#2
Well, it depends on your own preferences.

I prefer the Les Paul because it looks good, it has an appealing tone, and it has a lot of history behind it.
Sent from my iPad.
#3
^+1
Guitars:
Parkwood PW320M
Epiphone Les Paul Standard
Epiphone C-40 willie nelson signature
Squier Strat
Some beat up acoustic from '68

Amps:
Vox Ad50vt
Crate xt15r

Effects:
Vox Clyde McCoy Wah
#4
Neither is better. They're different.

LPs have Thick Bodies and are Heavy.
SGs have Thin bodies and are Light .
#7
Quote by pinkhaze29
sg's get more distortion i think.

Not necessarily. I think the amount of distortion depends on how high the guitar's pickup's output is.
Sent from my iPad.
#8
I don't think an SG gets more distortion, but it is supposed (I've never had the chance to really comapre side to side) to handle it far better.
#9
the SG has a MUCH brighter tone than the LP, for example, you hear Led Zep, adn the solos seem growly and deep, with good rhythm crunch, and you listen to the Back In Black solo for example, and its much more trebly, and harmonics come up a but more often. That is why to play the rhythm in back in black you have to roll off your tone control a bit, to get that deeper sound.

I think thats pretty true. Ive learnt from experience, but it might just be opinion
Why did Pat Metheney cross the road? He didn't, his hair got in the way
--
Member #1 of Ibanez > You club. PM me to join
#10
on what terms? you can't just generally compare the two. one is better than the other in different ways. for example, i like the heavy, rich tone and sustain you get from a Les Paul, but i also like the faster neck and the lighter body of the SG

it depends on what aspect of the guitar you're comparing (tone, pickups, neck, etc.)
Proud owner of a Gibby LP Custom and an all-original Vintage '62 Fender Jag

Quote by richwatkinson
Give 10 UGers a rope and ask them to pull. 4 will push, 1 will ask for buttsecks, 2 will tell you get an Ibanez and the last 3 will start complaining about Line6 Spiders.
#11
The SG is a remodled version of the Les Paul. The key differences are the pickups, the double-cutaway, and the thinner, lighter solid body which gives it its name (Solid Guitar). Essentially, it's designed specifically to be more of an agressive rock machine that's easier to throw around. If you like ACDC, the Who, and bands with that agressive in-your face distortion, go for the SG. However, if you want deep, intense, thicker tones, go for the Les Paul. Thicker is hardly better, depending on what you're looking for. Quite frankly, I'm partial to the SG courtesy of it's shape and feel. It's a lot easier to play and the neck is twice as fast. It's easier to throw around, and at least 1/5th as light. It's generally easier to play. If you drop an Iommi pickup in the bridge, though, then it brings out the beast in the SG and if you like rock, then it's the way to go. However, it's all a matter of opinion. Whichever's comfortable for you. They're both equally great and versatile, and have been widely used by a large group of musicians.
"Chuck-E-Cheese called. They want their band back."
#12
The differences between them are pretty obvious. SGs have much better upper neck access than a Les Paul. The difference in sound is pretty insignificant and depends very much on the pickups you put in it.
#13
Quote by smb
The difference in sound is pretty insignificant


are you kidding??? the difference in sound is immense! Les Pauls have deep, dark, rich, heavy tone, while SG's have bright, crunchy, trebly tone.

but the difference between bright and dark, and bassy and trebly is insgnificant

Proud owner of a Gibby LP Custom and an all-original Vintage '62 Fender Jag

Quote by richwatkinson
Give 10 UGers a rope and ask them to pull. 4 will push, 1 will ask for buttsecks, 2 will tell you get an Ibanez and the last 3 will start complaining about Line6 Spiders.
#14
I really prefer the SG, because it's tone is a lot more higher pitched and such than the Les Paul.

The bodie's lighter, so it's not a strain to have on for a long time, since it's made of mahogony it's tone and sound are great and I love all the extra hardware they can have, like those nickel tailplates that not only look good, but take the strain off the center of the body and transfer it to the back, which can make the guitar last longer.

But I'm not saying I wouldn't take a Les Paul, I would accept one in a heartbeat, but if I was buying one, I would buy the SG.
Voted 3rd Friendliest User of UG 2010

BUILD A TIME MACHINE, AND JERK OFF IN IT, AND SEND IT TO HITLER!


Saxo-Walrus

Steam & PSN ID: Panopticon20
#15
I love SGs and Les Pauls, but I prefer the LPs tone over that of an SG
My rig:
1999 Epiphone Les Paul Standard w/ Gibson electronics and Sperzel locking tuners
Ibanez RG470 w/ Floyd Rose (soon to be for sale)
Boss NS-1 Noise Surpressor
Ernie Ball Volume Pedal
Marshall MG100 1x12" combo
#16
I like SGs better. I like the tone a little better.
~gtrfrk


founder of the dunlop pick fan club


RIP Roger "Syd" Barrett


"Let the good times roll"
#18
Quote by ScreaminBlues25
are you kidding??? the difference in sound is immense! Les Pauls have deep, dark, rich, heavy tone, while SG's have bright, crunchy, trebly tone.

but the difference between bright and dark, and bassy and trebly is insgnificant


Well if someone is asking a straight "which is better" then the tone isn't the biggest difference. The amp and the pickups will make a much bigger difference. What I mean to say is you can get the tone you're after from either, by changing the pickups or selecting the amp and effect settings accordingly. Playability is the bigger issue here.
#19
LP special! The SG is nice for its weight, otherwise I prefer the LP, so the special is a nice compromise.
-Epiphone Riviera w/ Bigsby and Gibson 490r/498t combo
-Epiphone Es-333 Delonge Edition
-Fender Twin Reverb '65
#20
Quote by J.MitMetallica
the SG has a MUCH brighter tone than the LP, for example, you hear Led Zep, adn the solos seem growly and deep, with good rhythm crunch, and you listen to the Back In Black solo for example, and its much more trebly, and harmonics come up a but more often. That is why to play the rhythm in back in black you have to roll off your tone control a bit, to get that deeper sound.

I think thats pretty true. Ive learnt from experience, but it might just be opinion


Actully the LP ahs mroe top end, since the maple top adds treble. Also Angus never rolls off tone, neither does Malcom, they set there amps quite trebly and always use the bridge pickup. Jimmy puts alot of bass in his sound to and often uses the neck pickup for solos.
Quote by stratman_13
It's okay Gabel. You kick ass.



18watter video demo

My band

Recognised by the Official EG/GG&A Who To Listen To List 2009
#21
The maple doesn't add treble, it simply accentuates the bass less than mahogany. LPs have a darker tone, in general. But the choice of pickup makes a huge difference here.

And that is one beaten up Studio you've got there!
#22
Teh SG is brighter and the LP is fatter in sound, btu the LP has more "twang" and top end.
Quote by stratman_13
It's okay Gabel. You kick ass.



18watter video demo

My band

Recognised by the Official EG/GG&A Who To Listen To List 2009
#23
Quote by fallenangel20
I really prefer the SG, because it's tone is a lot more higher pitched and such than the Les Paul.

The bodie's lighter, so it's not a strain to have on for a long time, since it's made of mahogony it's tone and sound are great and I love all the extra hardware they can have, like those nickel tailplates that not only look good, but take the strain off the center of the body and transfer it to the back, which can make the guitar last longer.

But I'm not saying I wouldn't take a Les Paul, I would accept one in a heartbeat, but if I was buying one, I would buy the SG.


I'd love to buy one of those tail pieces, where can i get one?

And as not to spam, I own an sg and it is quite great to run around with.
I Dig Music.


Quote by insideac

Okie, I like you too
#24
Epiphone, the SGs are much better than the LPs.
Epi Elitist, the SGs and LPs are similar in quality, but I prefer Les Pauls
Gibson, again I prefer Les Pauls, but after having palyed an equivalently priced PRS, I can't recommend Gibsons anymore.