes in the weather than my other guitars. When it's on, it's on. But i'm not sure i'd want to own it without a workhorse guitar like a Gibson or Fender to fall back on when I want to.

DiabloS · Post by **DiabloS** » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:05 am

fiveightandten wrote:Glad you guys found this useful. It's interesting to see people's preferences. I felt this was the best way to do things, and hopefully it provides some sort of insight. As Andy mentioned, there's obviously no replacement for being in the room and being able to adjust the amp to bring out the best of each guitar. By setting the amp up and EQ'ing a fit-all, the Gibsons were probably at an advantage and the Ric at the biggest disadvantage. That guitar has so much bottom end, if you don't shave some off, it gives the illusion of it sounding muddy. It's not muddy.

I also tend to play the Tele with the tone knob rolled back a bit. This makes it sound less shrill, but also accentuates the mids a bit more and fattens it up.

Anyways, here's a quick take for anyone curious to hear some more input on these guitars:

The Studio and Standard are pretty similar. The standard is slightly thicker and has a more upscale feel with the neck binding. The neck size is different, the frets are different. They have different feels. The Studio has a little more harmonic content to it, it sounds better clean. It has a little more midrange crunch when overdriven.

The Standard is smoother, but also has a little more upper register bite, if that makes any sense. The cleans are more bell-like, as opposed to the warm vintage-esque cleans the studio can approximate (I say approximate, as the '61 RI takes the cake in that department). It has a bit more bottom to it, and the top end is a little more clear. Leads are smoother and less raw than the studio.

The 61 RI has the best clean tone of the Gibsons, with the Studio following behind. It has the most harmonic content when overdriven. But this also brings a little more "garbage" in with the tone. The Pauls are a little more pure. The 61 RI sounds more raw. Even still, it has a great midrange bark with a ton of character to it.

I've become very very familiar with these Gibsons recently, as i'm tracking guitars for a CD and i've spent a lot of time comparing them with the different amps I have to find the right sounds. For recording, i've mainly been using the Studio for all my distorted stuff and a lot of clean as well. The 61 RI has made it on many clean tracks and some overdriven stuff too. The standard has been used, but so far it hasn't been making it into many final mixes. It sounds great live, but the other 2 have more character that makes them a little more favorable for recording.

The standard is a great guitar. Anyone that picks it up loves it. Then they pick up the studio. The studio is a little banged up. It doesn't play as well. It could use a fret dressing. It doesn't feel as upscale or look as nice. I think I prefer it, and a few people I know feel the same way. It just has a certain character to it that makes you want to play it. I bought that guitar for $320. It had a headstock crack (not break) repair in 1996, when it was a year old. It's a hell of a guitar for $320.

The tele is a tele. I've since changed the bridge pickup out for a one out of a Custom shop tele. It definitely made the guitar sound better. IMO, Fenders low end (this is a Mexican Tele) guitars are much nicer than Gibsons monetary equalivents. I love this Tele. I go through periods where I use it every gig, and periods when I barely play it. Same with the Ric. But it's a quintessential Tele in every sense, and has most of qualities of more expensive Teles for a lot less cash.

The Ric is its own animal. I have a love/hate relationship with this guitar. For months on end, it's my favorite guitar and I refuse to play anything else. Then it sits in the case for months when i'm on a Les Paul kick. It obviously does the Ric jangle. But I do believe they are type cast a bit. You can definitely get a nice distorted rock tone out of this guitar. It probably built nicer than my Gibsons are. But it's a quirky thing, with its dual truss rods, lacquered fingerboard, and floating bridge. It's finicky with setups and more susceptible to changes in the weather than my other guitars. When it's on, it's on. But i'm not sure i'd want to own it without a workhorse guitar like a Gibson or Fender to fall back on when I want to.

You should post here more often! haha Seems like you used to at least. I watched that video at least 5 times, it was really well done and I appreciate your insight on the different guitars too. You usually have to sift through tons of crap on youtube to find a quality video like this.