Standard vs studio

[Oddball667]

What exactly in everyones opion is the difference between the studio and standards other than a few cosmetic upgrades and price?
I only have my 93' studio to base my opinion on , but I'm convinced I could plug this guitar into a potato and get a good sound out of it .
Is it just a personal preference of looks and or options? Because I'm not seeing anything that would greatly effect tone or playability at all.
Or is my standard being a being a 93' and from the "good wood" era built better than current models?
Either way I feel these models are basicly about the same and the perfect guitars for playing any style of music from super clean jazz to overly distorted death metal and everything in between.
And the only true difference other than price is a few other bells and whistles that dont actually effect to truly awsome sound of these guitars .
And from a musical stand point (to me anyway) the sound is the entire point , not looks.

 

[jstarr823]

Sounds about right.

 

[integra evan]

Sounds about right.

+1

 

[Oddball667]

I was just wondering I guess if the wiring and or pots or something was better in the stndards , i know the current ones have burst buckers in them also , but from what I'm reading theres hardly any difference in the sound of a burst bucker and the PAF's in my studio (or am I wrong thinking a 93' studio has PAF'S?)
but as fare as lets say a Mexican stray and an American strat other then obviously price theres a clear difference in build quality and feel , I cant really see that with a les paul standard and led Paul studio , I could understand that theres a difference in the jr's as I feel there completely diffrent guitars although a semilar shape.

 

[budg]

I’ve had several Traditionals and a few studios. Other than bling and a slightly thicker body, nothing better in the Standards. Better looking tops if that’s important to you. Sound and playability will be the same.

 

[RocketKing]

I was just wondering I guess if the wiring and or pots or something was better in the stndards , i know the current ones have burst buckers in them also , but from what I'm reading theres hardly any difference in the sound of a burst bucker and the PAF's in my studio (or am I wrong thinking a 93' studio has PAF'S?)
but as fare as lets say a Mexican stray and an American strat other then obviously price theres a clear difference in build quality and feel , I cant really see that with a les paul standard and led Paul studio , I could understand that theres a difference in the jr's as I feel there completely diffrent guitars although a semilar shape.

I think Studios from that era had the 490/498 pickup combo.
The acronym PAF is usually used for the original humbuckers made from 1957 to 1960 ish
Of course the word paf is used all over pick up marketing these days.
IMO those Studios from the 90s had a great spec and were authentic to the original concept :
A cosmetically stripped down Standard.
But still a Les Paul where it counted.
I'm not much of a fan of the following models made afterwards.

 

[Sinster]

My opinion that a lot of people believe a lot of internet lore about stuff.

 

[Oddball667]

I think Studios from that era had the 490/498 pickup combo.
The acronym PAF is usually used for the original humbuckers made from 1957 to 1960 ish
Of course the word paf is used all over pick up marketing these days.
IMO those Studios from the 90s had a great spec and were authentic to the original concept :
A cosmetically stripped down Standard.
But still a Les Paul where it counted.
I'm not much of a fan of the following models made afterwards.

Im kinda finding out my 93' is sorta special for whatever reason , sorta had this conversation yesterday on how the guy before me dont really take care of his guitars ( there 50 year old gibsons!) And how it bothers me , and I dont baby my guitars by anymeans but I'm not going to just throw it in the corner in a pile of dirty laundry either .
But my girl was like "oh he has alot of money , he can just buy a new one" .
I dont think she understands "buying a new one" isnt the same , or that its harder every year to find a 1993 les paul or a 1970 sg , and even if you do buy the exact same year make and model color everything each one sounds diffrent and feels diffrent .
I mean they may sound similar or play similar , but there still very different and have a diffrent feel and characteristics.
Thats why so many ppl have a favorite guitar or amp and or combinations of the two .

 

[David Garner]

I have never owned a Studio, but I've played a few. I do think most of it is fit and finish. Body and neck binding, inlays, etc. The Standard is "nicer" from an aesthetic perspective.

I can't imagine a Studio with the same pickups wouldn't sound a whole lot like the Standard. I would say "the same," but I have a Standard and a Traditional and they don't sound the same, despite the fact that they are essentially the same guitar WRT construction, fit and finish.

 

[Caretaker]

I was just wondering I guess if the wiring and or pots or something was better in the stndards , i know the current ones have burst buckers in them also , but from what I'm reading theres hardly any difference in the sound of a burst bucker and the PAF's in my studio (or am I wrong thinking a 93' studio has PAF'S?)
but as fare as lets say a Mexican stray and an American strat other then obviously price theres a clear difference in build quality and feel , I cant really see that with a les paul standard and led Paul studio , I could understand that theres a difference in the jr's as I feel there completely diffrent guitars although a semilar shape.

The first thing I do when I get a Gibson is ake out the harness and pickups.
I MIGHT use the pickups if they are 57 Classics or T Tops but I don`t like anything else.

 

[Oddball667]

I have never owned a Studio, but I've played a few. I do think most of it is fit and finish. Body and neck binding, inlays, etc. The Standard is "nicer" from an aesthetic perspective.

I can't imagine a Studio with the same pickups wouldn't sound a whole lot like the Standard. I would say "the same," but I have a Standard and a Traditional and they don't sound the same, despite the fact that they are essentially the same guitar WRT construction, fit and finish.

Well thats kinda right back to what I was just talking about you could have two of the exact les pauls you bought from the same store on the same day , and bet they would sound diffrent , would imagine because there made from diffrent trees lol , something to do with wood density.
But I wasnt sure if studios were like say a squire is to a start , there essentialy the same guitar made buy the same company , just one uses lower grade materials to make them more affordable , I dont feel like Gibson does this with the studio and standard othere then cosmetically .
I really never had any intrest in Las pauls other than I knew they sounded great and knew that was "the guitar" you hear your heros play on countless songs in multible geners .
And honestly the price seemed like it was completely unattainable for me (wich looking back is dumb , ive had Conklin and Warwick basses that cost as much) so I never even looked at them at ships or anything and didnt really know anyone who owned one .
Now that I have one I'm trying to learn as much as I can about them and the history ECT because I find it very interesting .
I mean to me there are basicly 3 guitars ....les puals , strats and teles .
Everything else is pretty much copies .
I mean obviously you have 335's and things like that but for the most part thise 3 guitars are the basic models of almost every modern guitar and sound.

 

[Oddball667]

The first thing I do when I get a Gibson is ake out the harness and pickups.
I MIGHT use the pickups if they are 57 Classics or T Tops but I don`t like anything else.

esound.ebery guitar ive ever owned ive wanted to literally rip out the pickups and throw them in the fire lol .....accept this studio , I'm completely happy with the sound , i dont think ill ever change anything on this guitar , if I want something different ill just buy another guitar .
.....would love an explorer and a voodoo V , but feel like those have there own sound as fare as being diffrent shapes and tones ECT .
Dont actually know alot about the voodoo pickups other than there diffrent , but ive been in love with V's since I first seen one as a kid and only ever owned a ESP/LTD V , wich was a great guitar ....but no Gibson.

 

[truckermde]

Something that's not just cosmetic is the thickness of the body.

Does it affect tone? Not really. I used to like the skinny bodies of Studios, but I prefer the thicker ones these days.

Sold my last Studio 8 or 10yrs ago. It was a '94. Nice guitar.

I will say this though: if you own something and you are constantly asking yourself if it's as good as another thing, you really want that other thing.

 

[Oddball667]

Totally understand that , im beyond happy with this les paul .
In away I'm glad I didn't get it till i was 40 because now seems to be the right time for it to be in my life if that makes sense .
I dont think i would of respected it like I do now when I was younger .
In the 90's I was in love with fenders and I played in a couple bands as a guitar player and in one we were actually becoming "local heros" kinda thing and our bass player died in a plane crash so I switched over to bass and just never looked back, never really lost intrest in guitar but never really picked one up again accept here and there for anything more than kinda a writing tool for ideas .
....just wasnt inspired by the guitar anymore .
But yeah I was just basicly curious if studios were the equivalent of a squire to a strat , after some research and talking to you guys on this forum and of course playing it I dont feel like it is .
I just feel like its more of an average working class or "blue collar" les paul wich not only suits my style but playing .
I don't think I would like a AAAA flamed maple top with mother of pearl binding and gold hardware (idk "super fancy" is what I mean) type les paul as I do this stripped down plain music making machine.
And I do love the sound I get from it so probably wouldnt change a thing even if it was diffrent from the Las pauls my "guitar heroes" play , just wasnt sure it was a true LP or something diffrent.
Wich to me can be confusing as it feels Gibson makes so many diffrent versions of a les paul , and I'm more used to thats a telecaster , or thats a jazzmaster so on and so forth ( I do realize there are diffrent versions of those also , but I hope you understand what I mean).

 

[Oddball667]

....and ive always loved EVERYTHING about fender ....accept how they sound , I have always been into "heavy" music and was never satisfied with how a strat sounded. I never could get that low bottom end that I heard in my head ....maybe thats why I play bass idk. But now that I have this studio I finally have the closest thing to the sound in my head ive ecer had from a guitar ive ever owned .
Kind ofmakes me think why someone never just told me "buy a Gibson dummy"

 

[moreles]

My Favorite Les Paul, which does sound and play noticeably different from both Standards and Traditionals is the '61 Les Paul/SG Custom. Next in line: the more usual Custom. Then the other stuff. As for the Studio/Standard showdown, I'll take a Standard any day. Studios are great, but the more substantial, better-topped, generally better-equipped (PUs), and bound-neck Standard is even better. Is the difference worth it? The market speaks for itself, but obviously value-for-money is a personal calculation. I don't see this as a battle. It's a straightforward choice. I disagree that they are essentially the same guitars. They aren't.

 

[Oddball667]

My Favorite Les Paul, which does sound and play noticeably different from both Standards and Traditionals is the '61 Les Paul/SG Custom. Next in line: the more usual Custom. Then the other stuff. As for the Studio/Standard showdown, I'll take a Standard any day. Studios are great, but the more substantial, better-topped, generally better-equipped (PUs), and bound-neck Standard is even better. Is the difference worth it? The market speaks for itself, but obviously value-for-money is a personal calculation. I don't see this as a battle. It's a straightforward choice. I disagree that they are essentially the same guitars. They aren't.

Thats pretty intresting , i understand the sg vs les paul sound , can even get the thicker body of a standard over a studio , but your saying the pickups are better made ? And better pots ect?

 

[bum]

I've played crappy Customs, great Customs, crappy Studios, great Studios.
Gibson more than any other company I know is very hit and miss, regardless of how much or little you spend.
Dunno how they do it to be honest, if three identical cars had different gas mileage for no reason there'd be questions asked, got a shitty Standard? That's just Gibson being Gibson

 

[Oddball667]

....actually starting to understand that , it is very odd that Gibson is "Gibson" with such a varied quality of basicly the same guitar , and some are ridiculously priced and others you can basically get for a few hundred bucks and arent really any better than a epiphone , but at the same time there making decent epiphone guitars (I wouldn't really want one but hey) and it also amazed me that les pauls have almost been discontinued , or lost there popularity act but somehow still are one of the most iconic guitars of all time.

 

[efstop]

I changed the sound of my Tribute by replacing the P-90s with mini humbuckers, but it's what I wanted. After playing it as bought and comparing it to the '14 MM with P-90S pickups, it was awesome. It's the body and pups, not the binding and flame.