# Here it is,... THE POLL !



## Robert1950

*Here it is,... THE POLL ! LP or Strat !*

There have been a couple of threads about strats and LPs recently. So, here it is. The Poll of the Decade. Your reason can be as simple the best tone you ever heard was Clapton's LP on the Beano album or that the strat is best playing guitar around. Here it is. Make your your choice. What do you like best. 

LES PAUL or STRATOCASTER.

Let the flames fly..........

(you notice I didn't state specifically Fender or Gibson - if Suhr or ESP Navigator was the turn on -doesn't matter)

P.S. I don't remember if this has been done before. If it has, it's been a while and we have a lot newer members, so..........


----------



## GuitarSkater

*LEs Paul*

i like Les Pauls WAY better. I think they sound better, and look better. ALso most of my favourist guitarists use Les Pauls nd Gibsons, (eg. SLASH(the best guitarisest ever in my opinion lol))


----------



## Guest

Neither: PRS


----------



## bolero

man....I can't do it....need one of each


plus a tele & a 335



:rockon2:


----------



## devnulljp

bolero said:


> man....I can't do it....need one of each
> plus a tele & a 335


Yes (except without the LP, the Strat, or the Tele :smile
EDIT: I'm with Paul below.


----------



## cdub66

Tough one-I bounce back and forth.

Right now it's Les Paul, do another poll in 3 months and I may vote the other way! kkjuw


----------



## screamingdaisy

My preference is about 51% Les Paul/49% Stratocaster. Ignoring one for the other is like cutting off your left hand because you prefer your right.


----------



## keto

I own 2 Strats (OK, 1's a G&L) and 1 Les Paul. I've owned about 3 other Strats and 1 other (real Gibson) Les. The Les is now on the block not because there's anything wrong with it, I just can't get comfortable with them. Strats have always felt the best. I voted accordingly.

'Tho recently I'm a Tele convert and play that the most hwopv 9kkhhd


----------



## Ripper

screamingdaisy said:


> My preference is about 51% Les Paul/49% Stratocaster. Ignoring one for the other is like cutting off your left hand because you prefer your right.


I'm with you on this one too. I wouldn't want to give up either of mine.


----------



## fraser

cant abide a lp- strat guy here:smile:


----------



## Intrepid

Can't do without either one though I have a strong preference for the Gibson Les Pauls and they make up most of my stable. I like the full tone of the LP but strats have always been (and always will be) an integral part of my arsenal. You didn't mention teles either and I can't be without one for very long. There's a time and place for each of these great guitars.


----------



## hollowbody

Like others, I'll chime in some love for the 335 and the Tele. I'd also like to point out that SGs rule too.

Between the Strat and the Lester, though I do love the sound of a LP, I just prefer the feel of a Strat and the clean tone of a Strat sounds WAY better than the LP's. As for driven or distorted sounds, LPs sound amazing, but I prefer them in studio, where I don't have to be standing and where they can be mixed in better. I have less trouble with a Strat cutting through the mix in a live setting than a LP, and *man* those suckers can be heavy.


----------



## elindso

I've been playing my Guild B.B. a lot of late. It's sorta Les Paulish. I really like it.

I've a Strat, Goldtop LP and a Tele.

I got rid of a pretty blond ES340. I found it uncomfortable, they are to big. I'd like a 339 or 336 when I've got some spare cash.

Bet ya can't keep just one.


----------



## Geek

No fair, apples and oranges.

I'd like to check both please


----------



## keeperofthegood

I said Les Paul cause I've seen him in interview and he seems a decent chap.


----------



## Canadian Charlie

*I have both and they both have thier good points and bad

The Les Paul is heavier to hold than a Stratocaster (I have back problems)
The Les Paul has a thicker sound
The Les Paul has a thick neck
The Les Paul has 2 volume and 2 tone knobs
The Les Paul has great sustain


The Stratocaster is light weight
The Stratocaster has a contoured body
The Stratocaster has a thin neck
The Straocaster has a whammy bar
The Stratocaster has the best IMO input jack
The Stratocaster has thin frets (A negative here)
The Stratocaster comes with either a maple or rosewood fret board


These are just some basic things about the 2 of them, both are used by millions of players out there. 

Gibson comands a high price for there products unles you go for an Epiphone or other Les Paul copy

Fender has a plant in Mexico and offers thier MIM Stratocaster for a lower price. 


Why decide? Buy both!!!!:smilie_flagge17:


*


----------



## Archer

Pretty different beasts.

I tend to go more for Fender-style instruments....though I try to avoid Fender products whenever possible.


----------



## Mooh

For my personal use I find the Stratocaster the more versatile of the two choices given, and since I don't generally dig the balance and feel of the Les Paul guitar (though Les Paul the man is THE man) I use an Epiphone Dot (335 style) and a Godin LG instead. 

That said, I generally gravitate towards my Telecasters.

Mindful of the foregoing qualifiers, I still vote for the Stratocaster.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## al3d

Archer said:


> Pretty different beasts.
> 
> I tend to go more for Fender-style instruments....though I try to avoid Fender products whenever possible.


Don't need to mention it in every fender topic kid..we know you're to good for fender! hwopv


As for me..Strat guy as well..and a FENDER one..heheh. i do own a LP, and a dawn nice one at that, but the strat feels better for me i guess. BUT..i have a LP if i ever feel like one..


----------



## pattste

They say a picture is worth a thousand words... or is it a thousand votes?


----------



## Scottone

I've never been able to bond with a strat (and I've owned a few good one's) so the answer is easy for me.....Les Paul


----------



## ssdeluxe

bolero said:


> man....I can't do it....need one of each
> 
> 
> plus a tele & a 335
> 
> 
> 
> :rockon2:


+1 , I'm with Bolero.

I love these "cage matches" of gear.

pound for pound and in "real" use, I have used the trusty strat way more than the les paul, but I do recording and don't play out anymore. In the studio a strat is indespensable, I can't say that for the typical lester, in my experience only of course.


----------



## Mogwaii

I'm not crazy about the strat shape, I like it but I don't like playing one. Les Pauls though, sound great and are comfortable. I love the strat sound for surf though!


----------



## Budda

EF - first word is epic, i'll let you guys solve the rest


----------



## smorgdonkey

I have more strat style guitars but I tend to think of les paul style guitars whenever I think of grabbing one...so I tend to agree with the guy who said left hand and right hand because they are both things that I like even if I like one better.

As for someone's comment about PRS...yeah...the coffee table guitar that must be at the top of the 'most often pickups swapped out of' list. Even ahead of Epiphone!!


----------



## allthumbs56

Around the house I will always pick up my Tele. When I jam with the "Band" I start with the Tele but will have switched to using an LP by the sixth song. The Tele's great for Eagles, Matchbox 20, Mellencamp, Petty, etc but when I need that big crunchy kerrrrrrrrrang ........ only one guitar will do.

I use my Strat all the other times :smile:


----------



## Archer

al3d said:


> Don't need to mention it in every fender topic kid..we know you're to good for fender! hwopv
> 
> 
> As for me..Strat guy as well..and a FENDER one..heheh. i do own a LP, and a dawn nice one at that, but the strat feels better for me i guess. BUT..i have a LP if i ever feel like one..



I see it as a goal in life to get people away from playing Fenders and going to real guitars


----------



## Archer

smorgdonkey said:


> I have more strat style guitars but I tend to think of les paul style guitars whenever I think of grabbing one...so I tend to agree with the guy who said left hand and right hand because they are both things that I like even if I like one better.
> 
> As for someone's comment about PRS...yeah...the coffee table guitar that must be at the top of the 'most often pickups swapped out of' list. Even ahead of Epiphone!!



Totally true, PRS pickups are probably the weakest of any major maker. Have to say that they REALLY did a good job on the new DGT pickups and the 57/08 pickups are also amazing sounding. 

Paul Smith REALLY likes low mids....his pickups seem to have an over abundant low mid tonality that can be murky.

Gibson, Fender and pretty much all makers are guilty of the coffee table look...that isnt just a PRS trait and it isnt predominantly a PRS trait anymore.


----------



## al3d

Archer said:


> I see it as a goal in life to get people away from playing Fenders and going to real guitars


well..i play the original...what's the point of looking elsewhere...it's only a copy after all..so a copy..can not be better then it's original counter part...different yes, but not better by any definition.. sdsre


----------



## shoretyus

Can't vote Robert... there is no Les Pat box :sport-smiley-002:


----------



## Archer

al3d said:


> well..i play the original...what's the point of looking elsewhere...it's only a copy after all..so a copy..can not be better then it's original counter part...different yes, but not better by any definition.. sdsre


You look elsewhere when a builder stops making the best example of a product. Fender has been eclipsed by most boutique makers...it hurts the traditional Fender fan to hear it and pisses them off but their opinions or ideas really dont change anything. Fender makes a lot of mediocre to good guitars. Not a great maker anymore....they havent been for more than 40 years. 

Anderson, Suhr, Tyler and a few other F-style boutique makers are not just making copies. The general body shapes are very similar but they are usually different dimensions...they have improved on the old originals. Once again backward looking/thinking Fender people hate to hear this but that is because they know it is correct.


And for those that may toss numbers at me or how many instruments Fender sells to a legion of fans. I dont care one iota...and the argument holds no water. History has shown time and time again that it IS possible for the masses to be wrong and the few to be correct. This is one of those cases.

If you MUST buy Fender get a Japanese one, they are priced properly for what they are.

(that post should stimulate some replies)


----------



## vds5000

al3d said:


> well..i play the original...what's the point of looking elsewhere...it's only a copy after all..so a copy..can not be better then it's original counter part...different yes, but not better by any definition.. sdsre


I wouldn't call any Fender Strat made after around '65 an 'original'.

The point of looking elsewhere is that some people want a higher quality instrument. American Standard Strats are not on par with counterparts made by companies like Anderson, Grosh, Suhr and Tyler (to name a few). These companies use more resonant wood, better quality electronics (including pickups) and have a much greater attention to detail (finishing, fretwork, etc.). I've owned a 1987 American Standard Strat, a 1991 American Standard Strat Plus and a 1994 American Standard Strat Plus Deluxe. All were good guitars, but none were great guitars. I've also owned a 1986 '62 Vintage Re-Issue Strat (USA) which I liked better than the 3 American Standards. I currently own a mid-80s Japanese Strat and a 1996 '60 Custom Shop Strat - both of which I like better than the 3 American Standards mentioned.

I'm not saying Fender Strats are bad - I still own 2. I'm just saying that Fender doesn't necessarily make the highest quality/best strat-type guitars out there.

By the way, over the years I've also owned:

1981 Les Paul Custom (Wine)
1984 Les Paul Studio (Black)
1990 Les Paul Custom (Black)
1991 Les Paul Standard (Cherry SB)
1992 Les Paul Standard (Black)
1993 Les Paul Standard (Cherry SB)
1993 Les Paul Standard (Amber - Birdseye limited)
1996 Les Paul Studio (Wine)
2004 Les Paul Classic (Amber - Premium Plus)
2007 Les Paul Studio (Fireburst)

I really can't pick one over the other (Strat vs. Les Paul). I like them both - but both are different.

Excellent thread, btw!!!


----------



## Spikezone

bolero said:


> man....I can't do it....need one of each
> 
> 
> plus a tele & a 335
> 
> 
> 
> :rockon2:



YEP!
-Mikey


----------



## Spikezone

al3d said:


> well..i play the original...what's the point of looking elsewhere...it's only a copy after all..so a copy..can not be better then it's original counter part...different yes, but not better by any definition.. sdsre


Well, I was going to try to avoid this trap, because we have been through this one over and over, but I must say (once again) that I like my G&L Legacy (and most of the other Legacies and Tribute Legacies I have played) better than most of the 'real' Fender Strats I have played, with the possible exception of a really sweet 60 Strat a friend owns. I can't say it enough times, but the G&L's are what Fender Strats would be now if Leo had retained his original company.
-Mikey


----------



## Robert1950

Spikezone said:


> Well, I was going to try to avoid this trap, because we have been through this one over and over, but I must say (once again) that I like my G&L Legacy (and most of the other Legacies and Tribute Legacies I have played) better than most of the 'real' Fender Strats I have played, with the possible exception of a really sweet 60 Strat a friend owns. I can't say it enough times, but the G&L's are what Fender Strats would be now if Leo had retained his original company.
> -Mikey


The way I see it, the G&L is a Leo Fender guitar. Plain and simple.


----------



## al3d

Archer said:


> You look elsewhere when a builder stops making the best example of a product. Fender has been eclipsed by most boutique makers...it hurts the traditional Fender fan to hear it and pisses them off but their opinions or ideas really dont change anything. Fender makes a lot of mediocre to good guitars. Not a great maker anymore....they havent been for more than 40 years.
> 
> Anderson, Suhr, Tyler and a few other F-style boutique makers are not just making copies. The general body shapes are very similar but they are usually different dimensions...they have improved on the old originals. Once again backward looking/thinking Fender people hate to hear this but that is because they know it is correct.
> 
> 
> And for those that may toss numbers at me or how many instruments Fender sells to a legion of fans. I dont care one iota...and the argument holds no water. History has shown time and time again that it IS possible for the masses to be wrong and the few to be correct. This is one of those cases.
> 
> If you MUST buy Fender get a Japanese one, they are priced properly for what they are.
> 
> (that post should stimulate some replies)


In your case..the mass is right i'm afraid.....you'll learn when you grow up..don't worry. everyone thinks he's right when they're young.. You're sold on the idea that Fender makes crap, yet it's one , if not THE most successfull guitar company out there. Taking something like a strat and "improving" it as you say ain't original..any idiot can fiddle with a design that as stand the time, and then say.."i improved on the design"..wow, greath accomplishment. Let all those you makes your worship make their OWN design from Scractch, and let see if they're so successfull after that. Riding Fender's wave is easy. the last builder that actually came up with something new was PPS realy. Others...just copy, plain and simple. Ask your makers to DESIGN a complete guitar, EVERYTHING original, and make it for 1100$ new... That you agree or not, is irrelevant, it's a fact, and facts can't be denied. You have the right to like other makers, and hate fender, i don't deny you that right..hey, there are lots of guitars i realy don't like out there personnaly
(ibanez-gretch), but by not liking those brand, it does'nt mean they are CRAP...my opinion on a guitar style or design is irrelavant to it's quality, as you seem to think your opinion on makers is LAW and that If YOU say fender's crap..then so be it!...


By the way..did'nt you just buy a Fender CS Jeff Beck!...for someone who sais Fender's crap...you sure do spend a lot on one that's overprice no!


----------



## Bevo

Have had 3 Strats, 2 USA and 1 Mex and all were gone in a short time, we just did not get along. Did not find them comfortable to play and the single coils were not that great sounding to me.

My buddy left his G&L Legacy with me for a few days and I just loved that guitar, hottest single coils ever!

Would I buy another Strat....No

Les Pauls, I have always loved but have not owened on yet. Have played them lots and rented one for a week. It was a great week with the standard and is on my list of things to get for 09 when L&M has that no interest sale again.
White with ebony fret board...oh yeah:bow:

Bev


----------



## vds5000

al3d said:


> In your case..the mass is right i'm afraid.....you'll learn when you grow up..don't worry. everyone thinks he's right when they're young.. You're sold on the idea that Fender makes crap, yet it's one , if not THE most successfull guitar company out there. Taking something like a strat and "improving" it as you say ain't original..any idiot can fiddle with a design that as stand the time, and then say.."i improved on the design"..wow, greath accomplishment. Let all those you makes your worship make their OWN design from Scractch, and let see if they're so successfull after that. Riding Fender's wave is easy. the last builder that actually came up with something new was PPS realy. Others...just copy, plain and simple. Ask your makers to DESIGN a complete guitar, EVERYTHING original, and make it for 1100$ new... That you agree or not, is irrelevant, it's a fact, and facts can't be denied. You have the right to like other makers, and hate fender, i don't deny you that right..hey, there are lots of guitars i realy don't like out there personnaly
> (ibanez-gretch), but by not liking those brand, it does'nt mean they are CRAP...my opinion on a guitar style or design is irrelavant to it's quality, as you seem to think your opinion on makers is LAW and that If YOU say fender's crap..then so be it!...
> 
> 
> By the way..did'nt you just buy a Fender CS Jeff Beck!...for someone who sais Fender's crap...you sure do spend a lot on one that's overprice no!


Hey Archer, where did you say in this thread that Fender is crap? I did a search on each page, and only one person has used 'Fender' and 'crap' in the same sentence.


----------



## Maxer

I pick Godin.

[runs off laughing]

Hey y'all... Happy New Year. I'm hightailing it off to the country for a few days. May you all strum in good health.


----------



## Guest

The Stratocaster is quite simply the most versatile guitar ever built and for anyone to say it is crappy to mediocre is preposterous. The Fender Strat outsells all other guitar models. Period. It is Les Paul lovers who get upset by those numbers, not Strat lovers. Les Paul lovers like to spread nonsense that somehow the Gibson is a better quality instrument. Bullshit. They are overpriced and in some cases poorer quality than a Fender. I have owned only one genuine Les Paul even though I've owned many copies. The real LP I had was a pile of crap. Multiple issues. I have posted that story here before so no need to rehash it. Sufffice to say I won't be rushing out to buy another based on that experience.

I chose the Strat in the poll even though I have a few LPs (copies) that I would never give up because the Strat can do so much more than the LP and because it just feels better.


----------



## Steadfastly

For me the Les Paul is too plain which doesn't make sense because I generally like plain.


----------



## al3d

Yoda said:


> The Stratocaster is quite simply the most versatile guitar ever built and for anyone to say it is crappy to mediocre is preposterous. The Fender Strat outsells all other guitar models. Period. It is Les Paul lovers who get upset by those numbers, not Strat lovers. Les Paul lovers like to spread nonsense that somehow the Gibson is a better quality instrument. Bullshit. They are overpriced and in some cases poorer quality than a Fender. I have owned only one genuine Les Paul even though I've owned many copies. The real LP I had was a pile of crap. Multiple issues. I have posted that story here before so no need to rehash it. Sufffice to say I won't be rushing out to buy another based on that experience.
> 
> I chose the Strat in the poll even though I have a few LPs (copies) that I would never give up because the Strat can do so much more than the LP and because it just feels better.


Now..ok..tell us REALY what you think...hehe..but i do agree with most of your post. LPs seem a bit over expensive compared to their fender counter part. you usually get 2.5 strats for the price of a LP.


----------



## bscott

I am a LP fan. Over at Gibson's own forum there is a LOT of unhappiness over the newest Lp - the DarkFire. A lot of new technology. Will it make the LP better?? Don't know except that Gibson seems to be investing a lot in their new technology guitar. They have disconrinued a lot of LP models in favour of the new technology stuff.
Whatever happened to the old - tune up, plug in and play!! ??

Brian


----------



## Milkman

In my early years I was a Les Paul player.

After about five years of playing I started using Strats and later switched to Super Strats and Teles. I've tried a few LPs over the years and loved them initially, but didn't like the way the sat in the mix at all.

I've been a sound man now for the past couple of years and I like Strats and Teles even more from this perspective. Single coils rule in the context of a band IMO.

The worst sounding bands (again IMO) are two guitar bands where both players are using LPs.


----------



## Robert1950

Milkman said:


> The worst sounding bands (again IMO) are two guitar bands where both players are using LPs.


I've rarely seen a band that uses two LPs. I think that the Duane and Dicky version of the Allman Bros. is one of the those exceptions where it sounds really good.

I have a strat, but not an LP. I find the heel and the single cut design awkward when it comes to upper fret access. My strat is such beautiful player. But when you are able to nail that really, really good LP sound , it is to die for.


----------



## Zeegler

Les Paul.

I prefer the flatter fretboard, set-neck, humbuckers, fixed TOM bridge, mahogany body, pretty much everything about an LP over a Strat. Strats feel like cheap toys to me. They were developed as a cheaper alternative to traditionally made guitars. Bolt on necks made them far easier to mass produce. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a well built Strat, and I know first hand how good they can sound. It's just that I prefer everthing about a LP.


----------



## vds5000

I Huff Paint said:


> Les Paul.
> 
> I prefer the flatter fretboard, set-neck, humbuckers, fixed TOM bridge, mahogany body, pretty much everything about an LP over a Strat. Strats feel like cheap toys to me. They were developed as a cheaper alternative to traditionally made guitars. Bolt on necks made them far easier to mass produce. ...


Oh boy, here we go...


----------



## Archer

al3d said:


> In your case..the mass is right i'm afraid.....you'll learn when you grow up..don't worry. everyone thinks he's right when they're young.. You're sold on the idea that Fender makes crap, yet it's one , if not THE most successfull guitar company out there. Taking something like a strat and "improving" it as you say ain't original..any idiot can fiddle with a design that as stand the time, and then say.."i improved on the design"..wow, greath accomplishment. Let all those you makes your worship make their OWN design from Scractch, and let see if they're so successfull after that. Riding Fender's wave is easy. the last builder that actually came up with something new was PPS realy. Others...just copy, plain and simple. Ask your makers to DESIGN a complete guitar, EVERYTHING original, and make it for 1100$ new... That you agree or not, is irrelevant, it's a fact, and facts can't be denied. You have the right to like other makers, and hate fender, i don't deny you that right..hey, there are lots of guitars i realy don't like out there personnaly
> (ibanez-gretch), but by not liking those brand, it does'nt mean they are CRAP...my opinion on a guitar style or design is irrelavant to it's quality, as you seem to think your opinion on makers is LAW and that If YOU say fender's crap..then so be it!...
> 
> 
> By the way..did'nt you just buy a Fender CS Jeff Beck!...for someone who sais Fender's crap...you sure do spend a lot on one that's overprice no!


I don't think Fender is crap, they are good (and some are really good)....but I would say that they are an elite level maker by any stretch. They are like a Chevy...readily available and easily replaced should something go wrong with them.

I did buy a Jeff Beck strat because I worship the guy...and it is a really good one. Not half the guitar my Andersons or Suhrs are but it is a good guitar. I got it for 1400 dollars...not a lot of money and it is now sitting in a case in my office. Looks good there too. If I wanted a true Player I'd have purchased a Tom Anderson Classic or Suhr Pro series in seafoam. The Beck strat is an ornament that is also a pretty good guitar.

Sales and being the biggest means nothing. Vanilla Ice was the most successful entertainer in the world for a while, Milli Vanilli was also....I guess the must be great.


----------



## Archer

vds5000 said:


> Hey Archer, where did you say in this thread that Fender is crap? I did a search on each page, and only one person has used 'Fender' and 'crap' in the same sentence.



I didnt say fender is crap. I said they arent a great maker and stand by that.

You see die hard Fender and Gibson freaks are drama queens and cannot stand the fact that their instruments are not as great as they think they are. That they get the warm fuzzies because Hendrix or Page or whoever played them doesn't mean the guitars are great in the grand scheme of things.....even though they want them to be. Its kinda naive....which is cute and sort of endearing. They buy their first genuine made in America by a Mexican Stratocaster.....it is olympic white....it has a whammy bar....it looks legit. The buyer feels like Hendrix the buyer smiles and continues to smile until some clear fluid drips out the corner of their mouth...it's cute. 

Truth be told I have played many nice Fenders and Gibsons....I own 2 fine Gibsons and a Fender that is a really good guitar. Are they the best guitars in my collection? Nope....they arent even top 10.


----------



## mrmatt1972

I'll start by saying I have never owned the USA made real thing of either guitar, but if forced to choose I would choose a Les Paul. 

I have owned several strat clones (the best was a Valley Arts/Samick that was very good) and one good Epiphone LP clone (the Bob Marley tribute). I could never get comfortable with the controls or the tone on the strats. The LP felt like home right away.


In terms of tone of my guitar heroes: Strat: SRV, David Gilmore, Hendrix LP: Billy Gibbons, Bob Marley, Jimmy Page, Neil Young (aka GOD)...

Many more LP players than strat players on my list.

Also, just to add fuel to the fire in our debate... Just about everything Fender Music Corp slaps its name onto is garbage. By way of example, when I was tele shopping I ended up buying a Hamer T-51 because the build quality and parts were far superior to production Fender instruments. Gibson seems to take its heritage and logo more seriously and rarely passes off junk with a Gibson logo on it. Unfortunately we all have to pay through the nose for that quality.

Matt


----------



## Archer

Problem with Gibson seems to be that for every good one you have to go through 5 or 6 that seem to be made by a 5th grader.

I have owned about a dozen...only now do I have 2 that are keepers.


----------



## Guest

Gibson has had some quality issues for the past 10 to 15 years or so. They know about it, they just haven't been successful at fixing it yet. Hopefully they will once again be worthy of the revere they've always enjoyed. For now? for right now? ... not so much.

The total opposite is true with Fender. After a couple of decades of hit and miss instruments in the early years (yes, that's right, not all vintage Fenders were awesome, some were total shite) they went on to create some truly terrible instruments (the CBS years) and generated a bad reputation for themselves as a result of those instruments. That reputation that lingers to this day even despite the fact that in the past 10 to 15 years they've gotten their act together and are making the most consistently good guitars they've ever made.

I get a kick out of people retelling the same old story year after year and inferring the same incorrect assumption from it every time. Yes, Leo Fender created his guitars to be affordable and easily serviced. That approach lead to the easy access electronics and the removable neck. Somehow over the years people have confused the words affordable and cheap. They do have quite different meanings. The internet affords us the luxury of anonimity so we feel free to say things we might not say in person. Stand in my presence and call my excellent quality Fender Strat cheap and I'll show you a very expensive Les Paul that is cheap.


----------



## Robert1950

I had to try out 40-50 stratocasters (under a $1000) over a period of a year until I found THE one.


----------



## zontar

Well at least this isn't a Gibson or a Fender site.
I do visit a Les Paul site and a Fender site--and both have had this poll--guess who wins on each board...

I used to debate this with a friend back when I was in high school--I argued in favour of the Les Paul, he took the Strat. Within a year he had bought TWO Les Pauls & no Strats, and within two years I had a Fender Mustang--not a Strat, I know--but not a Gibson. Although I later bought a Les Paul, and had a copy at the time. My friend later bought kit parts to make his own Strat, but he was never happy with it and kept making changes-not long after it was in an unplayable state. When I was helping him move out of his parents house I told him he'd never get it finished now. I was right.

So I had to vote Les Paul, they're more me, but I do like Strats, and recently developed some GAS for a MIM 60's Strat. (And all I'd do to it is replace the neck pickup.


----------



## ssdeluxe

Archer said:


> I didnt say fender is crap. I said they arent a great maker and stand by that.
> 
> You see die hard Fender and Gibson freaks are drama queens and cannot stand the fact that their instruments are not as great as they think they are. That they get the warm fuzzies because Hendrix or Page or whoever played them doesn't mean the guitars are great in the grand scheme of things.....even though they want them to be. Its kinda naive....which is cute and sort of endearing. They buy their first genuine made in America by a Mexican Stratocaster.....it is olympic white....it has a whammy bar....it looks legit. The buyer feels like Hendrix the buyer smiles and continues to smile until some clear fluid drips out the corner of their mouth...it's cute.
> 
> Truth be told I have played many nice Fenders and Gibsons....I own 2 fine Gibsons and a Fender that is a really good guitar. Are they the best guitars in my collection? Nope....they arent even top 10.




not sure I'm liking the general tone of some of your replies, a bit eliteist and maybe considered a bit insulting to some folks. I think a few foks would consider 1400.00 a fair bit of money, and you saying its no biggie for you just demonstrates you are trying subtely to convey some kind of superiority...its subtle , but I am not diggin it.

I would rather hear more on-topic discussion.


nice thread though in general with some gr8t constructive criticism.


----------



## Archer

I am a bit elitist, actually when it comes to guitars I am more than a little elitist.....I wont be losing any sleep over it either. I have busted my ass to get to the point where I can buy good things and not have to settle for stuff that doesnt do it for me 100%.....Fender does not do it for me. I refuse to drive a Chev or a Ford because I want something made with more attention to detail...same thing with guitars. If it does for someone else that is fantastic and good for you. 


However when talking about the smoking deal I got on that Beck strat elitism isnt part of my point. I have been been waiting 18 years for the right Jeff Beck strat and THEN found one from the custom shop for 1400 dollars that IS cheap. I think they are 2500-2700 dollars new.


----------



## Milkman

Robert1950 said:


> I've rarely seen a band that uses two LPs. I think that the Duane and Dicky version of the Allman Bros. is one of the those exceptions where it sounds really good.
> 
> I have a strat, but not an LP. I find the heel and the single cut design awkward when it comes to upper fret access. My strat is such beautiful player. But when you are able to nail that really, really good LP sound , it is to die for.



As much as I would enjoy it, sadly I have never had the pleasure of mixing FOH sound for the Allman Bros. I was more referring to bands I have mixed, and really I should have been a bit more broad in my comment.

Two LPs, one LP and one PRS, pretty much any combination of two guitars with humbuckers only is not a great sound to me.

ONE humbucking guitar is ok. Two in the same band sounds like mud to me.

Two single coil equipped guitars (we'll call the Strats just to stay on topic) wil sound consistantly better in a band together, all other things being equal.


----------



## Robert1950

Look at the two inventors. Leo and Les. (Condensed Version)

Leo loved music but was not a player. He was technician, a builder and a *listener.* He talked to several musicians, professional and everyday players. As a builder he wanted to create something guitarists would want to play and could be easily serviced among other things. He also had good people like George Fullerton.

Les was a master player and a recording pioneer among other things. When he designed the Les Paul, it came from experience as such. He knew what he wanted - it was in his head. Les had to go to a builder. He was turned by Gibson at first. After Fender started producing, Gibson needed a solid body electric design and they decided on Les Paul's idea. It was also good that Ted McCarty was at the helm at that time.

I could spend a little more time speculating how this relates to the two instruments, but I'll leave to all you others at this time.


----------



## Archer

Milkman said:


> As much as I would enjoy it, sadly I have never had the pleasure of mixing FOH sound for the Allman Bros. I was more referring to bands I have mixed, and really I should have been a bit more broad in my comment.
> 
> Two LPs, one LP and one PRS, pretty much any combination of two guitars with humbuckers only is not a great sound to me.
> 
> ONE humbucking guitar is ok. Two in the same band sounds like mud to me.
> 
> Two single coil equipped guitars (we'll call the Strats just to stay on topic) wil sound consistantly better in a band together, all other things being equal.



I think having 2 players with humbucking guitars in a band can work. It really depends on how the players use EQ....as long as they are covering different territory it works well.

I saw Scorpions a year and half ago...was front row and could hear the dry signal off the stage. Matthias had a cutting sharp tone while Rudy had a thick fat tone....both use humbuckers and live it worked. Their live sound was amazing. 

I saw Alter Bridge too...Tremonti's hard sounding modern tone was very different from Myles' more vintagey tone. It worked


----------



## Bevo

I heard my Dad and another guy have this same discussion at a car show, we had our 56 Merc F100 truck. The other guy had a 55 GM pickup.
Listening to them argue over the finer points of both trucks were very amusing, at the end of the day my Dad won best truck and the other guy won best Vintage vehicle...That started another discusion that has not ended to this day..its been 20 years!

Both guitars are great and it really comes down to how they fit you and your experience with them. If they fit good, feel good, sound good and look good then you will keep it, if not maybe its not for you.

As was mentioned above, buying a guitar that your hero played for a first guitar is not a bad thing. For one, it puts you in the game and second you really don't know what you got till a few years later when you can play it.
If your hero played a Les and you were given a cheap Strat or the other way around it may be that little guitar that will stop you from lifetime of playing.

Bottom line, if the guitar never calls out to you or makes you feel guilty when you walk past it then its not going to get played.

Bev


----------



## shoretyus

Bevo said:


> I heard my Dad and another guy have this same discussion at a car show, we had our 56 Merc F100 truck. The other guy had a 55 GM pickup.
> 
> 
> Bev


New poll..... which guitar fit's best in a 56 Merc Les Paul, Tele


----------



## Robert1950

Oh good!. It is now unclosed. Thank you mods!

If you look at how each of these guitars came to be by looking at Leo and Les, it starts to make a little more sense. See my previous post on these two.


----------



## greco

Bevo said:


> ...That started another discusion that has not ended to this day..its been 20 years!


Bevo...please remind me to check this thread on New Years Eve, 2029

Glad the thread is open again ....Thanks

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Bevo

Why this one http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/cms/..._Crossroads_Guitar_Fest_2004_-_lg.6298281.jpg


And it goes with this..http://www.socp.net/gallery.php?Qwd=./gallery/Mercury&Qif=image11.jpg&Qiv=thumbs&Qis=M

Sadly the truck is no longer with us, if you need to know I can post a second thread.

Bev


----------



## greco

greco said:


> Bevo...please remind me to check this thread on New Years Eve, 2029
> 
> 
> Dave


Bevo...I posted this request as I'm thinking that this thread (like the "discussion" about the trucks) might still be active in 2029...considering the variety of "opinions" being posted.

kkjwpw...Sorry...I'll stop now

Dave


----------



## Edutainment

Both my guitars are Fender right now, but I can appreciate the Les Paul. I just haven't played them extensively. I do really like the mahogany LP Studio though, it's really light, and the matte finish is beautiful and... I don't know but it's a pretty guitar.


----------



## Milkman

Archer said:


> I think having 2 players with humbucking guitars in a band can work. It really depends on how the players use EQ....as long as they are covering different territory it works well.
> 
> I saw Scorpions a year and half ago...was front row and could hear the dry signal off the stage. Matthias had a cutting sharp tone while Rudy had a thick fat tone....both use humbuckers and live it worked. Their live sound was amazing.
> 
> I saw Alter Bridge too...Tremonti's hard sounding modern tone was very different from Myles' more vintagey tone. It worked


It CAN work, but it seldom does. Put a couple of Strats or a Strat and a Tele in a band together and the odds of a decent mix increase dramatically when compared to a couple od LPs.

Go one step further and replace the scond guitar with a good keyboard and the mix improves again.


----------



## Robert1950

Milkman said:


> It CAN work, but it seldom does. Put a couple of Strats or a Strat and a Tele in a band together and the odds of a decent mix increase dramatically when compared to a couple od LPs.
> 
> Go one step further and replace the scond guitar with a good keyboard and the mix improves again.



Why is this ???


----------



## Milkman

Paul said:


> Clutter in the available freq. spectrum. Strats and Tele's seem to have more and stonger upper harmonics. In the language of this board, they "cut through the mix" more. Add in fuzz/overdrive/distortion which add even more upper partials, and the Strat/Tele style guitar can lance a boil at 30 paces.
> 
> The best keyboard players know instinctively how to stay out of the way of the rest of the band.


That about sums it up.

I would add there seems to be a tendency for two guitar bands featuring humbuckers to play with more distorted and mid heavy tones as well as to play heavier music by nature.

One good guitar player in a band is plenty for my tastes.


----------



## nicmat42

les paul standard (wine red finish) is my favorite guitar of all time!


----------



## Archer

Paul said:


> Don't forget the drop tuning too!!!
> 
> It's very rare to see two bassists in a group of any kind, (other than a symphony orchestra), but it can be done. Oscar Peterson had a trio at Montreaux in the 70's with bassists Ray Brown and Neils Hennig Oersted Pederson. Aside from the brilliant performances, it's a lesson in using only the room you need, and leaving available room for others.


Ned's Atomic Dustbin was a band that had 2 bassists for a while (I seem to recall they didnt keep the 2 bassists for the life of the band) and it was actually quite an interesting sound. They were a decent band.


----------



## devnulljp

Robert1950 said:


> I've rarely seen a band that uses two LPs. I think that the Duane and Dicky version of the Allman Bros. is one of the those exceptions where it sounds really good.


Also Thin Lizzy did a great job with that and a whole stack of great players too. I liked Blackfoot before they became a mediocre 80s wannabe FM rock band, and that combo of Les Paul and Explorer was great. 
Lots of bands like that: 2 Les Pauls or the like. 
Soundgarden was usually a Les Paul and the Guild S-100. 
Peal Jam.
Lynyrd Skynyrd (and all the Southern other wannabes too).
Black Crowes
The original Fleetwood Mac.
Free when Paul Rogers stuck of a guitar it was usually a LP right?
Boston?
Does AC/DC count?

It's all good anyway.

Then of course there was King Crimson in the 90s, which was two whole power trios on stage together: two drummers, two bass players and two guitarists.


----------



## hollowbody

Robert1950 said:


> Why is this ???


When I was playing in my last band, at our first rehearsal together the lead guitarist had a '72 LP Deluxe Goldtop with mini-humbuckers, and I was playing my Dot an awful lot at the time because it was still new to me and I was loving it. That first practice sounded like ass, partly because we weren't used to each other, but also partly because we were both playing humbucking guitars. Next time I brought my Strat and from the moment I plugged it in, I decided this was the guitar I would play pretty much exclusively in that band.

It almost seems like humbuckers have a "default" frequency range that isn't very flexible. I, for one, don't really like using the tone knobs on my buckers because I prefer a treblier sound, and a bucker turned down sounds waaaay too dark to my ears. Every time I try to dial in Clapton's Woman Tone, I keep thinking, "man, how did this sound so good on record and so crappy here?"

Single coils tend to lean to the more trebly side when the tone is dialed to 10, so there's more usable tones available by fiddling with the knobs.


----------



## hollowbody

devnulljp said:


> Also Thin Lizzy did a great job with that and a whole stack of great players too. I liked Blackfoot before they became a mediocre 80s wannabe FM rock band, and that combo of Les Paul and Explorer was great.
> Lots of bands like that: 2 Les Pauls or the like.
> Soundgarden was usually a Les Paul and the Guild S-100.
> Peal Jam.
> Lynyrd Skynyrd (and all the Southern other wannabes too).
> Black Crowes
> The original Fleetwood Mac.
> Free when Paul Rogers stuck of a guitar it was usually a LP right?
> Boston?
> Does AC/DC count?
> 
> It's all good anyway.
> 
> Then of course there was King Crimson in the 90s, which was two whole power trios on stage together: two drummers, two bass players and two guitarists.


I think Pearl Jam sounds much better when McCready plays a Strat.


----------



## al3d

Most metal bands use 2 players and are i'de say 95$ using Humbuckers. But when you look at bands like Iron Maiden, they are mostly humbucker and single, i've seen then live more then i can count, and got many DVDs of them. When one is using a single, the other will have a Humbucker, and so one.

But there are LOTS of bands using 2 humbuckers, maybe using lots of distortion helps in that mather..i could'nt tell.


----------



## Milkman

With big bands it comes down to personal taste.


As a sound man I try not to make judgements based on my musical tastes, but I'd say 8 times out of 10, when there are two humbucker equipped guitars on stage, the sound is muddier and louder than with singles.

When lesd players use a very distorted tone with humbuckers and the other player does the same for the rythm you really have to boost the lead strip on the board to get him (or her) out. MOST two guitar bands fit into this category in my experience.

We can all provide a list of famous bands with two (or more) LPs or similar. That's not the point I'm making. Take ANY of those same bands and put Strats and Teles in their hands (not feasible of course) and compare the results.


----------



## Archer

Milkman said:


> With big bands it comes down to personal taste.
> 
> 
> As a sound man I try not to make judgements based on my musical tastes, but I'd say 8 times out of 10, when there are two humbucker equipped guitars on stage, the sound is muddier and louder than with singles.
> 
> When lesd players use a very distorted tone with humbuckers and the other player does the same for the rythm you really have to boost the lead strip on the board to get him (or her) out. MOST two guitar bands fit into this category in my experience.
> 
> We can all provide a list of famous bands with two (or more) LPs or similar. That's not the point I'm making. Take ANY of those same bands and put Strats and Teles in their hands (not feasible of course) and compare the results.



I find that even in single guitar player bands if the guitarist is a gainiac they are hard to hear in a mix....all that gain shrivels tone. Sounds great when you are sitting in your house but in a live setting it is terrible.


----------



## Milkman

Archer said:


> I find that even in single guitar player bands if the guitarist is a gainiac they are hard to hear in a mix....all that gain shrivels tone. Sounds great when you are sitting in your house but in a live setting it is terrible.


Absolutely.


The cleaner the guitar the better it sounds in the mix, whether there's one guitar or two.


It seems like whenever you have two humbucker guitars in one band, there's always too much gain along with them.

At the root of my opinion on this subject as it relates to the original post and poll is my distinct preference for single coil pickups in the context of a band.


----------



## zontar

I've jammed with many guitarists--most of them using humbuckers, and with me usually playing on humbuckers. Most of those times it sounded good. 

Part of the problem is when guitarists won't change their own sound to fit in with others. I'd flexible that way. If the guitars don't mesh--and this has happened with single coils too--tweak the amps or guitars or effects (or don't use that effect), etc, etc.


Based on the examples given above--it's doable.
That's nothing against a humbucker/single coil mix either--those work too.
So do two single coils.

I always preferred playing with another guitarist to being the only one.


----------



## Milkman

zontar said:


> I've jammed with many guitarists--most of them using humbuckers, and with me usually playing on humbuckers. Most of those times it sounded good.
> 
> Part of the problem is when guitarists won't change their own sound to fit in with others. I'd flexible that way. If the guitars don't mesh--and this has happened with single coils too--tweak the amps or guitars or effects (or don't use that effect), etc, etc.
> 
> 
> Based on the examples given above--it's doable.
> That's nothing against a humbucker/single coil mix either--those work too.
> So do two single coils.
> 
> I always preferred playing with another guitarist to being the only one.


It's doable alright, but in my experience it's seldom done well.

I've played in two guitar bands and it worked, but the tonal palette is much more limited.

My preference is that at least one and preferrably both "guitarists" double on keyboards and/or other instruments. There aren't many songs where I want two guitars banging away through the whole song.

Again, this is only my opinion.


----------



## pattste

I watched Lucinda Williams on Austin City Limits (PBS HD) last night. Three guitars plus the bass for most tunes. A couple of tunes had two Gretches with humbuckers and one Fender Tele with humbuckers. Nice tone, good sound, good show. It is possible to make it work, but it requires musicians who can listen and play with taste.


----------



## zontar

Milkman said:


> It's doable alright, but in my experience it's seldom done well.
> 
> I've played in two guitar bands and it worked, but the tonal palette is much more limited.
> 
> My preference is that at least one and preferrably both "guitarists" double on keyboards and/or other instruments. There aren't many songs where I want two guitars banging away through the whole song.
> 
> Again, this is only my opinion.


I've always been willing to double on keyboard, but it would only have been fairly basic parts--although I'm sure I'd have improved it I were doing it on a regular basis. Most of the musicians I've played with could play another instrument if needed. That's been good, because not every song is best served by the same instrument lineup--so instead of forcing the song into your lineup, you're adapting to what's best for the song--if that's two guitars & no keyboards--then you do that. If it's 2 keyboards and no guitars--then that's what it is.

But I still like two guitar lineups for a few reasons.

The main one is I like playing with other guitarists. I've always liked having both guitarists playing different, yet complimentary things. I used to jam with this one guitarist who came up with some great riffs. I'd play the same riff a few times to learn it, then I'd make some changes--often playing the whole riff higher or lower--or splitting it up. One thing that can sound good is to have both guitarists play the same notes, but then at one point in the middle have one go up & the other go down to the next note. Or I'll use different inversions of the same chords. If it doesn't work, I'll try something else.

I've always listened to the other guitarist and if they like doing fills, I leave spaces for them, instead of filling them. If they leave me spaces-sometimes I'll take them--other times I'll leave the spaces for someone else, or to leave a space that works.

I think most of the time when two guitarists don't work it's because they aren't co-operating with each other. Neither is willing to change their tone or try something different playing wise. I've never wanted to be the big showoff guitarist, or even the main lead guitarist. I tend to hear a song as a whole, not a set of parts. I've met too many guitarists who don't get that. I tend to get along better with drummers.

And yeah, that's my opinion, not yours--and I recognize you have a lot more experience in these things than I do. So I do listen to what others have to say here.


----------



## Milkman

zontar said:


> I've always been willing to double on keyboard, but it would only have been fairly basic parts--although I'm sure I'd have improved it I were doing it on a regular basis. Most of the musicians I've played with could play another instrument if needed. That's been good, because not every song is best served by the same instrument lineup--so instead of forcing the song into your lineup, you're adapting to what's best for the song--if that's two guitars & no keyboards--then you do that. If it's 2 keyboards and no guitars--then that's what it is.
> 
> But I still like two guitar lineups for a few reasons.
> 
> The main one is I like playing with other guitarists. I've always liked having both guitarists playing different, yet complimentary things. I used to jam with this one guitarist who came up with some great riffs. I'd play the same riff a few times to learn it, then I'd make some changes--often playing the whole riff higher or lower--or splitting it up. One thing that can sound good is to have both guitarists play the same notes, but then at one point in the middle have one go up & the other go down to the next note. Or I'll use different inversions of the same chords. If it doesn't work, I'll try something else.
> 
> I've always listened to the other guitarist and if they like doing fills, I leave spaces for them, instead of filling them. If they leave me spaces-sometimes I'll take them--other times I'll leave the spaces for someone else, or to leave a space that works.
> 
> I think most of the time when two guitarists don't work it's because they aren't co-operating with each other. Neither is willing to change their tone or try something different playing wise. I've never wanted to be the big showoff guitarist, or even the main lead guitarist. I tend to hear a song as a whole, not a set of parts. I've met too many guitarists who don't get that. I tend to get along better with drummers.
> 
> And yeah, that's my opinion, not yours--and I recognize you have a lot more experience in these things than I do. So I do listen to what others have to say here.



There's no doubt that it can work and I have played in bands with that line up, however the longer I played the more I really wanted the broader tonal palette a wider variety of instruments can provide. 

There was a trend toward guitar synthisizers for awhile which I saw as a half a$$ed attempt to accomplish the same thing.

Since making the shift to the sound board I'm ever more aware of the limitations of the two guitar line up.

It's not surprising that on a guitar site, there would be a tendency for members to enjoy a two or even three guitar format. I don't tend to think as a guitarist so much these days.

All opinions are valid and should be respected.:food-smiley-004:


----------



## EchoWD40

FACT!: 
Humbuckers > Single Coils


----------



## smorgdonkey

Any set-up *can *work but I tend to enjoy bands that have one guitar player because that one player normally works really hard to 'do it all' if it is in their ability to do do. If the player is really good then it tends to be a real treat watching a player cover all of the bases.


----------



## Milkman

Paul said:


> Then you'll love Speakeasy....1 guitar & 5 horns.:smile:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think it's a 2 guitar issue, it's a 2 guitarist issue. I don't know a lot of guitarists that are good at not playing very much. The 2nd guitar on a lot of Beatles tracks is often a single note line. With a lot of rests in it.
> .


That only adresses musical elements and not tonal or timbral ones. Even the most tasteful players will STILL be limited by the tones the instrument can produce.




Paul said:


> I try hard to play/think as a musician that happens to play guitar, as opposed to a guitarist that wants to be a musician. There is a difference, and when I get it right, the music is sooooo much better.


I agree wholeheartedly. The best bands don't always have the best guitarists, but they generally have the best musicians.


----------



## ssdeluxe

Paul said:


> I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I think a lot of the timbral clutter happens when 2 or more guitarists play very similar parts with any 2 guitars. If one of the guitarists is playing the steak, and the other is playing the seasoning, then the clutter is much less of an issue. My Beatles example is weak in that they never had the extreme-gainy-tuned-down-a-5th-super-crunch-death-tones that guys play with now.
> 
> I've long believed that waaay too many hobby level musicians play with waaaaay too much distortion/fuzz/overdrive. Almost anything by AC/DC, EVH's Eruption, Born to Be Wild......stuff like that is nowhere near as distorted as most hobby musicians tend to play it.
> 
> Excessive gain hides a lot of tecinique flaws, and creates a new set of problems.


bingo
+1 , I love the OLD sounds, kinda forgotten these days, I'm no old fart (not that there is anything wrong with old farts), but I totally agree, too much dist and too much high end doesn't do alot of "songs" much good....of course unless you like the metal/modern rock flavs. as always imho.


----------



## Last_Train

Stratocaster because I do not presently own a Gibson .


----------



## RIFF WRATH

I voted for LP style.......not for myself, but rather the sound I like from real players.........and I'm talking from a tonal perspective and musical listening preference..........IMHO this nonsense about which is "better" just gives some individuals an opportunity to make fools of themselves in public............as an guitar analogy, let's use a tool... a "hammer".........there are various brands of the same style hammer......some last longer.......some actually do the job better.........but there are various styles that are for a particular job.........and you need to use the right one for the right job.............personally in my tool box I have an assortment of hammers...........same as my guitar collection........a telly style...........a strat........and an LP style.........and an accoustic.........and an electric accoustic........and a dobro..........and a banjo.........and few different sounding bass(s)............eventually a "335" style..........all obviously different sounding.............and all designed to make music........lets get past the head stock madness..............lol


----------



## Guest

If I had to choose out of the two, it would be a Les Paul.. that said, I'd much rather an SG & a Tele
I like how they sound, and they're comfortable to play.. I never was into 3 pickups.


----------



## WarrenG

Strat - because the most notable guitar tones I can recall easily are of Brian MacLeod (Chilliwack, Headpins) and Kim Mitchell (Max Webster).


----------



## faracaster

ssdeluxe said:


> bingo
> +1 , I love the OLD sounds, kinda forgotten these days, I'm no old fart (not that there is anything wrong with old farts), but I totally agree, too much dist and too much high end doesn't do alot of "songs" much good....of course unless you like the metal/modern rock flavs. as always imho.


Well thank you for confirming that... (the nothing wrong with OLD FARTS line !!!! sdsre)

I LOVE the sound of a Les Paul in the hands of a master. But for myself I'd take a Strat (and I voted Strat since we only had to choose between that and a LP). I have owned some GREAT LPs (and have yet another arriving tomorrow :smile but while I think I have gotten my head, hands and heart into getting acceptable tone out of an LP......ergonomically they just have not worked for me. They are always the last guitar taken to a gig by me (except those honeymoon days when a new one arrives). Bought my first Strat in Grade 10 and always had one since.
I will say that since the early nineties Strats have NOT always been the first into a gig bag for me. PRSi usurped them some time ago.....and in the past couple years, Gustavsson's are the king of the hill for me with a old Tele being the second guitar to get on stage.

cheers
Pete


----------



## zontar

Paul said:


> I think a lot of the timbral clutter happens when 2 or more guitarists play very similar parts with any 2 guitars. If one of the guitarists is playing the steak, and the other is playing the seasoning, then the clutter is much less of an issue.



This is part of my point as well.
But then I'll bet not everybody here likes their steaks cooked the same way either.

This also part of the reason I like having series/parallel on my Les Paul--I'd love to have it on all my humbuckers.


----------



## hollowbody

Paul said:


> I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I think a lot of the timbral clutter happens when 2 or more guitarists play very similar parts with any 2 guitars. If one of the guitarists is playing the steak, and the other is playing the seasoning, then the clutter is much less of an issue


I think why this is a problem is that most musicians these days don't have the creativity to ability to write two distinct guitar parts. I know I certainly don't most of the time. When I listen to something I've written the next day and realize that the guitars are playing almost identical parts, even though I spent a lot of time trying to write rhythm and lead tracks, I feel like throwing up. The bigger problem is that a lot of bands actually release these tracks instead of throwing them out.




Paul said:


> I've long believed that waaay too many hobby level musicians play with waaaaay too much distortion/fuzz/overdrive. Almost anything by AC/DC, EVH's Eruption, Born to Be Wild......stuff like that is nowhere near as distorted as most hobby musicians tend to play it.
> 
> Excessive gain hides a lot of tecinique flaws, and creates a new set of problems.


+1 - Yup, I've read something on Angus's setup, and his guitar tech said that he uses a *lot* less distortion than people would think. I can't remember how many times I've seen a cover band do a song that might have a little bit of grind in it, except they'll drown it in Big Muffery.


----------



## ssdeluxe

hollowbody said:


> I think why this is a problem is that most musicians these days don't have the creativity to ability to write two distinct guitar parts. I know I certainly don't most of the time. When I listen to something I've written the next day and realize that the guitars are playing almost identical parts, even though I spent a lot of time trying to write rhythm and lead tracks, I feel like throwing up. The bigger problem is that a lot of bands actually release these tracks instead of throwing them out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +1 - Yup, I've read something on Angus's setup, and his guitar tech said that he uses a *lot* less distortion than people would think. I can't remember how many times I've seen a cover band do a song that might have a little bit of grind in it, except they'll drown it in Big Muffery.



+1 , I totally relate to your observations: although I try to do something original, _"charged as guilty"_ as my dad would say {with a bit of a slavic accent lol !}, I keep thinking, why is this ?? perhaps we don't have time to REALLY be inspired or creative, maybe we buzz around too much and focus is harder................hmmmm................ geeeeez, that's another thread

gr8t observations and interesting.


----------



## fraser

Milkman said:


> It's doable alright, but in my experience it's seldom done well.
> 
> I've played in two guitar bands and it worked, but the tonal palette is much more limited.
> 
> My preference is that at least one and preferrably both "guitarists" double on keyboards and/or other instruments. There aren't many songs where I want two guitars banging away through the whole song.
> 
> Again, this is only my opinion.


ive never enjoyed playing in a band situation with another guitarist- maybe because growing up i was the only one with singlecoils- i dunno. the rythme parts never seemed to sound right.
i always felt a good bassist can cover the structure better than an extra guitar. never paid attention to it when watching or listening to bands at all.


----------



## shoretyus

I think some folks use the distortion pedal as a talent button


----------



## zontar

That's why it's a good idea to do some of your practicing without even plugging into an amp. Most of mine is done that way. No effects to hide your mistakes--but it's still fun to plug in, crank up and play with effects.


----------



## Guest

bolero said:


> man....I can't do it....need one of each
> 
> 
> plus a tele & a 335
> 
> 
> 
> :rockon2:


Now you talkin'


----------



## Guest

*Amp, guitar volume and attack*

Natural tube amp distortion:

I usually run a Telecaster (H/S) through a Traynor YCV40. Only effects are
reverb, delay when needed and a WEE bit of compression (transparent as possible)

THEN I crank the amp to about 6 or 7, back the tele volume to around 6 and have at 'er.

If you need more meat, dig in harder and turn up the guitar. 

(I admit to using a TS-9 on occasion)

Cheers


----------



## Milkman

When it comes right down to it, I'd rather listen to and/or play in a trio than a band with two guitarists. Second choice would be a four piece with guitar, bass, drums and keyboards.

Ever had one of your guys missing at a rehearsal? Now honestly, didn't it sound really great in site of the missing parts?


----------



## Milkman

Paul said:


> Not with my playing!!!! I dislike the power trio format, when I'm the guitar player anyway.


I was more referring to those currently playing in a two guitar band.


----------



## al3d

I prefer the 2 guitar set-up personnaly for the type of stuff we mostly play, wich is 80's metal..


----------



## JHarasym

hollowbody said:


> I think why this is a problem is that most musicians these days don't have the creativity to ability to write two distinct guitar parts.


IMHO a great example of a two guitar band is The Tragically Hip. I love the guitar arrangement and tones on the song "Fully Completely" - sounds like one single coiled and one buckered, with differing levels of gain, leaving spaces for each other. Tasty!


----------



## allthumbs56

My, my...... Look at us selfish guitar players - we just don't want to share the spotlight with a brother :sport-smiley-002:

I do concede that it's a lot harder to do with two guitars and both players really need to work WITH each other - if they don't it can result in a horrible cacaphony o' crap. But when it does work ..... it's a joy........ and we all are freer to explore the music.

Note: I also like 118 piece orchestras ............ but only when they play nice together.


----------



## hollowbody

JHarasym said:


> IMHO a great example of a two guitar band is The Tragically Hip. I love the guitar arrangement and tones on the song "Fully Completely" - sounds like one single coiled and one buckered, with differing levels of gain, leaving spaces for each other. Tasty!


I gotta agree. Even in the early days Langlois and Baker seemed to have a great connection. I mean, c'mon, how cool is that "New Orleans is Sinking" riff, with the lead playing the pull-offs over top?

I love listening and playing songs like that where both guitar parts are interesting and fit together well.


----------



## Milkman

allthumbs56 said:


> My, my...... Look at us selfish guitar players - we just don't want to share the spotlight with a brother :sport-smiley-002:
> 
> I do concede that it's a lot harder to do with two guitars and both players really need to work WITH each other - if they don't it can result in a horrible cacaphony o' crap. But when it does work ..... it's a joy........ and we all are freer to explore the music.
> 
> Note: I also like 118 piece orchestras ............ but only when they play nice together.


LMAO,

I don't see myself as a guitarist. I'd much rather be thought of as a musician.

As a listener the bands I've always enjoyed the most have had one guitar.

I'll take Yes over The Hip
Supertramp over Iron Maiden

Et cetera, et cetera.

As for sharing the spotlight, I'd MUCH rather share it witha keyboardist and even a couple of horns.

It's not abot ego. It's about music.


An orchestra is decidedly different than a small ensemble. I love orchestral music. In fact, even with Jazz I'l take a big band over a bebop trio or quartet.

If you only have four instruments in a band, it seems counterintuitive and wasteful to have two of the same instrument.


----------



## Milkman

Paul said:


> Which explains the COMPLETE lack of creative output from The Beatles in the last 38 years! <gentle kidding off>
> 
> I tend to agree.....I prefer great musicians working with and off of each other. I'm just not good enough as a guitarist or musician to play in a power trio format. I need another melody level instrument, (guitar, keys, horn of any kind), to work with, otherwise things sound too thin.
> 
> And then there are musicians like Joe Pass or Chet Atkins or Lenny Breau who don't even need the other two.
> 
> Are we far enough off the original topic yet?


Ever seen the Beatles live?

Listening to their recorded works is a bit different. Although we've derailed the original topic (my fault), recorded music is much different than live as you know, and from everything I've ever read or heard, the Beatles sounded pretty rough live.

You might be surprised about your ability to play in a trio. Personally I think it's easier.


----------



## Milkman

Paul said:


> I don't do it enough to get good at it. Rhythm wise I'm fine, but I don't like taking the endless solo's that folks expect. Put me in a band playing nowt but Stax/Volt/Motown and I'm good. With exception of Booker T songs, there ain't a lot of guitar solo's goin' on.


Endless solos?

Why would you? You play the song solo where appropriate. That's the mistake I think may players make in a trio (thinking they have to fill in all the gaps). 

I know you're not inclined to do this and it shouldn't be any different in a trio. It's just that the impact of leaving the spaces is more evident and impactful in that context.

The rhythm parts are the toughest to get down smoothly.


----------



## bryguy9

I know this is a flamebaiting warthread, but isn't that the point of discussion forums? Discussion? At least that is how I am justifying jumping on board the flametrain.



bolero said:


> man....I can't do it....need one of each
> 
> 
> plus a tele & a 335
> 
> 
> 
> :rockon2:


and



nicmat42 said:


> les paul standard (wine red finish) is my favorite guitar of all time!


...those posts just about sum it for me. I keep one of each out to grab and go (Wine red LP + Silverburst strat plus). But I gotta have them both there. 

I love ebony fret boards. But there is just something about the maple neck of my Strat plus. The tone from my LP is the tone I hear in my head when there is a song in there. But the Strat is just so easy to scoop up and start picking on.

Sigh. I love them both. Why choose?

B
:bow:


----------



## Robert1950

Milkman said:


> Ever seen the Beatles live?


Yes, twice. It was almost impossible to hear them the first time. The second time was better - but I was not sophisicated enough way back then to dicern how the quitars worked together - it was just enough to hear them with without all that screaming and teenboppers creaming their pants the first time around.


----------



## Robert1950

bryguy9 said:


> II love ebony fret boards. But there is just something about the maple neck of my Strat plus. The tone from my LP is the tone I hear in my head when there is a song in there. But the Strat is just so easy to scoop up and start picking on.
> 
> Sigh. I love them both. Why choose?
> 
> B
> :bow:


I hear the LP in my head, but I pick up my maple necked strat too. Or my 335 style guitar.


----------



## Milkman

bryguy9 said:


> I know this is a flamebaiting warthread, but isn't that the point of discussion forums? Discussion? At least that is how I am justifying jumping on board the flametrain.


No flaming or trolling happening here, just interesting and respectful discussion.


----------



## Milkman

Robert1950 said:


> Yes, twice. It was almost impossible to hear them the first time. The second time was better - but I was not sophisicated enough way back then to dicern how the quitars worked together - it was just enough to hear them with without all that screaming and teenboppers creaming their pants the first time around.


Wow. Well there's a distinction not many of us can claim to have.


----------



## Robert1950

Milkman said:


> Wow. Well there's a distinction not many of us can claim to have.


I guess there are a few good things that come with age. :smile:


----------



## faracaster

Paul said:


> And then there are musicians like Joe Pass or Chet Atkins or Lenny Breau who don't even need the other two.



Ahhh yes.......but have you ever hear the Standard Brands album by Lenny and Chet???
There is a great vote for two incredible musicians (who just happen to be guitarists) playing together.

Myself......I can see both points.
I think a band like say....Lynnard Skinnard, Put the dual (or in their case triple) guitar groups back into the stone age with their guitarists playing exactly the same thing in a lot of their songs. Where as bands like Wishbone Ash, (dare I say even The Beatles) the Allmans, and even Pat Travers (when Pat Thrall was in the band) had taken a musical yet powerful step in having two guitars "orchestrate" pop songs. Hell.....look at the Motown session guys or the Wrecking Crew in LA...always more than one guitar playing in a song. But each player had their own part.
I have played in many twin guitar bands with differing levels of musical success. You really have to co-operate and create your part that doesn't step on the other. When it works well, it can be very powerful and beautiful.
I do like the openness of keys and guitar in a band. Where my musical timbre has it's own space. That's where I am now. However the B3 player I play with, plays really loud so it can be oppressive at times........but generally, beautiful.


cheers
pete


----------



## zontar

You know, so far, the discussion about two guitars has centered on electric guitars. That's understandable given the original intent of the thread among other things--

But what about two acoustic guitars in a band, or an acoustic & an electric--does that change anybody's opinions?

For example, Heart did some good stuff in their early days with a mix of electric guitar & acoustic.

Just throwing that out there to see what anyone thinks--I'm interested in hearing what you think. (Some of my favorite jamming memories are when a friend and I used to get together and bash out chords on our acoustics. He used to throw in arpeggios, and I would leave holes for them, or when it fit throw in different chord voicings and suspended chords, etc. A lot fun. And when we played for others, they would think he made the mistakes I made, because I've played longer.)


----------



## Spikezone

zontar said:


> For example, Heart did some good stuff in their early days with a mix of electric guitar & acoustic.


This reply is a little off the original topic, but I heard Heart MANY times before they even cut an album, and in my opinion, EVERYTHING they did in their early days (both on albums and live) was PHENOMENAL!
-Mikey


----------



## Spikezone

Milkman said:


> You might be surprised about your ability to play in a trio. Personally I think it's easier.


I haven't been in a band for a while, but if I was, I think it would lean towards Classic Rock (and hopefully developing original tunes), and there are JUST SO MANY of those old rock tunes that just have to have two guitars. So many of them have signature lead lines on top of signature rhythm parts that I just couldn't even imagine playing them without two guitars. Hell, even ZZ Top tunes, although they can be pulled off as a trio, still benefit from having a rhythm guitar to fill them out. My ideal band would have at least bass, guitar and keyboards, and I would certainly be pickin' the keys player to try to emulate some of those missing rhythm or lead guitar parts. 
-Mikey


----------



## Spikezone

shoretyus said:


> I think some folks use the distortion pedal as a talent button


That is PROFOUND! Can I quote you?
-Mikey


----------



## Milkman

Spikezone said:


> I haven't been in a band for a while, but if I was, I think it would lean towards Classic Rock (and hopefully developing original tunes), and there are JUST SO MANY of those old rock tunes that just have to have two guitars. So many of them have signature lead lines on top of signature rhythm parts that I just couldn't even imagine playing them without two guitars. Hell, even ZZ Top tunes, although they can be pulled off as a trio, still benefit from having a rhythm guitar to fill them out. My ideal band would have at least bass, guitar and keyboards, and I would certainly be pickin' the keys player to try to emulate some of those missing rhythm or lead guitar parts.
> -Mikey



That's why I always look for a keyboard player who can play guitar. I also play keyboards, mandolin and a few assorted odds and ends. Yes, lead guitar over rhythm guitar sounds great, but listen to those same recordings and you'll seldom her that lead guitar continue playing between the solos and fills.

Also, of course it depends on your repertoire. I tend to lean toward bands that have keyboards. Getting a keyboard player to "emulate" the missing parts is so cheezy sounding that I'd much rather do without them. I've always hated keyboards trying to do Sax or harmonica solos. IMO, they should stick to organ, piano, strings and a few pads.


----------



## Spikezone

Milkman said:


> Yes, lead guitar over rhythm guitar sounds great, but listen to those same recordings and you'll seldom her that lead guitar continue playing between the solos and fills.
> 
> Also, of course it depends on your repertoire. I tend to lean toward bands that have keyboards. Getting a keyboard player to "emulate" the missing parts is so cheezy sounding that I'd much rather do without them. I've always hated keyboards trying to do Sax or harmonica solos. IMO, they should stick to organ, piano, strings and a few pads.


I agree with you on these things. but in the instance of the lead guitarist 'disappearing' after a solo, to me it would be worth it to try to come up with another part and still have the extra guitarist. 
As for cheezy sounding keyboards, if cheez was the best we could do and I felt both parts had to be there, I would rather drop the song than omit a part of it. If I have heard a song 10,000 times and my audience has as well (even though the majority of them probably have a tin ear), I feel that as a cover band you have sort of an obligation to try to recreate it for the discerning listeners in a crowd. I have always been a notorious 'parts-learner' as far as cover tunes go...maybe that's why I like blues jams a lot, because I feel that that is the place where you can stretch out and be yourself.
This might be a whacked-out point of view, but it's mine.
-Mikey


----------



## Steadfastly

I don't like Gibsons and I don't like strats. However, the other day I played a strat style Godin and I had to admit, it was a nice guitar. Actually, it was a very nice guitar.


----------



## Milkman

Spikezone said:


> I agree with you on these things. but in the instance of the lead guitarist 'disappearing' after a solo, to me it would be worth it to try to come up with another part and still have the extra guitarist.
> As for cheezy sounding keyboards, if cheez was the best we could do and I felt both parts had to be there, I would rather drop the song than omit a part of it. If I have heard a song 10,000 times and my audience has as well (even though the majority of them probably have a tin ear), I feel that as a cover band you have sort of an obligation to try to recreate it for the discerning listeners in a crowd. I have always been a notorious 'parts-learner' as far as cover tunes go...maybe that's why I like blues jams a lot, because I feel that that is the place where you can stretch out and be yourself.
> This might be a whacked-out point of view, but it's mine.
> -Mikey



I would drop the songs if I had to have a keyboard player mimic a guitar or sax part.

Doing that is only one step away from playing to recorded tracks. Some folks do that and that's their choice. I once saw Kim Mitchel (I'm a long time fan) and he had keyboard tracks prerecorded which the band played to.

It was terrible. I was embarrassed for him and completely distracted by it.

As for covers and learning the parts accurately, you're preaching to the choir. I'm closer to the "classic albums Live" method than I am to the "interpretation" method.


----------



## Milkman

FlipFlopFly said:


> I don't like Gibsons and I don't like strats. However, the other day I played a strat style Godin and I had to admit, it was a nice guitar. Actually, it was a very nice guitar.



What do you like? Teles? Gretsch? Pointy guitars?:smile:


----------



## Steadfastly

Milkman said:


> What do you like? Teles? Gretsch? Pointy guitars?:smile:


First: Hollow bodies
Second: Semi-hollow bodies
Third: Teles

And definitely not pointy.


----------



## Brennan

I love my Les Paul, but if I could only own one guitar it would always be a strat.


----------



## devnulljp

Milkman said:


> Doing that is only one step away from playing to recorded tracks. Some folks do that and that's their choice. I once saw Kim Mitchel (I'm a long time fan) and he had keyboard tracks prerecorded which the band played to.
> It was terrible. I was embarrassed for him and completely distracted by it.


Hah! I know it's not the same thing, but some good friends in Thailand picked us up one time at the airport on a long stopover from somewhere to somewhere else (I forget where) and, jet-lagged though we were, insisted on taking us to eat (always a good idea in Thailand!) with their parents. Well, dad's fave place to go was this cheesy hotel lounge kinda place, trying real hard to do the James Bond casino look thing with faux velvet drapes and tassles. They had a lounge act on too -- think Murph and the Magic Tones, only one guy and a bank of those cheesy boom-ba-chucka-boom-ba-chucka keyboards.
Quando, Quando, Quando, Quan-dooooooooooooooooh!










The guy's playing away, all the cheese, Quando, Can't live if living is without you, Feelings, along with some Thai country and western/enka stuff that is popular in Issan. His cell phone rings mid-peformance and he answers it, "Feeeeeelings....woh woh wo...<insert ringtone here> Hello? Blah Blah Blah ...", and of course the music just keeps on going. boom-ba-chucka-boom-ba-chucka 

It was a moment, but I guess you had to be there.

I also saw Dave Lee Roth in the 80s and they were using all kinds of samples and pre-recorded stuff, which felt like a cheat.


----------



## devnulljp

shoretyus said:


> I think some folks use the distortion pedal as a talent button



[youtube=Option]8EDuK46ZqFM[/youtube]


----------



## smorgdonkey

Great post dev!


----------



## aC2rs

Great stuff. That vid was hilarious!


----------



## Robert1950

I always felt that this was one of the coolest commercials ever made:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8O5wZAd2z4


----------



## faracaster

Robert1950 said:


> I always felt that this was one of the coolest commercials ever made:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8O5wZAd2z4


wouldn't you just love to say that to someone....."It's on the guitar"


----------



## al3d

Robert1950 said:


> I always felt that this was one of the coolest commercials ever made:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8O5wZAd2z4


Man..i remenber that Spot...extremely well done.


----------



## zontar

That video pops up here every now & then--and I never tire of it.
It was a great idea that was executed very well.


----------



## Robert1950

Thought I'd bump this thread with Joe Bonamassa vids

With Les Paul " http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=bonamassa+joe&hl=en&emb=0&aq=0&oq=Bonamassa#

With Strat: http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=bonamassa+joe&hl=en&emb=0&aq=0&oq=Bonamassa#


----------



## devnulljp

faracaster said:


> wouldn't you just love to say that to someone....."It's on the guitar"


I just legally changed my name to "Squier SE Special Electric Guitar Starter Pack with Instructional DVD ($199)" ... but you can call me "Truss rod adjustment"


----------



## DavidM

'94 Fender Jerry Donahue Custom Shop Tele - by far the best guitar I have ever owned. And I have owned them all!


----------



## Robert1950

DavidM said:


> '94 Fender Jerry Donahue Custom Shop Tele - by far the best guitar I have ever owned. And I have owned them all!


I would really like to see a pic of that tele.


----------



## DavidM

Here you go ... it's the third from the right

http://s649.photobucket.com/albums/u...DSC03786-1.jpg


----------



## DavidM

Oops ... try this ...

http://i649.photobucket.com/albums/uu220/DSM222/DSC03786-1.jpg


----------



## Justinator

Although the les paul has a killer tone when its distorted, I much prefer the clean tone of my strat. Since I have humbuckers in my strat I can come close to a les paul sound anyway. The neck on my strat also feels smoother and easier to play, and the cutaway in the back of the body makes it extremely comfortable even when playing for hours. I'm a big fan of both designs but the strat pulls ahead of the les paul because of its comfort.


----------



## snacker

not really into either of them, i'm a semihollow or tele guy


----------



## Lemmy Hangslong

I love both tonally but then again thats a pretty general point... there are so many Les Paul and Strat tones.

Playabiliyt i think they both suck past the 12 fret. Otherwise for me it's a draw.


----------



## Robert1950

KHINGPYNN said:


> Playability i think they both suck past the 12 fret. Otherwise for me it's a draw.


With the strat, I find I have no problem getting up to the 18th (Bb), but the single cut/heel design of the LP is awkward for me above the 12th fret or so. But the tone of the LP is to die for.


----------



## Robert1950

Maybe this should become a sticky, like the strat/tele thread?


----------



## keefsdad

Ripper said:


> I'm with you on this one too. I wouldn't want to give up either of mine.


Exactly. If you have both you have a wide palette of tones at your disposal.


----------



## Rugburn

Les Pauls are fine sounding guitars, and some of them are really beautiful to look at. They're just nowhere near as versatile as a Stratocaster. It's a personal thing, but Strats have those springs that add another layer to the single coil chime.


----------



## Lemmy Hangslong

keefsdad said:


> Exactly. If you have both you have a wide palette of tones at your disposal.


That true for sure... many bands have toured with two main guitars... a Strat and a LP... covers a lot of sonic ground.


----------



## BrianA

Is an HSS Strat cheating?


----------



## kazzelectro

Agrees with one of the other chaps...ya need one of everything..es335, jazzbox, lp, strat, tele, and then ya gotta do the same with the acoustics.
Need to have a Martin, Gibson (no Taylors), etc. But if I were to choose one it would be a vintage 70s Strat...major mojo.


----------



## Grandpa Simpson

strats are my guitar. i dont mind les pauls, they just dont feel right for me.


----------



## Robert1950

BrianA said:


> Is an HSS Strat cheating?


Yes. That is cheating. I'm afraid we will have to shoot you. :2guns:


----------



## hoser

LP
I can't stand strats.


----------



## whammybar

It has probably all been said in the 17 or so pages leading up to here and I confess I have not read all of them but I have to ad my two cents for Stratocasters. When Hendrix picked up a strat the face of music was changed forever, some of us feel that when Buddy Holly picked up a strat the face of music was changed as well, but that's another story for another thread. The tonal charactaristics of strats make them so flexible for so many variations of music from blues to funk to rock to the sweetest clean bell tone on the planet. The balance of a strat is perfect, the body shape fits easily into any jumbo or scrawny sized body. Single coils are head and shoulders above the lowly humbucker and come in so many tonal varations made not just by Fender but by guys like Fralin, VanZandt, and a host of others that the options are endless for nuance and sweetness. Add to that the 5 way and it's variations and it is almost endless what you can squeeze out of a strat. Even a guy like Bonamassa, who, granted, is spectacular with what he does with humbuckers, is better with single coils.9kkhhd


----------



## bolero

IMO you need both


I voted LP just because you can plug it straight into a tube amp, crank it, and get THAT SOUND


with a strat you invariably need some sort of FX pedal...but they excel at what they do as well



sdsre


----------



## Robert1950

I can't remember if I posted this before, and I am too lazy to check, but I play a strat and I picked LP. The strat is so playable for me, but gawd, I wish it sounded like an LP.


----------



## elindso

I like my Bluesbird best right now. The Les Paul I have is great as are the Tele, and Strat.

That then puts me LP this week.


----------



## HedleyGrange

They'll have to pry my VOS '57 Goldy from my cold dead hands!!! Strats are fun and sound pretty but My Les Paul just always feels like an "instrument" not just a tool ya know what I mean?


----------



## Todd68

I can go longer without a Strat. I need a LP at all times!


----------



## Corrode

I like LP's when I'm listening to Zeppelin.
I like Strats when I'm listening to Hendrix and SRV.

Nuff said.


----------



## MungoJerry

I play both, but overall the Gibby LP gets my vote.


----------



## stratman89

cdub66 said:


> Tough one-I bounce back and forth.
> 
> Right now it's Les Paul, do another poll in 3 months and I may vote the other way! kkjuw


Same for me, right now it's my new LP Traditional.


----------



## Robert1950

The Les Paul seems to be the choice on this forum in this poll


----------



## Robert1950

Now that I have a copy of a copy of a Les Paul, I find the sound of the Les Paul is just it. Doesn't mean I still don't like my strat though.


----------



## zontar

--never mind--


----------



## knottycm

Without a doubt Ill take a Strat over a LP.

Part of it is feel. The only LP Ive liked in my hands was a Epi elitist.

The other part is the versitility. I like 5 tones at my fingertips. I have Strat loaded with HBs & Strats loaded with single coils. I love them.

When its all is said & done, does it really matter? There as been loads of great music made with both.


Craig


----------



## cheezyridr

i didn't really feel like reading all the pages so if i say something somebody else said, forgive me. 

i like the way the strat neck feels in my hand. however, _for me_,the 
bridge-pick up-knob geography just doesn't work for my right hand. 
i like resting the heel of my hand on the bridge and rolling it on and off to mute. can't do that on a strat with a small hand like mine because you end up with the volume knob in you way and the pick is directly over the pick up and i don't like that. i like to be just in front of it. also the lp has a smaller radius in the back where my forearm/elbow covers the guitar and that also seems to facilitate more comfort for me.


----------



## Archer

Strat styled guitars are it for me. I like the snap you get from the longer scale and bolt on neck. When I am in the mood a Les Paul is great but my go to guitars are strat style instruments.


----------



## fatherjacques

The Feel of a Strat is better for me. But... Sometimes I need to play with a PRS or an other type of Set Neck. However my new PRS DGT seems to become my preferred one:smilie_flagge17:


----------



## david henman

...i voted strat, of course.

i love les pauls. wish i could play one. i've tried, many times.

on two occasions, i have actually been given les pauls.

the first time was back in 1968. it was a '59 (approx..) burst with PAFs.

maybe, hopefully, one day, i'll find one that has my name on it.

-dh


----------



## Frantic_Rock

I prefer a strat, because it can get cleaner and chimier than a LP. In my opinion it is easier to go from clean to dirty than the other way around. I'm picking strat because of versatility. For certain lead situations - a Les Paul might be better, or have more mojo in a rock context. But for versatility - strat all the way.


----------



## foghorn99

*How about Yamaha Weddington???*

In the traditional styles, either Tyler or Suhr Strat

or.....

Collings CL Deluxe.

However, a buddy of mine would say Yamaha Weddington for the LP style.

It really comes down to fit with the higher end guitars...the meat-hook players love the 25.5" scale strats/tele and the diminuitive-digits gravitate to the LP-SG-335-PRS axes.

That's my theor and I'm stickin' to it.....:smile:


----------



## cheezyridr

that makes sense to me. i have short fingers, and i loved the lp i had.


----------



## Robert1950

I love the top on that. I hope it sounds as good as it looks.



gregsguitars said:


>


----------



## elindso

I have one of each that I liked a lot before I bought it. It isn't really a one or the other thing for me.


----------



## Drazden

I find that for me, the overall clarity of the tone is much better on the Stratocaster, so that--or Strat-style guitars, anyway--are what I normally use. I love my Les Paul, great warm tones out of it, but the Strat's just that much clearer, and that much more useful (for me.)


----------



## Vincent

Strats have a thinner sound than les pauls however I like both types of guitars.

Strats have a nice tone...nice and clean and glassy however i usually use les paul for distortion type sounds and songs.


----------



## zjq426

I like les paul shape but not the neck...just too thick...
I'll collect a vintage gibson after winning this week's 649:smile:


----------



## Wired

I have not met a strat I liked or gotten along with.

so LP gets my vote.


----------



## ironuser

*kramer nightswan*

I have a kramer nightswan us 1980s it has two SDs,floyd rose and fast neck
The sound is clean and powerfull.I don't know if it's a gib or a strat it has a bit of both In the trade it's called a shreder.


----------



## octofour

I have a LP standard, it is my favourite guitar of all i have played


----------



## Robert1950

You know, for me, the Strat is a little easier to play, easier to access the higher frets, is more versatile and it sounds great, but,... there is just something about the sound of a Les Paul - It sounds like magic with balls.


----------



## Robert1950

I've been listening to an internet Jam Bands station and they've been playing a lot of live Warren Hayes (Solo, Mule, ABB, Dave Matthews,etc.) and the sound from his Les Paul,... kksjur


----------



## urko99

I have both. I have need for both sounds in my rock/blues gendre. If I buy another guitar, it will be most likely a PRS to complete my collection. I have a deep love for both the Strat and LP for thier sound and uniqueness. You really can't compare one against the other. Just my humble opinion.


----------



## djfacile

The 90's plus strat with lace sensor PU is just great.


----------



## Steve_F

Les Paul, just because i have a harder time playing on a strat.


----------



## warse22

I have a Strat with a humbucker in the neck position, which doesn't give me LP obviously, but makes it very versatile. 

Strat it is!


----------



## monty

No-brainer for me.
I'm a Strat guy 100%. Love the way a LP looks, hate the feel and while the dirty sound is great I hate the clean.


----------



## ZenJenga

Neither for me.
Les Pauls are heavy and are way too generic looking for me. Strats don't sound unique enough for me and I find them ugly to be honest. I do like the CBS headstock versions though. I've owned one of each, but couldn't justify keeping either of them. I wanted to like them, just couldn't get used to them at all.

Telecaster, Jazzmaster, Mustang, SGs with P90s and Firebirds w/ mini buckers for me.


----------



## krall

LP's for me. I've owned 16 Gibsons and multiple MIJ's (Greco, Tokai's, etc) throughout the years..


----------



## copperhead

come on you guys are comparing apples to oranges ,the 2 greatest guitar tones in rock n roll history .guys are always knocking either or. you swear they were opposites just like the north & south pole of a magnet.you know maybe endorsements are to blame ,cant play a fender with a Gibson endorsement, kind of creates a fence , i think the strat is the most comfortable feeling & playing guitar ever made except for the thick neck joint. i think today's new strats can recreate those great tones of a vintage strat pretty good. but a new les paul in my opinion cant recreate the sound of a 59 lp without a hell of a lot of work .....i don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing


----------



## BigNorm

Stratocaster....because of the neck, and it's versatility. But I would'nt be mad receiving a Les Paul as a gift ;-)


----------



## csrMark

Les Paul = WARM


----------



## Mars_all 50

I like both. But the Strat always felt better in my hands.


----------



## prodigal_son

Why compare two totally different guitars? Each are good for certain tones and styles and yet each are completely unique and do not sound the same. Strange poll, dude.


----------



## mcgriff420

I'm currently looking at another LP but the strat is what I play at EVERY gig.

..


----------



## tonydawe

i ended up choosing the les paul. if there was an option for a les paul dc i would have chosen that as i actually don't like how the single cut model looks.


----------



## bluesmostly

no comparison, really, you can't compare them. two very different animals... I love both. I Gotta have both... 

actually, love the look of a nice of a nice strat, like the feel too. Don't like the look or feel of the LP so much 

but that tone... my Ibanez artist covers that for me.

If I could only have one (that would be the perfect poll q in this case imo), it would be a strat with a good bucker (splitable) in the bridge position, which is what my no1 is in fact (a G&L Legacy actually).


----------



## Cort Strummer

I used to only like LP style guitars then I tried a G&L strat guitar and loved it so I ordered a USA G&L Invader to take advantage of a Humbucker pickup and sing coil pickups.

Really the ultimate guitar IMO.


----------



## Mizter

I prefer the Les Paul look and sound but the stratocaster generally has a better clean sound.


----------



## bw66

When I was young I had a Strat and wanted a Les Paul because it had that great classic rock sound. I still have the Strat and now that my tastes have broadened I like that sound a lot better. So much so that lately I've been plugging straight into the amp (no effects rack). I also like the wider fretboard now that I play more fingerstyle.

Brian


----------



## bluesmostly

Robert1950 said:


> I always felt that this was one of the coolest commercials ever made:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8O5wZAd2z4



that is a very cool commercial!:rockon2:


----------



## bluesmostly

Cort Strummer said:


> I used to only like LP style guitars then I tried a G&L strat guitar and loved it so I ordered a USA G&L Invader to take advantage of a Humbucker pickup and sing coil pickups.
> 
> Really the ultimate guitar IMO.


and there you have it! nice guitar cortstrummer!


----------



## Robert1950

*.... Or .... *


----------



## Phlegethon

well . . . time to weigh in here for what it's worth

voted strat, as all of the guitars I've liked the most have been a variation on the design the strat brought around whether or not I was playing my HSS strat copy I first started out on to the hardtail RG's I use now. . .I also would say that the strat is a superior design overall despite its flaws in comparison to anything singlecut. being a guitar player who has zero use for anything involving "feel", "mojo" or any other kind of measure of a guitar that seems to come from intangible/spiritual/emotional origins it works out in the end


----------



## Robert1950

Time to revive this old poll...


----------



## Steadfastly

I don't know if anyone has seen this movie or not but for those interested in the history of the electric guitar, this is great watching.

Here is the trailer:

[video=youtube;eCCfex7TsLM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCCfex7TsLM[/video]

Here is a link to another site where someone posted the whole thing. See post #1 if you want to watch the whole thing. Enjoy.

Solidbodies - the 50 year guitar war


----------



## Petey D

I've had genuine and copys of both over the years, and I prefer the Les Paul. Purely subjective on my part, IMO, it just looks better, feels better, sounds better. Plus, for some reason I just can't seem to play a strat as well as I can a LP. Same goes for teles, I just can't seem to make my fingers work on their fretboards. Heres my current LP copy. http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/gixxed/guitarstufffeb09003re-size.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/gixxed/guitarstufffeb09004-1.jpg


----------



## Roryfan

Wouldn't it be great if someone made a lightweight Les Paul that had improved high fret access? Just an overall nice & solid guitar.


----------



## doriangrey

very surprised the Les Paul is on top on this poll...I know so many people who play Strats - and when I walk into L & M there are 3 times as many Strats on the wall as Les Pauls, which I imagine is because Strats outsell Les Pauls...for me Strats are my first true love...I also really like high end Ibanez super strats - Ibanez make some really great feeling necks...


----------



## buzzy

Strat. I like the look and sound of a Les Paul but it's not a comfortable sit-down guitar (for me) and it's too heavy for playing standing up. A Strat feels just about perfect to me. Someday, I'd like to try a Strat with something other than a 9.5" fretboard radius. 12" might be nice or perhaps a compound one.


----------



## ed2000

My hearing is starting to go
...the Telecaster still sounds clear to me - with Strats coming in #2.


----------



## smorgdonkey

doriangrey said:


> Ibanez make some really great feeling necks...


The thing about that is, if you like the Ibanez neck feel then you LOVE it...but if you don't like it then you play something else and that's whay thetre are so many people playing other things. At one time, Ibanez used to make 'copies' which felt quite similar to the other guitars. When they took the shredders to the next level with the really thin necks they carved out their own niche and many would say perfected the shredder guitar.

That's not to say that they don't make other guitars that are quite nice (the Artcore line would be a great example of such guitars) but they are best known for the RG550 and all of the incarnations which followed like the Jem 777 and the RG xxxx-infinity.


----------



## Buzzard

Yamaha Twangers Rule !!


----------



## loudtubeamps

I have always loved the *look *of the Les Paul( body and headstock) *feel*(Custom's bound neck, frets and profile) and the(ebony fretboard) v.s. the *versatility*(trem bar) *comfort *and *clarity* of the Strat.
I have never found one guitar that has both!
Is there one out there?


----------



## Robert1950

I've said this before, but hey. My fantasy guitar would be a set neck strat that sounds like a Les Paul.


----------



## Roryfan

loudtubeamps said:


> I have always loved the *look *of the Les Paul( body and headstock) *feel*(Custom's bound neck, frets and profile) and the(ebony fretboard) v.s. the *versatility*(trem bar) *comfort *and *clarity* of the Strat.
> I have never found one guitar that has both!
> Is there one out there?


You didn't mention tuning stability as a requirement, so how about an SG Custom with a Maestro?


----------



## Roryfan

Robert1950 said:


> I've said this before, but hey. My fantasy guitar would be a set neck strat that sounds like a Les Paul.



I think that's what PRS was going for with the McCarty.


----------



## loudtubeamps

Roryfan said:


> You didn't mention tuning stability as a requirement, so how about an SG Custom with a Maestro?


 Hmmm..... good point worth mentioning. I've never really had a problem with tuning stability except for a couple of aluminum guitars I've had in the past.
"so how about an SG Custom with a Maestro?" 
Sorry..I'm not seeing this one, can you enlighten me a bit.
cheers, d.


----------



## Roryfan

loudtubeamps said:


> Hmmm..... good point worth mentioning. I've never really had a problem with tuning stability except for a couple of aluminum guitars I've had in the past.
> "so how about an SG Custom with a Maestro?"
> Sorry..I'm not seeing this one, can you enlighten me a bit.
> cheers, d.


I've always felt that SGs were a great cross between Strats & Les Pauls. With the obvious exception of the Les Paul body shape, an SG Custom equipped with a Maestro would offer most of what you're looking for:

1) Gibson headstock (I've always been a sucker for that split diamond inlay)
2) Bound neck
3) Ebony board
4) Tremelo (warning: use lots of nut sauce)
5) Comfortable body shape, not too heavy
6) Clarity (the ebony board helps this vs an SG Std; with the right wiring scheme lots of punchy clean tones can be dialed in). 

Gibson Custom Les Paul SG Custom Maestro | Musician's Friend


----------



## loudtubeamps

Been there with the SG's....Sorry, I'm not feelin' the love.
cheers, d.


----------



## Robert1950

This gets closer to the fantasy idea - Baker B3 - has a thru neck


----------



## cristinelo

I`m a Strat guy. If I want thick sounds....I pick up my Charvel So Cal with Darkburst WCR`s on it. If I want thinner sounds...got the single coil Strat.

LP got a very nice design but is not comfortable to play.

I find that LP lover are masochists. 
Lack of access, lack of ergonomy, plenty of backpain...etc...
And all that for lots of moneys!

That Ladies and Gents is Masochism. 

kkjuw


----------



## Roryfan

loudtubeamps said:


> Been there with the SG's....Sorry, I'm not feelin' the love.
> cheers, d.


Capisce, I've owned 11 SGs & played dozens more in the past few yrs, took me a while to find one that I bonded with. The tiny necks (be it lack of girth or that late 60s narrow nut width) bug me. The newer USA Stds have comfy, stable necks, but I'm not a fan of the bat wing guard or the pups being used on those guitars. 

The current is an '07 VOS Std stoptail with a long neck tenon and a profile that's slightly fatter than your run of the mill 61 RI. This one actually stays in tune. The Wolfetones make it sound extra nice, methinks it's a keeper.


----------



## Jeffguy

I pick the LP. The Tone, look, feeling, and sound of a Les Paul cannot be matched IMO. If I had to sell all my guitars but 1 or 2, it would be my LP's that stay hands down.. I really like the sound of a strat, Hendrix, Srv, etc. But for MY personal playing tone and style the LP's give me what I want. I have and Play a strat though.


----------

