Les Paul Studio v Standard

Fuengi

Much difference in tone or is it just aesthetics?

What are current 2017 / 18 Studio models like?

57Deluxe

weight, aesthetics but sound is often better on a Studio as that is what they were designed for - optimum studio weapons...

Fuengi

OK, so Standard for show Studio for a pro?

Voxman

57Deluxe said:9

weight, aesthetics but sound is often better on a Studio as that is what they were designed for - optimum studio weapons...

I don't think that's correct. Studios are stripped down versions that bring a good quality L.P. into the budget of folk that can't meet the higher cost of standards and customs.  And just like any L.P. there will be some that play and sound better than others. Having said that the later studios have coil taps that add versatility. 

thegummy

I thought that it's just that the studio isn't as fancy looking because no one sees you in the studio anyway; didn't think it would be any better sound.

johnl

Yep, Studios are just stripped back standards - no binding, tops not as highly flamed, Gibson logo is a decal rather than inlaid into the headstock etc. etc. 

thegummy

When comparing the models of LPs there seems to be quite a big price hike compared to how much extra you're getting.

Going down another step to the tribute and it loses neck binding and glossy finish but that takes the price down by 400 quid which seems a lot.

Going from the tribute to the standard is a huge price increase seemingly to look a bit fancier?

crunchman

Different neck profile.  Most studios have the horrible "Slim Taper" neck profile, as do most of Gibson's other budget offerings.

thegummy

crunchman said:

Different neck profile.  Most studios have the horrible "Slim Taper" neck profile, as do most of Gibson's other budget offerings.

It's personal preference though, isn't it? Rather than everyone preferring the rounded but settling for slim taper to save money?

Legionreturns

Look at classic and traditional for the steps between studio and standard, that'll fill in the blanks

Whitecat

crunchman said:

Different neck profile.  Most studios have the horrible "Slim Taper" neck profile, as do most of Gibson's other budget offerings.

The Standard is still slim taper, just asymmetrical. 

The Traditional has the fattest neck on a “budget” Gibson but they ain’t so cheap anymore either... £2k list now I think. I’d rather save up and buy a used R*. 

guitarfishbay

I strongly prefer the slim neck. The fat neck is uncomfortable to me. There was a time a few years ago where it was hard to get many 60’s neck Gibson’s but it seems like there’s been more choice in recent times

guitarfishbay

Legionreturns said:

Look at classic and traditional for the steps between studio and standard, that'll fill in the blanks

The old Trad Pros were a great deal.

Badically a Trad with a gloss top but satin back and sides, locking tuners, and pickups with coil splits and 500k pots. They did some colours with 60’s necks and some with 50’s. They were more expensive than a studio but less than a Trad or Standard.

sweepy

Les Paul Studios should be seen as a different guitar in their own right, they don’t sound like a Les Paul Standard or Trad etc, the body is thinner and they do have a different sound, slightly pusher and more forward in nature

Bucket

Studio is just a name. Nothing to do with "the studio" - you can use anything in the studio, as I'm sure you're aware.

To me, all it signifies is a very cheap-looking guitar that has precisely none of the aesthetic appeal of a proper LP because it doesn't have binding. Presumably because if they made it look half-decent, they wouldn't sell enough expensive guitars.

guitarfishbay

Bucket said:

Studio is just a name. Nothing to do with "the studio" - you can use anything in the studio, as I'm sure you're aware.

To me, all it signifies is a very cheap-looking guitar that has precisely none of the aesthetic appeal of a proper LP because it doesn't have binding. Presumably because if they made it look half-decent, they wouldn't sell enough expensive guitars.

It’s arguably a smarter business plan than Fender who do near identical looking instruments regardless of the price bracket. There’s less incentive to ‘upgrade’ that way 

57Deluxe

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/55/03/fb/5503fbe7018381ca91d67909cfaa4b58.jpg

daveyh

I have a 2001 Studio, and its the best LP I’ve owned by a mile.

Wolfetone

I've had a number of LP's and they've all been great. One of my favourite's was an LP faded. It was a lot lighter than the standards but came with burstbuckers. It sounded great.

The standard studios aren't any different to the regular guitars in my opinion. 

Fuengi

daveyh said:

I have a 2001 Studio, and its the best LP I’ve owned by a mile.

Best sounding? 

siraxeman

johnl said:

Yep, Studios are just stripped back standards - no binding, tops not as highly flamed, Gibson logo is a decal rather than inlaid into the headstock etc. etc. 

Its like asda's "no frills" for LP's...dat's all.