Page 1 of 3
#1
So, what do you think will be a better purchase? A Les Paul studio or a PRS SE custom 24 with upgraded Seymour Duncan alnico pro vintage pickups and locking tuners?
#5
The les paul by far. PRS SEs are made in koreo with not only worse compnents but also worse quality control. the finish wont be as nice, the elctronics will be worse, the woods will be worse and there's a much higher chance that you'll get a crap one because of worse quality control.
Locking tuners aren't gonna be much help on the prs either because tuning stabilty problems are going to come from the bridge not the tuners. the only reasons that tuners should work badly is if they're made of plastic or if you string your guitar like a retard.

The Gibson may one of the cheaper ones but its made of much better wood, rarely goes out of tune, has better finish and quality control and its made in a place where people are paid fairly. Also the electronics in the gibson are of much higher quality. the only thing in the gibson that would be worse than an upgraded PRS is the pickups. they arent great so id just save for some new ones.

There are very few important differences between a les paul studio and a les paul standard and its mostly cosmetics and pickups.

Don't get me wrong, i love PRS guitars but people tend to hate on gibson and love PRS because its a trend but if they dont give proper reasons its juyst cos they're fanboys :/
Last edited by TheDuckMajor at Mar 24, 2012,
#6
Quote by TheDuckMajor
The les paul by far. PRS SEs are made in koreo with not only worse compnents but also worse quality control. the finish wont be as nice, the elctronics will be worse, the woods will be worse and there's a much higher chance that you'll get a crap one because of worse quality control.
Locking tuners aren't gonna be much help on the prs either because tuning stabilty problems are going to come from the bridge not the tuners. the only reasons that tuners should work badly is if they're made of plastic or if you string your guitar like a retard.

The Gibson may one of the cheaper ones but its made of much better wood, rarely goes out of tune, has better finish and quality control and its made in a place where people are paid fairly. Also the electronics in the gibson are of much higher quality. the only thing in the gibson that would be worse than an upgraded PRS is the pickups. they arent great so id just save for some new ones.

There are very few important differences between a les paul studio and a les paul standard and its mostly cosmetics and pickups.

Don't get me wrong, i love PRS guitars but people tend to hate on gibson and love PRS because its a trend but if they dont give proper reasons its juyst cos they're fanboys :/


You can go with the opinion of the guy who can't spell Korea, thinks Gibson quality contol is fantastic and that they 'rarely go out of tune' and get the studio that will probably not be a much better guitar than the PRS if you get a good example with those upgrades. Also the studio looks rather bland compared to the PRS.
SMILE!
#7
Honestly...those import prs's are nothing short if stunning. And also with the recent step up in WV by Gibson on the studios......either choice is going to be good. I would go as far to say they are just about on large with eachother.....hut the studio having a little more of an edge in quality. But I just love the stock pickups in most prs's.
Quote by kangaxxter
The only real answer to the SG vs Les Paul debate is to get a Flying V and laugh at all the suckers who don't have one.


Quote by Blompcube

if you embrace inaccurate intonation it can be quite arousing.


I <3 TWEED
#8
Quote by Mr.DeadDuck
You can go with the opinion of the guy who can't spell Korea, thinks Gibson quality contol is fantastic and that they 'rarely go out of tune' and get the studio that will probably not be a much better guitar than the PRS if you get a good example with those upgrades. Also the studio looks rather bland compared to the PRS.


1) I know how to spell korea, it was a bad typo.
2) You shouldn't judge someone's knowlege of guitars by their grammar, especially english isn't even their mother tongue.
3)I've had two gibson les pauls (including the studio) and a PRS SE 245 Singlecut. The Les Paul Studio actually stayed in really well and unless you're strong enough to do two tone bends its going to stay in tune for quite a while. Either way, it'll stay in tune better than a guitar with a cheap trem.
4) Gibson's quiality control is still much better than korean quality control.
5) Since when did the studio look bland? Unlike the PRS, it has a full Carved Top and much better finish. Also the white one and the fireburst look pretty damn sexy. There are multiple times that i've had the urge to buy another one just because of the colour.
6) Why should TS listen to someone who still hasn't given reasons that the PRS is better? USA PRS guitars are great. SEs... not so much. They're good and i love my singlecut but the the les paul studio is miles ahead.
#9
I have both and absolutely love both.
My Gear
Guitars:
-Gibson Les Paul Studio
-Ibanez "lawsuit" Les Paul
-Ibanez S470
-PRS SE Custom

Amp:
Marshall TSL100
Marshall 1960a cab

Effects:
Dunlop 535q wah
Visual Sound Liquid Chorus

Pickups:
Guitarforce
MHD
#10
Quote by TheDuckMajor
1) I know how to spell korea, it was a bad typo.
2) You shouldn't judge someone's knowlege of guitars by their grammar, especially english isn't even their mother tongue.
3)I've had two gibson les pauls (including the studio) and a PRS SE 245 Singlecut. The Les Paul Studio actually stayed in really well and unless you're strong enough to do two tone bends its going to stay in tune for quite a while. Either way, it'll stay in tune better than a guitar with a cheap trem.
4) Gibson's quiality control is still much better than korean quality control.
5) Since when did the studio look bland? Unlike the PRS, it has a full Carved Top and much better finish. Also the white one and the fireburst look pretty damn sexy. There are multiple times that i've had the urge to buy another one just because of the colour.
6) Why should TS listen to someone who still hasn't given reasons that the PRS is better? USA PRS guitars are great. SEs... not so much. They're good and i love my singlecut but the the les paul studio is miles ahead.


You know now because I helpfully showed you, you learn something new every day, I know it's not a perfect system and there are plenty of people who can't write at all but are smart but in general bad communication skills = lack of intelligence so excuse me for not knowing English isn't your first language I would have if you didn't have your location as something stupid.

Yes the SE has a trem (not cheap its still a mid range guitar after all) but it will also be helped by the locking tuners. Bland is a matter of opinion and in my opinion solid colours on the studio with the dot inlays looks boring as hell and the fireburst looks too glossy and needs a nice piece of flame maple to work like the one that's on the SE. But as I said that's a matter of opinion neither of us are right or wrong.

Quality control doesn't work like you seem to think I'll accept the Korean made SE might be below par more often than a Gibson but if you find a good example of either they wont be miles away from each other, I'm fed up of people believing Gibsons are magic or something.

I think the PRS is better because it's prettier, more user friendly (there's no denying Les Pauls are heavy) give a similar sound with a good set of pickups in them and is cooler. (You might disagree of think it's stupid to judge what guitar to buy based on that but it does make a difference.)
SMILE!
Last edited by Mr.DeadDuck at Mar 24, 2012,
#11
Quote by Mr.DeadDuck
You know now because I helpfully showed you, you learn something new every day, I know it's not a perfect system and there are plenty of people who can't write at all but are smart but in general bad communication skills = lack of intelligence so excuse me for not knowing English isn't your first language I would have if you didn't have your location as something stupid.

Yes the SE has a trem (not cheap its still a mid range guitar after all) but it will also be helped by the locking tuners. Bland is a matter of opinion and in my opinion solid colours on the studio with the dot inlays looks boring as hell and the fireburst looks too glossy and needs a nice piece of flame maple to work like the one that's on the SE. But as I said that's a matter of opinion neither of us are right or wrong.

Quality control doesn't work like you seem to think I'll accept the Korean made SE might be below par more often than a Gibson but if you find a good example of either they wont be miles away from each other, I'm fed up of people believing Gibsons are magic or something.

I think the PRS is better because it's prettier, more user friendly (there's no denying Les Pauls are heavy) give a similar sound with a good set of pickups in them and is cooler. (You might disagree of think it's stupid to judge what guitar to buy based on that but it does make a difference.)


1) I really did know how to spell korea before the typo.
2)You obviously don't know what a les paul studio is. They have mother of pearl trapezoid inlays and the finish is a thin layer of nitro-cellulose and in person it's not as shiny as in the pics. It's not too glossy but its not "dry" either.
The Les Paul Studio is also chambered and very light. Much lighter than my strat and my SE 245 but it still has more sustain and a fuller sound. The PRS is really good but pretty much everything about the gibson says "buy me" against it. I'm not a gibson fanboy but i hate how people automatically hate on them.

Some of there higher end stuff (mainly the "Les Paul Custom" is certainly overpriced cos it is EXACTLY the same as a les paul studio but made in the custom shop.
#12
Quote by TheDuckMajor
1) I really did know how to spell korea before the typo.
2)You obviously don't know what a les paul studio is. They have mother of pearl trapezoid inlays and the finish is a thin layer of nitro-cellulose and in person it's not as shiny as in the pics. It's not too glossy but its not "dry" either.
The Les Paul Studio is also chambered and very light. Much lighter than my strat and my SE 245 but it still has more sustain and a fuller sound. The PRS is really good but pretty much everything about the gibson says "buy me" against it. I'm not a gibson fanboy but i hate how people automatically hate on them.

Some of there higher end stuff (mainly the "Les Paul Custom" is certainly overpriced cos it is EXACTLY the same as a les paul studio but made in the custom shop.


I believe you knew how to spell Korea I was being a dick, but you're right I was mixed up and they have the trapezoid, I still think it looks like a half arsed Les Paul Standard wannabe, but that's all still opinion.

I don't hate Gibson, there are models I would kill to have the studio just isn't one of them but I really do hate people arguing guitars they bought are fantastic just to validate their decision in buying them, you're biased.
SMILE!
Last edited by Mr.DeadDuck at Mar 24, 2012,
#13
Quote by TheDuckMajor
1)
Some of there higher end stuff (mainly the "Les Paul Custom" is certainly overpriced cos it is EXACTLY the same as a les paul studio but made in the custom shop.

Wrong. The custom shop stuff is a very clear step up from the Gibson USA lines.
#14
PRS.

So PRS.
Quote by gilly_90
Hi, I'm looking for some fruit, I can't decide between apples and oranges.
Which one is better?
Thanks
#15
Quote by al112987
Wrong. The custom shop stuff is a very clear step up from the Gibson USA lines.


Not a $3000 clear step dude. its obviously much better but not $3000 better.
#16
Quote by al112987
Wrong. The custom shop stuff is a very clear step up from the Gibson USA lines.

+1

Also the Les Paul Custom is kind of different in terms of specs, it's hardly the same guitar at all.


EDIT: Also I'd personally buy the Gibson.
Fender American Special HSS Stratocaster
Ibanez 1987 Roadstar II Deluxe
Yamaha THR10X
Marshall JCM900 SL-X
Ibanez WD-7 Weeping Demon Wah
TC Electronic Polytune
Seymour Duncan Tweakfuzz
#17
Quote by Mr.DeadDuck
I believe you knew how to spell Korea I was being a dick, but you're right I was mixed up and they have the trapezoid, I still think it looks like a half arsed Les Paul Standard wannabe, but that's all still opinion.

I don't hate Gibson, there are models I would kill to have the studio just isn't one of them but I really do hate people arguing guitars they bought are fantastic just to validate their decision in buying them, you're biased.


Sorry but i'm certainly not biased. I have many guitars and the les paul studio isn't even my favourite but i love it and its my favourite for the price that i got it at. I actually got it before the PRS so i would actually have to validate buying that.

The best thing for TS to do is go tio the shop and try them out. Simples. this was just a pointless argument really.
#18
Quote by TheDuckMajor
Not a $3000 clear step dude. its obviously much better but not $3000 better.
How much it's worth to the person buying is relative. Is a BMW worth $40k more than a Toyota Camry? I mean... they both get you from point A to B, right?

A Gibson 1958 plain top reissue is... what, $3500? (which no one with a brain ever pays that much anyway) And a les paul standard is... Idk... $2000-$2500? I'd take the R8 plain top 10 times out of 10. If I wanted a les paul and did not have the extra $1000-$1500, then I would save the extra $1000-$1500 to buy the R8 or find a way to get one in good condition used. Yes, they are THAT much better.
#19
Quote by al112987
How much it's worth to the person buying is relative. Is a BMW worth $40k more than a Toyota Camry? I mean... they both get you from point A to B, right?

A Gibson 1958 plain top reissue is... what, $3500? (which no one with a brain ever pays that much anyway) And a les paul standard is... Idk... $2000-$2500? I'd take the R8 plain top 10 times out of 10. If I wanted a les paul and did not have the extra $1000-$1500, then I would save the extra $1000-$1500 to buy the R8 or find a way to get one in good condition used. Yes, they are THAT much better.


1958 reissues are much more than $3500 but I see your point. Anyway, I didn't say that all Gibson were overpriced. I said that ONE specific model with similar specs to a LP Studio os overpriced. If I wanted a custom shop then I would certainly save for one rather than a standard but not for that specific model that I mentioned , I'd get another one with better specs.
#20
TS - it depends on both guitars. i'm a fan of both and own both of them. they are different in a lot of ways and it depends on what you are going after.

what kind of music do you play?
what kind of amp do you use?
budget?
location?
is used gear ok or just new?

we really need this info to properly answer your question here.


Quote by TheDuckMajor
1958 reissues are much more than $3500 but I see your point.

oh ffs my custom shop 1960 reissue was less than $2750, and i bought used in a major chain. people get 1958 reissues for $2k used with all the original paperwork etc. get a grip on real world pricing is all i'm saying here.

and i know a place that sells plain top and painted top custom shop reissues for $2800 new. so if you want a gold top or plain top burst there ya go. sealed in a box from gibson.
I wondered why the frisbee was getting bigger, then it hit me.
Last edited by gregs1020 at Mar 24, 2012,
#21
I play mostly rock and maybe a bit of prog metal but mostly pink floyd, and rock/heavy rock. Mostly lead playing.

Used is ok but I prefer new.

So I still can't make up my mind. Is the PRS build quality good enough to make the upgrade worthwhile? It sounds like it can be an interesting and special moded guitar or maybe it's safer to go with the les Paul.

Anyways, thanks for all the help :-)
#23
Go with the les paul and upgrade pickups later. They're decent pickups but under high gain they get pretty dark and muddy, especially the neck pickup.
#24
Quote by eternia
I play mostly rock and maybe a bit of prog metal but mostly pink floyd, and rock/heavy rock. Mostly lead playing.

Used is ok but I prefer new.

So I still can't make up my mind. Is the PRS build quality good enough to make the upgrade worthwhile? It sounds like it can be an interesting and special moded guitar or maybe it's safer to go with the les Paul.

Anyways, thanks for all the help :-)


The upgrades would be worthwhile on the PRS but even after the upgrades the Gibson would edge it IMO.
#25
I picked up a Fender Custom Spalted Maple HH Tele the other day, and the headstock said "Made in Indonesia", had all the original paperwork, $800 guitar, and it was an excellent guitar. Doesn't really matter where it was made, just how it was made.

Honestly, with all the negative things I hear about the Studios, I'd go with the PRS SE, even though it is cheaper, PRS is very consistent with their guitars. How long it lasts is dependent on how well it was taken care of, during shipping, storage, and ownership.

It also depends on what kind of feel you want, a Les Paul feels nothing like a PRS Custom 24, those are 2 totally different monsters.
#26
Quote by gregs1020
TS - it depends on both guitars. i'm a fan of both and own both of them. they are different in a lot of ways and it depends on what you are going after.

what kind of music do you play?
what kind of amp do you use?
budget?
location?
is used gear ok or just new?

we really need this info to properly answer your question here.


oh ffs my custom shop 1960 reissue was less than $2750, and i bought used in a major chain. people get 1958 reissues for $2k used with all the original paperwork etc. get a grip on real world pricing is all i'm saying here.

and i know a place that sells plain top and painted top custom shop reissues for $2800 new. so if you want a gold top or plain top burst there ya go. sealed in a box from gibson.


My mistake, I was looking at the Gibson website and i forgot to take into account that that's way over the street price.
#27
Quote by ethan_hanus
I picked up a Fender Custom Spalted Maple HH Tele the other day, and the headstock said "Made in Indonesia", had all the original paperwork, $800 guitar, and it was an excellent guitar. Doesn't really matter where it was made, just how it was made.

Honestly, with all the negative things I hear about the Studios, I'd go with the PRS SE, even though it is cheaper, PRS is very consistent with their guitars. How long it lasts is dependent on how well it was taken care of, during shipping, storage, and ownership.

It also depends on what kind of feel you want, a Les Paul feels nothing like a PRS Custom 24, those are 2 totally different monsters.


Although the whole "made in ____" is stupid in theory, in practise in the places where people are paid less and have less training the chances of getting a bad guitar are higher.
I've never played a bad les Paul studio. I haven't played a bad PRS either but I certainly prefer a LP studio.
#28
I'd go with the PRS I've played a few SE's and i own tremonti SE. They're great guitars they always have great finishes. I had an ibanez s that was more expensive than my tremonti and it was terrible compared to PRS. PRS's always feel great if you get a chance play the PRS before you buy anything. try the Santana aswell.
#29
I Play mostly rock to heavy rock and prefer a new guitar. I think the PRS can be fun because I can customize it and make it my own but the question is if the body and the parts that will not be replaced are good and reliable enough or is it better to play it safe with the LP. Is the PRS made of good wood? Is the quality of build good or is it cheap?
#30
Quote by eternia
I Play mostly rock to heavy rock and prefer a new guitar. I think the PRS can be fun because I can customize it and make it my own but the question is if the body and the parts that will not be replaced are good and reliable enough or is it better to play it safe with the LP. Is the PRS made of good wood? Is the quality of build good or is it cheap?


It seems to me like you want the PRS, if so that's what I'd get but if it's only for customizing what's the point? You can easily customize a les Paul as well and you won't need to spend money on locking tuners in order to stay in tune.
The PRS is made of good wood, not as good as Gibson wood, but good nonetheless.
The build quality is usually quite good but beware for the odd one out.
#31
Quote by TheDuckMajor
The les paul by far. PRS SEs are made in koreo with not only worse compnents but also worse quality control. the finish wont be as nice, the elctronics will be worse, the woods will be worse and there's a much higher chance that you'll get a crap one because of worse quality control.
Locking tuners aren't gonna be much help on the prs either because tuning stabilty problems are going to come from the bridge not the tuners. the only reasons that tuners should work badly is if they're made of plastic or if you string your guitar like a retard.

The Gibson may one of the cheaper ones but its made of much better wood, rarely goes out of tune, has better finish and quality control and its made in a place where people are paid fairly. Also the electronics in the gibson are of much higher quality. the only thing in the gibson that would be worse than an upgraded PRS is the pickups. they arent great so id just save for some new ones.

There are very few important differences between a les paul studio and a les paul standard and its mostly cosmetics and pickups.

Don't get me wrong, i love PRS guitars but people tend to hate on gibson and love PRS because its a trend but if they dont give proper reasons its juyst cos they're fanboys :/

You clearly have no clue when it comes to PRS.

Anyway, to the TS - can you play both before making a decision?
#32
I can play them but I won't be able to know how the PRS would sound like with the upgrades.
I don't want to buy it only for customizing, the fact is it would be cheaper to do this then to buy a Les Paul.
#34
The SE Santana
model also seems a relevant competitor. What do you think?
Last edited by eternia at Mar 24, 2012,
#35
Quote by eternia
The SE Santana
model also seems a relevant competitor. What do you think?

Another good option. Are you wanting a guitar with a trem?
#36
I'm a PRS fan boy, so I'd obviously go with the CU24, but neither guitar is a bad purchase by any means. What kind of Les Paul studio are you looking at? If you're planning on getting one of the faded models, then I'd prefer the PRS just because it looks better lol. But if you're willing to drop $1,200 or so on a Les Paul, you could also test the used market for some USA made PRS's. Just a thought.
#37
Used Mira might be an option as well.
Fender American Special HSS Stratocaster
Ibanez 1987 Roadstar II Deluxe
Yamaha THR10X
Marshall JCM900 SL-X
Ibanez WD-7 Weeping Demon Wah
TC Electronic Polytune
Seymour Duncan Tweakfuzz
#38
Quote by thehikingdude
Another good option. Are you wanting a guitar with a trem?


The trem is not a must but I guess besides the fact that it takes special care it could be pretty nice... So no, it does not really matter..

At the end of the day I want a good sounding, good feeling, good looking and easly playable guitar that was worth the money spent.

Thanks a lot for all the comments everyone, you are really helping me out here!!
#39
The PRS will not go out of tune. Nor will it have build quality issues. Although the woods are lower quality than the Gibson.

The Gibson is prolly a better guitar, but both feel totally different from each other. If you can try both, then try both and decide from there. It's only the SE PRS, not the USA. Still a good guitar, I own one, but that's because I can't stand the way les pauls feel.
#40
Gibson. A good LP Studio would be better than any PRS SE.
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Omae wa mou
Shindeiru



Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Page 1 of 3