SG quandry: 61 reissue or Standard

crunchman

My Standard is brilliant.  It has the best neck of any guitar I've ever played.  It's about 15 years old now so I don't know how newer ones would compare.

Moltisanti

for the record i much prefer the 498/490 to the 57 Classics, the 57s are too weedy for me

slate

Moltisanti;629288" said:

for the record i much prefer the 498/490 to the 57 Classics, the 57s are too weedy for me

Me too, the 498s are great with gain.
I like the fat neck of the old model - pre 2013 - SGs too. My faves are the specials - no horrible binding nibs!!

p90fool

I like the combination of a 498t with a classic 57.
It makes for a very well-balanced guitar, where both pickups excel with the same amp settings.

terada

slate said:

Moltisanti;629288" said:

for the record i much prefer the 498/490 to the 57 Classics, the 57s are too weedy for me

Me too, the 498s are great with gain.
I like the fat neck of the old model - pre 2013 - SGs too. My faves are the specials - no horrible binding nibs!!

It's brilliant how individual we all are. I like a skinny neck on sg's, far prefer 57 classics, and I love the nibs!!!

Different strokes and all that

bloodandtears

Wow.. such a mix of views and tastes...

As Angus I'm guessing a 498/490 pairing would be preferred to 57 classics? as I'd be relying on the guitar to drive the amp more so than using an amp on high gain (not taking into account a dimed amp obviously).. 

So I need to avoid pre- and post-2013 standards if I want a slimmer neck; and a 61 re-issue has 57 classics??

This is becoming quote a narrowing down process..

bloodandtears

slate said:

Moltisanti;629288" said:

for the record i much prefer the 498/490 to the 57 Classics, the 57s are too weedy for me

Me too, the 498s are great with gain.
I like the fat neck of the old model - pre 2013 - SGs too. My faves are the specials - no horrible binding nibs!!

What are binding nibs??

citizen68

stickyfiddle;628897" said:

I have a 2000 Standard, and used to have a 2003 Special. The 61 is a lovely guitar, but the big headstock can make it more neck-heavy than Standards. FWIW I like the look of the 61s but I really like the neck on the pre-'13 Standards. T

The 2013 Standard may be the best of both worlds - it was a bit cheaper than the 61 but has small guard and more 61-type contours, but with the smaller headstock.

In terms of batwing or small guard, Angus has played both fairly equally so I wouldn't worry either way. Just make sure it's red

Dunno if it's the way the photo's been resized but the strings' break angle off the bridge looks very extreme there!

slate

binding nibs are the small areas of neck binding plastic that covers the fret edges.

The post 13 standards have 57 classics too , it's the pre 13s that have the 498/490s.
All post 13 standards have the slimmer necks.

stickyfiddle

I love nibs, and I love 57 Classics, but agree 498s are really really good pickups for Marshall-flavoured rock sounds.

terada

bloodandtears said:

Wow.. such a mix of views and tastes...

As Angus I'm guessing a 498/490 pairing would be preferred to 57 classics? as I'd be relying on the guitar to drive the amp more so than using an amp on high gain (not taking into account a dimed amp obviously).. 

So I need to avoid pre- and post-2013 standards if I want a slimmer neck; and a 61 re-issue has 57 classics??

This is becoming quote a narrowing down process..

Firstly, 57 classics are brilliant pickups, don't be fooled into thinking they are tame. Those pups completely rock! Comparison video

Secondly, remember that the key to angus tones is to keep the gain low, and drive the output tubes as hard as possible (i.e. max out the master volume). If you can do that, any decent pickups will sound fab, although I'd still go for the 57 classics myself.

Lastly, don't aim to avoid anything. Instead go play a bunch and see what fits. Again though, 2013 was a bit of a 'wonder year' for USA gibsons, especially if you want vintage looks and a slim neck. 

Also, nibs are just the little bit of binding that raises up to meet each fret end. They used to be on all gibsons with binding, but in 2014 guitars with them became fewer and fewer. Now its only really a custom shop feature (although note that custom shop nibs are much smaller than those on USA standards). People get really fussy about them, some love them, some hate them, some are indifferent. Personally, I think they are part of what makes a gibson, a gibson.

Nibs:

ICBM

How thick is that binding?!

And how poorly-shaped are those nibs...

terada

ICBM said:

How thick is that binding?!

And how poorly-shaped are those nibs...

Yup its a pretty bad example, just got the pic off the web! Nibs did end up so thick in the end I can see why they annoyed people. 

The pic below is of an original 1959 lester. Notice how the nibs are completely different!

Moe_Zambeek

Good old Gibson QC

ICBM

Glad that first one isn't yours! I don't think I've seen one that bad, actually. They don't even match the shape of the frets properly.

The '59 is better, although still not perfect. And then there are the ill-fitting inlays and the red paint in the angle of the binding where it shouldn't be… so it seems they've always been a bit dodgy .

And people get up in arms when Gibson QC is mentioned.

DrJazzTap

Get a batwing one, but I'm biased.

bloodandtears

terada said:

bloodandtears said:

Wow.. such a mix of views and tastes...

As Angus I'm guessing a 498/490 pairing would be preferred to 57 classics? as I'd be relying on the guitar to drive the amp more so than using an amp on high gain (not taking into account a dimed amp obviously).. 

So I need to avoid pre- and post-2013 standards if I want a slimmer neck; and a 61 re-issue has 57 classics??

This is becoming quote a narrowing down process..

Instead go play a bunch and see what fits.

Easier said than done.... especially access to 2013 models or 61 reissues.

Dinosauria

The 61 RI is a great sounding guitar, very well built, however the neck is so thin that the slightest pressure on the back of the neck and it goes flat. That was the only reason I got rid of mine.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t173/dinosauria/Guitars/SG61reissueSmall.jpg

Shockingly I actually preferred the Special I had to the 61. The neck was chunky but a great shape so it was a real treat to play. Rock solid and it sounded great. And you can get them for about £300.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t173/dinosauria/Guitars/TealSGsmall01.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t173/dinosauria/Guitars/TealSGsmall04.jpg

ChrisMusic

Moe_Zambeek said:

The batwing standards have a chunkier neck than the the 61s, which are modern slim taper. The early 61 reissues (actually called 62 reissues at the time...) were slightly slimmer still. I have one and it's my benchmark neck, just because it's what I learned on.
When the standard became a small guard 61 style (2013?) the necks were in between std and 61 IMO and are actually ok.

I am curious, what did you learn on @Moe_Zambeek ?

I take it that you have a 62 RI now ?

How much difference is there between 62, 61 and 2013, 2014 profiles and widths ?

The one constant companion through my previous guitar career was a 1963 SG Junior (I was told it was earlier but it didn't have the Les Paul script).  That was a sublime guitar, and one of life's great mistakes to have sold it.

So you can guess the reason for my question is that I would dearly love to find that neck profile on a more recent SG.

ICBM

All the old SG Juniors I've come across have had big necks, not like an SG-Les Paul/'61RI at all.