#1
i just want to know your guys oppinions on these guitars?
FOR SALE: MESA BOOGIE STUDIO PREAMP
Ship Worldwide, Message me for details.
#2
gibsons are overpriced in my opinion, not that they arent good guitars, just you can get something just as good for way less. and PRS's are phenomenal, get one.
Gear:
Gibson SG w/ Bare Knuckle Aftermaths
Early 90s Fender MIM Telecaster
Squier VM Jaguar
Ibanez RGD7421
Blackstar HT-100
Avatar Vintage w/ 2 Governors and 2 Swamp Thangs
Ibanez EX
Carvin bx500 w/ Peavey 2x10&1x15
#3
PRS for sure. As a base PRS makes way finer guitars, is a far more hands-on company when dealing with customer support/ actual guitar craftsmanship. CE 22's also have exponentially better tone than any Gibson ever has or will.
CE 22's are sexier as well
#4
^actually, what PRS does is lets the machines do the routing and cutting, and concentrates on wood quality, build quality, finish quality, etc. instead.

That being said, for their higher end guitars PRS does in fact basically build them by hand.
Current Gear:
LTD MH-400 with Gotoh GE1996T (EMG 85/60)
PRS SE Custom 24 (Suhr SSH+/SSV)
Ibanez RG3120 Prestige (Dimarzio Titans)
Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz V
Audient iD22 interface
Peavey Revalver 4, UAD Friedman BE100/DS40
Adam S3A monitors
Quote by Anonden
You CAN play anything with anything....but some guitars sound right for some things, and not for others. Single coils sound retarded for metal, though those who are apeshit about harpsichord probably beg to differ.
#5
Quote by Progis8strings
PRS for sure. As a base PRS makes way finer guitars, is a far more hands-on company when dealing with customer support/ actual guitar craftsmanship. CE 22's also have exponentially better tone than any Gibson ever has or will.
CE 22's are sexier as well


Really...?
Gibson Les Paul Standard
Fender American Stratocaster
Taylor 210 Dreadnought Acoustic
Bogner Alchemist 40w 212 Tube combo
Vox V847A Wah Pedal
MXR M-134 Stereo Chorus
Electro-Harmonix Big Muff Pi USA
Boss DS-1 Distortion Pedal
Korg Pitch Black
#6
tone wise, i think the Les Paul sounds better than the CE 22 because of the thicker body. Les Pauls have a much fuller sound while the CE 22 sounds more of the lines of an SG.

feel is all opinion. i love the feel of both the PRS having played them and of the Gibson Les Paul which i actually own. i tend to mistrust other people's opinions when it comes to things like this, so what you have to do is just go out and play them to find out for yourself.
Quote by Scutchington
I like this guy, he's UG's Greek, and he just told your ass in two paragraphs. And I once spent 5 minutes watching his avatar.


A Brain Malfunction

We'll Never Admit As Defeat
#8
PRS all the way
Mark Tremonti: I have my own mixer on stage so I can alter my volmes while on stage

Myles Kennedy: And why's that Mark?

Mark Tremonti:....I have trust issues with the sound guy



Selling a Marshall DSL401!
#9
Sound is subjective but as far as tone goes, the les paul, and imo, it's even really that close.
#10
PRS.

Gibsons are overpriced and you can be original getting the PRS instead of the LP.
LTD MH-250NT (With EMG 81/85)
Ibanez RGT42FXQM
Bugera 6260
Seismic Audio 212
#11
I'm always curious why people even bother asking these questions on UG. To the OP, if you arent familiar with the trends of UG the general concensus will always be that PRS = God, Gibson = Overpriced poor quality trash, Marshall MG and Line 6 Spider are the worst amps ever......If you want to form your own opinion on these guitars then do what 90% of the people commenting have never done, and go spend some time playing each of them.
#12
Quote by GuitarDTO
I'm always curious why people even bother asking these questions on UG. To the OP, if you arent familiar with the trends of UG the general concensus will always be that PRS = God, Gibson = Overpriced poor quality trash, Marshall MG and Line 6 Spider are the worst amps ever......If you want to form your own opinion on these guitars then do what 90% of the people commenting have never done, and go spend some time playing each of them.

That's true a lot of the time, yes.

Having played a Gibson LP studio then playing a PRS SE, I preferred the far cheaper PRS SE for tone and playability.
Current Gear:
LTD MH-400 with Gotoh GE1996T (EMG 85/60)
PRS SE Custom 24 (Suhr SSH+/SSV)
Ibanez RG3120 Prestige (Dimarzio Titans)
Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz V
Audient iD22 interface
Peavey Revalver 4, UAD Friedman BE100/DS40
Adam S3A monitors
Quote by Anonden
You CAN play anything with anything....but some guitars sound right for some things, and not for others. Single coils sound retarded for metal, though those who are apeshit about harpsichord probably beg to differ.
#13
Quote by Mitochondria9
PRS.

Gibsons are overpriced and you can be original getting the PRS instead of the LP.


original by getting the PRS?

every single person i this thread, except for me and someone else i think, has voted for the PRS...

Quote by GuitarDTO
If you want to form your own opinion on these guitars then do what 90% of the people commenting have never done, and go spend some time playing each of them.


+ infinity

i actually own a Gibson Les Paul Standard that was made in 2005, and it's anything but low quality i'll tell you that right now. i don't understand how anyone can say Gibsons are overpriced when:

a) PRS's cost more

and

b) a good Gibson is just as playable and just as well built as any PRS in the same price range.

just because Gibson have a tendency to produce more "lemons" than your average guitar company doesn't mean every last one of their guitars are bad. this is where you, the buyer, has to go out and play the guitars to see which ones are the best.

like i said, never trust anyone else's opinion, go out and form your own.
Quote by Scutchington
I like this guy, he's UG's Greek, and he just told your ass in two paragraphs. And I once spent 5 minutes watching his avatar.


A Brain Malfunction

We'll Never Admit As Defeat
#14
I say the PRS, Gibson is not what it used to be, they kinda make poor quality guitars now, every $3000 Les Paul I've ever played felt like it was built cheaply and sounded very muddy and tiny. Every PRS I've ever played sounded great, and was built to how I would expect a guitar of this price range to be, every freaken one.
#15
Depends if you like them, alot of people don't like PRS necks and alot of people (including me) don't like a single cutaway guitar.
#16
Quote by darkcheef
Depends if you like them, alot of people don't like PRS necks and alot of people (including me) don't like a single cutaway guitar.


This. I like how Les Pauls look, but I don't like single cutaways, but I'll most likely own one anyways.

When I think of PRS, I think of a cross between Fender and Gibson in terms of feel (The neck). The neck is borderlining between thin and thick, and the radius is the 10" while Gibson is 12" and most strats in production now are 9.25" while the vintage has the 7.25".

I can't really choose, but I've seen a lot of sexy PRS, while I've seen sexy Gibsons as well.
#17
Am I really the first person to ask what amp the TS has?


They're both good guitars. You will find bad and excellent examples of both of them. They have completely different feels.

Try as many of both of them out as you can, and buy the one you like the most.
#18
i just wanted to know your guys oppinion on this. the prs is ALOT more comfortable on the higher frets obviously, ive tried both of these myself and IMO the prs just feels better. also wanted to ask hows the quality of the prs mira? i havnt tried one out yet.
FOR SALE: MESA BOOGIE STUDIO PREAMP
Ship Worldwide, Message me for details.
#19
hey gibsons sound fine, I think the stock pickups in most gibsons are a little bad. I put a pair of SD '59s in my LP studio and it came alive. So OP do whatever sounds good to you. Play both, listen to both, and whatever works. Hell, you may go in the store and try something else you may discover you like. Never limit yourself to "this or that" guitar because you may look over a diamond in the rough.
#20
I hate the traditional les pauls.

IMO unless you're buying a custom shop reissue, the new standards are worthless. the last truly great year was 2004, before they started doing this weight relief bull****.


if you can find a 2004 somewhere, i would take that over the PRS every single time.
Last edited by Lt. Shinysides at Oct 8, 2009,
#21
I played a les paul standard the other day and didn't really like it. The thickness of the body, the neck and the general feel of the guitar was just fat and chunky, almost felt like a chore to play on it. Then again I have been playing LTD's and Ibanez guitars over the past few years, most of which had super thin necks and were unfinished. The PRS I bought yesterday just plays like absolute butter, its the smoothest fastest neck I've ever played on and the variety of tones you can get out of it is just amazing! The push/pull function allows for acoustic like tones as well, I was just amazed by the tones I was pulling out of this thing. Oh and PRS wins on looks to
:P
Gear:
Orange tiny terror
ENGL 2x12 cab
PRS Singlecut
MXR GT OD
#22
Quote by Lt. Shinysides
I hate the traditional les pauls.

IMO unless you're buying a custom shop reissue, the new standards are worthless. the last truly great year was 2004, before they started doing this weight relief bull****.


if you can find a 2004 somewhere, i would take that over the PRS every single time.
Gibson has been weight relieving their normal production lines for several decades now.

They just changed it to using more strategically placed chambers as opposed to drillling swiss cheese holes in the guitar.
#23
Quote by Lt. Shinysides
I hate the traditional les pauls.

IMO unless you're buying a custom shop reissue, the new standards are worthless. the last truly great year was 2004, before they started doing this weight relief bull****.


my lp is an 05 and it only has the swiss cheese weight relief.



like so.

the traditional les pauls have this type of weight relief, not the complete chambering.
Quote by Scutchington
I like this guy, he's UG's Greek, and he just told your ass in two paragraphs. And I once spent 5 minutes watching his avatar.


A Brain Malfunction

We'll Never Admit As Defeat
#24
Quote by al112987
Gibson has been weight relieving their normal production lines for several decades now.

They just changed it to using more strategically placed chambers as opposed to drillling swiss cheese holes in the guitar.


yeah i know about the "holes" which they have been doing since the 80s or something. by "weight relief" im talking about what happens to the standards, where it's basically hollow inside.
#25
^ That's called chambering and they don't do it to the Traditionals.

As for the two guitars at hand, besides their singlecut shape, they don't share a whole lot of things in common. They have different feels and create different tones better. There's overlap sometimes, but you're better off finding them in a shop and giving them a try because for the most part all you're going to get on UG are constant waves of PRS knob polishing.
#26
Quote by Lt. Shinysides
yeah i know about the "holes" which they have been doing since the 80s or something. by "weight relief" im talking about what happens to the standards, where it's basically hollow inside.


so then how come you hate the traditionals?
Quote by Scutchington
I like this guy, he's UG's Greek, and he just told your ass in two paragraphs. And I once spent 5 minutes watching his avatar.


A Brain Malfunction

We'll Never Admit As Defeat
#27
Quote by Waterboy799
so then how come you hate the traditionals?



it just seems wrong. i realize it is INCREDIBLY childish, but i just can't stand the fact that they had to make a "special" series, just to get the "normal" body weight and all that. to me, i want a gibson les paul standard, not a gibson les paul standard... traditional. I think the traditional should be the REGULAR standard, and the standard should be the special line of weight relieved guitars.
#28
what's the difference...?

as much as the chambering is hated by a lot of people, I have actually been pretty pleased with the chambered les pauls. 1) they're more comfortable to play 2) they actually sound better in a lot of ways than the swiss cheese weight relieved les pauls. A lot of the old weight relieved les pauls were still way too heavy, imo anything over 10.5 lbs or so is too heavy for a les paul, and I have never heard a heavy, dense les paul that sounded good to my ears. They're always too dark, too muddy, and are not resonant. The lighter ones as a whole, have ALWAYS sounded better. But again, just my opinion. I don't know where epople got the idea that les pauls are supposed to be heavy guitars, they became heavy when Norlin started making them, which is also when Gibson was at it's worst as far as making guitars that actually sounded good.
Last edited by al112987 at Oct 9, 2009,
#29
Why not get a Les Paul DC? they have a great lead tone and better fret access than a standard. I played a traditional, and was pretty impressed, but it still costs way too much IMO. For the price of one of those, you can get a Suhr pro series. Same thing with the PRS. Good guitars, but better alternatives.
Quote by Skraeling86
That's a lot of booze. Frankly, I'm impressed. You're of a stronger timber than the average man, jimbob! Hail you.



Quote by Bubban
Yes you should go to a doctor, fucking moron. We can't do anything about your hemorrhoid.


#30
Quote by Lt. Shinysides
it just seems wrong. i realize it is INCREDIBLY childish, but i just can't stand the fact that they had to make a "special" series, just to get the "normal" body weight and all that. to me, i want a gibson les paul standard, not a gibson les paul standard... traditional. I think the traditional should be the REGULAR standard, and the standard should be the special line of weight relieved guitars.


Yeah, I just don't get it.....Why does it matter what the little faceplate on the guitar says? If it means that much just replace the "Traditional" truss rod cover with one that says "Standard". I have a traditional plus and its the exact same guitar essentially as a weight relieved standard (new standards are chambered though). I love everything about my Traditional. I don't care if the truss rod cover says "Horse****" on it.