Advertisement
If you had to chose one or the other to move you from the acoustic to the electric guitar world, which would you chose and why?
posted by:
|
Unsubscribed |
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Sun, January 27, 2008 - 11:42 PMstratoblaster.....cheaper...and just as important in your arsenal of axes....both will be worth more 20 years from now...dude go play both for crying out loud and dont listen to us! Follow your intuition ...you cant loose if you are true to your self. You got to fall in love with it....like a woman ..and then you can ball all night long! -
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Mon, January 28, 2008 - 10:18 AMIn My Humble Opinion (from playing both):
Les Pauls advantages:
great sustain, a fatter distorted signal, easier to acheive master volume distortion without any signal processing, tune-o-matic bridge,
...and two words: cherryburst finish...*mouth waters*
Les Paul disadvantages:
they weigh as much as a buick, the neck is not as ergonomic as a strat's (specifically a maple strat neck),
No stock vibrato arm ("whammy bar"), no stock three pickup configuration, high retail price
Stratocaster advantages:
great cleantone, great for slideguitar , stays in tune a tad bit more efficiently than a Les Paul, ergonomic neck,
Far more used strats then Les Pauls
Stratocaster disadvantages:
singlecoil pickups can be a pain in the ass, (i.e. lots of signal interference, thin "out-of-the-box" distorted signal), larger, more cumbersome pickguard, the stringuide(s) on the headstock can also be a pain the ass, high retail price (but slightly less then Gibson overall). -
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Mon, January 28, 2008 - 4:44 PMI play and own both.
I like the playability of my Fender Strat better than my Les Paul but my Les Paul sounds LIGHT Years Better than any Strat and it's red flame-top mahogany finish and attention to detail(fit/finish/ivory trim etc) is to DIE For!
My Strat is a "very plain looking Guitar" like all Strat's are.
-
-
-
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Mon, March 3, 2008 - 6:50 AMstrat in my opinion . get a nice american deluxe strat or tele from between 2005-07 . they really did something right in carona ca. during this time . if i had to have one electric it would be a tele . but strat over paul because you can get such a wide variety of sounds out of a strat . you can not get as much out of a paul . you have to know how to handle a strat first of all .
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Wed, May 21, 2008 - 2:57 PMStrat... Mainly for.... 25.5" scale-length - more tension, more punch
Only the Gibson high-end jazz models used 25.5, all the others are nearly an inch shorter, hence flappy feel
I also prefer the high-end of a Fender. It's easier to cut hi-s than it is to add them.
Also, Strats are more rugged and not so shoulder-bustin heavy as a Les Paul.
Now the Les Paul Signature (lo-impedence) is the one Paul I'd use. You know the one with one 335 cut-away and the smaller lower cut-away
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Wed, July 16, 2008 - 4:12 AMGibson. Strat is demanding like hell, you have to love it (I do) and boost it somehow. I used Zappa's pickup switch trick, just reversing the pickups, experimentally. Now it is also a matter of love. we love both, actually:)
If sound is paramount> OK Epipohone semi, Trace Eliot GP11, Octaver 2 octaves down, strike a chord!!!
-
Re: Les Paul or Strat?
Tue, August 5, 2008 - 7:43 AMSTRAT i have both also and ive found myself using the strat more and more...i think it may be a new plague.... the strat is so much more playable than the paul it just depends on what you wanna play.
good luck/have fun
