Guess I am not a Les Paul guy after all - LOVE MY SG !!!!

[lulusg]

Ah! so you have finally turned to the Dark side. Welcome!!!

[martinw]

I've just bought another one!  8)

[noodleplugerine]

I've just bought another one!  8)

That's wrong in so many ways!!!

Its a StratG?!

[martinw]

So guitars have to conform to certain predefined profiles?  :lol:

[Philly Q]

I've just bought another one!  8)

Can't decide if I like the look of those or not!  I certainly like the sunburst  :) .  Not sure about the rotary switch, it's a pity the SG body isn't deep enough for a 5-way blade switch.

What are the pickups like?

[martinw]

I love the rotary switch, reminds me of the Varitone thing.
I wasn't sure I liked the guitar at first, but then it just clicked.

No idea what the pickups are like, the guitar's still in Florida!
I'm not too bothered, as I almost always change pickups. I this case I imagine a bit of careful routing, possibly a new scratchplate and I can put a humbucker in the bridge. Even with all that work it will have cost less than a "normal" SG Standard.

[Twinfan]

Martin - nice score!

Re. thick SG necks, the '61 reissue has a great slim-taper neck.  My personal favourite on an SG and not in the least bit fat and rounded.

[hunter]

I love the looks of SGs but i play so poorly on them due to the thicker necks and also the fact that the neck seems to be so long, i always end up a fret or two away from where i want to be lol.

On my standard, I'd say the neck is like a 60s slim taper les paul neck. Definitely nowhere near the 50s baseball bat of my Doublecut LP Special.

As far as I can tell the neck is awesome.

The only thing I hate (on most Gibson necks anyways) is the pastic ends of the frets instead of the frets going over the binding. Why do guitar builders do this kind of misconstruction?

[noodleplugerine]

I love the looks of SGs but i play so poorly on them due to the thicker necks and also the fact that the neck seems to be so long, i always end up a fret or two away from where i want to be lol.

SGs have rather thin necks I've allways thought...

[martinw]

So some people don't like them because the necks are too thin, and others because they're like baseball bats!    :lol:  :?

Quite funny, bearing in mind SG necks are the same profiles as LP's, and there are both 50's and 60's versions available.

[Transcend]

So some people don't like them because the necks are too thin, and others because they're like baseball bats!    :lol:  :?

Quite funny, bearing in mind SG necks are the same profiles as LP's, and there are both 50's and 60's versions available.

i dont like normal les paul; necks either

i loved my agile as it was more like an ibanez neck

[broken cord]

I find the neck to be quite comfortable on my SG; of course I have BK'S in mine, (MQ & WP). I guess if one tosses about with little abandon as one plays one could snap the neck off any guitar. Where it is true SG's do have a bad rap for being easily snapped it still lends itself to be a fine rock machine.  

For the record: I too prefer the SG over an LP.

[Tellboy]

Martin - nice score!

Re. thick SG necks, the '61 reissue has a great slim-taper neck.  My personal favourite on an SG and not in the least bit fat and rounded.

+1 - Definitely - although I find myself prefering fatter necks these days.

It appears that there is quite a variety of neck profiles if you look around.

[_tom_]

Twinfan, which neck profile is the neck on my Pearl most like? I remember you saying it was quite slim but it feels huge to me :lol:

[Twinfan]

It's probably closer to a Standard than a 61,  The width is about the same, but the Standard has a deeper profile like your Pearl LP  :)