This_Dying_Soul Posted October 30, 2011 Posted October 30, 2011 Had a chance to try the 61Ri and also A/B it with an SG Standard. My findings were surprising... I actually didn't care for the '61. The Standard sounded better to my ears. Mind you, there was only 1 '61RI on the sales floor and it's entirely possible that it was not a good example of the model... either that or the Standard I'd chosen off the wall was better than average. I never thought to check if the body of the '61 was a single piece of wood or not, but the Standard was either a single piece or extremely well matched to the point the seam was completely invisible (I could not find it no matter how closely I looked and from not matter what angle - even the body's edges didn't reveal the seam). I also liked the feel of the Standard more than the '61. The neck was just more comfortable. Assuming the '61 I tried was not a dud, for the difference in price (about $500 Canadian) I would definately take the less expensive Standard. It had beat the '61 in both tone and playability for me.
Tim Plains Posted October 30, 2011 Posted October 30, 2011 You're not the first to reach that conclusion. SG Standards are great guitars.
charlie brown Posted October 30, 2011 Posted October 30, 2011 I like them both...good versions, of both, that is. If I had to pick one...all things being equal, it would be the '61RI or VOS "Historic," with Maestro. I just prefer that styling... the smaller pickguard, deeper/wider beveling, and tapered horns. But, that's just me. They're both great guitars, when you find a lively one, of either style. CB
SG Jones Posted October 30, 2011 Posted October 30, 2011 Absolutely nothing wrong with a good standard. They are the best bang for the buck in the Gibson lineup as far as I am concerned. The pretty burst that mayes213 posted has me gassing for one.
Dallastx Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 Absolutely nothing wrong with a good standard. They are the best bang for the buck in the Gibson lineup as far as I am concerned. The pretty burst that mayes213 posted has me gassing for one. Amen!
This_Dying_Soul Posted October 31, 2011 Author Posted October 31, 2011 Figures, too. I'm not in the market for a new guitar right now and the price on the standard came down quite a bit since i got my SG Special 3 years ago. I paid $850 Canadian plus taxes. At the time the standard was $1500. The Standard I was playing around with on Saturday was $1199.00. I've said recently that I'd really take a close look at any new Gibson before buying because I've heard lots of complaints of poor QC lately; but this one would have been worth the price. At any rate, maybe I'll get really lucky and find a comparable guitar when I can afford another SG... and maybe I'll get even luckier and they've come down in price some more tool.
charlie brown Posted November 8, 2011 Posted November 8, 2011 While waiting to pick up my 2000 Les Paul Classic, from having it's frets crowned, polished, etc., I was looking around my dealer's shop (something I love to do, anyway), and noticed the large discrepancy in beveling, and horn points (some tapered as is traditional, and some did not!). The '61 and the VOS reissues, all had traditional wide, deeper beveling, and tapered horns, the current SG Standard, still had no tapering, of the horns, and "puny" beveling, between horn and neck area, especially. Even the Epiphone's have better beveling, that way. What gives, Gibson??? The early '60's beveling IS the SG! I've said it, probably too often, for some folks, but... It's so much nicer looking, and a lot more comfortable, to hold, as well. What's your reasoning, for these puny bevels?! Fess up! Oh, and that "50th Anniversay" decal, instead of the traditional "Crown" inlay??! CB
Malchik Posted November 8, 2011 Posted November 8, 2011 While waiting to pick up my 2000 Les Paul Classic, from having it's frets crowned, polished, etc., I was looking around my dealer's shop (something I love to do, anyway), and noticed the large discrepancy in beveling, and horn points (some tapered as is traditional, and some did not!). The '61 and the VOS reissues, all had traditional wide, deeper beveling, and tapered horns, the current SG Standard, still had no tapering, of the horns, and "puny" beveling, between horn and neck area, especially. Even the Epiphone's have better beveling, that way. What gives, Gibson??? The early '60's beveling IS the SG! I've said it, probably too often, for some folks, but... It's so much nicer looking, and a lot more comfortable, to hold, as well. What's your reasoning, for these puny bevels?! Fess up! Oh, and that "50th Anniversay" decal, instead of the traditional "Crown" inlay??! CB Do yourself a favor and stay away from SGs made between 1970-present.
charlie brown Posted November 8, 2011 Posted November 8, 2011 Do yourself a favor and stay away from SGs made between 1970-present. I know...aside from my MIJ Epiphone Japan '61 Standard (with correct spec's and beveling) I've managed to do, just that! ;>) But, I like the '61 Reissue SG, as well as the VOS versions. They have vintage spec's, and the correct beveling and tapered horns, as well. It just seems to be the (other) regular Gibson USA versions, that don't seem to bother, with those "details?" CB
alexandros Posted January 20, 2012 Posted January 20, 2012 Are you serious dudes? 61 reissue is far away better instrument than the standard...It has more clear sound with better growl and sustain. Have you ever tried to compare these two guitars at the same good amp (mesa mark IV for example)...I think tha even broken 61 reissue is better than sg standarf or special, it is just one or two class more than the others. Finally if you want more gain to 61 reissue install a 498t (i think it depends on the amp you use!
lockbody Posted January 20, 2012 Posted January 20, 2012 Are you serious dudes? 61 reissue is far away better instrument than the standard...It has more clear sound with better growl and sustain. Have you ever tried to compare these two guitars at the same good amp (mesa mark IV for example)...I think tha even broken 61 reissue is better than sg standarf or special, it is just one or two class more than the others. Finally if you want more gain to 61 reissue install a 498t (i think it depends on the amp you use! I've had both at the same time, and I own a Mark IV as well, and while I think the '61 RI is the better sounding guitar, I thought the Std. sounded more like a SG. Does that make sense? I just thought the Std. just nailed all those classic SG humbucker tones. AC/DC and Black Sabbath just dripped from it. The first thing I did when I got the Std home was tune it to "drop-d" and whipped out Sabbath's "Into The Void". The drummer (yeah, I know) was just gushing afterwards "Dude! That sounds just like the album!". Same thing with "Walk all over you" by AC/DC. I agreed, too. Yet, I still traded the Std away for a Classic (which I really thinks nails what I consider a SG should sound like), and kept the RI. The RI is just an overall better guitar for me, and just a more versatile instrument for my tastes.
alexandros Posted January 21, 2012 Posted January 21, 2012 No dude i think that 61 reissue is a lot better than the standard sg. Don't forget that ac/dc used to have the custom version of the standard and not a guitar that costs only 1000 euros....I believe that sg standard and special are too noisy for fast rock music, like punk or some kinds of metal...but for slow rock styles is good enough!
alexri Posted January 21, 2012 Posted January 21, 2012 No dude i think that 61 reissue is a lot better than the standard sg. Don't forget that ac/dc used to have the custom version of the standard and not a guitar that costs only 1000 euros....I believe that sg standard and special are too noisy for fast rock music, like punk or some kinds of metal...but for slow rock styles is good enough! Way to be humble. I'm going to pretend I didn't read most of that. I've got one guitar; a standard, and it rocks harder than anything.
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 hey man i recorded 2 months ago with my sg special (498t on bridge)using a mark V guitar amp and even if it had awesome rock sound,it has not the "balls" that a reissue could have. You have to understand that sg special and sg standard are only good instruments and nothing more...As I had told you before all the bands we are listening never but never record with a cheap sg, they prefer a custom vesion or a les paul, because they want growl and not just a thin beuatiful sound!!
lockbody Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 hey man i recorded 2 months ago with my sg special (498t on bridge)using a mark V guitar amp and even if it had awesome rock sound,it has not the "balls" that a reissue could have. You have to understand that sg special and sg standard are only good instruments and nothing more...As I had told you before all the bands we are listening never but never record with a cheap sg, they prefer a custom vesion or a les paul, because they want growl and not just a thin beuatiful sound!! Dude. Really? If your Special was stock, it has a 490t, not a 498t. That explains your lack of "balls". Even if it was the 498t, that pickup IMO, is great to bring the rock, but not a very versatile pickup. If you were to replace your Special's pickups with 57 Classics like in the RI, you'd find out that it's not quite as bad you seem to make it out to be.
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 i replaced the stock pickup with a 498t GC and it sounds a lot better and more clear than before, but this doesn't mean that my sg gain "body" or growl. Even my friend's fender deluxe with jeff beck on bridge had twice growl than mine. It's the body and the neck which plays crucial role not the pick ups. As for the 57 classic plus pick ups, in my opinion if you had a solid mahogany guitar this pick up will give it bigger "balls" than Hulk's!!!Man, it seems to me that you are obsessed with sg standard just be honest and watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRMvun2cm3s
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 This an awesome sg standard with "ballsssss". A true sg sound!
alexri Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 hey man i recorded 2 months ago with my sg special (498t on bridge)using a mark V guitar amp and even if it had awesome rock sound,it has not the "balls" that a reissue could have. You have to understand that sg special and sg standard are only good instruments and nothing more...As I had told you before all the bands we are listening never but never record with a cheap sg, they prefer a custom vesion or a les paul, because they want growl and not just a thin beuatiful sound!! Go educate yourself, Pete Townshend recorded most of the Who's most famous tracks in the late 60's on an SG Special. Carlos Santana played one at Woodstock. Iommi played a special with P90's for the first Sabbath album (and a Strat). Angus' Number One is a Standard. It's funny that you think the 61 RI has more balls; most people seem to think the 61 RI is a thinner sounding guitar.. The Standard uses 498t and 490R pickups, which Gibson uses in the Customs. It's a hotter sounding pickup than the '57 Classic in the 61 RI. If you think the Standard is a "cheap guitar" that's "only 1000 euros" then you are the definition of guitar snobbery.
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 hey victim, you tell me that you were watching angus young recording with a sg standard..How do you know that? May be he used a custom standard or a 1970's standard which has for sure better woods than yours!! sg 61 reissue has bigger sound but less gain than the standard! what is more important for you, to have more clear and bigger sound or just a thin bright noise. If your standard is so good so tell me a reason why 61 is 600 euros more expensive than the standard...oh let me think....gibson made a mistake and put a wrong price...so send them an email to cost standard as high as 61 and please believe me, they will send you back a huge bag with "balls" and a 61 reissue photo on them!!
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Oh and forget these guys you refered to me may they wrote some parts of their albums with a special or whatever, but they have also used analog compressors, analog eq's, tube amps, mics that cost twice the price of your and mine guitar together, preamps and their eq's and an equipment that costs about 100000 dollars! but i am sure you still think that they take a sg special with 490t and record at their friend's home studio...
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Gibson uses on custom models 490r and 498t? are you sure about that? burstbuckers 1 & 2 or 57 classics NOT 498T OR 490R.
alexri Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 What makes the 61 RI so much better at recording than the Standard or Special? It costs $600 more because it has a different pickguard, as far as I'm concerned. And yes, the Les Paul Custom has 498T and 490R pups, as do many other customs.
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 les paul custom is much different than a sg because it has fuller sound and amazing sustain...les paul custom has different wood than the sg and that's why it weighs some kilos more...it's an acoustic organ itself. gibson knows better and put 57 classics or burstbuckers on sg, their sound fit better. Man i have a sg special since 2005 and i am very pleased with my guitar but it's good to admit that 61 reissue is not more expensive only for the pickguard, but also for the solid mahogany body, the slim and different sounded neck and generally the better selection of wood that gibson chooses for this instrument.
alexandros Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 May ask you another question? what's the difference between the sg angus young signature model and the sg standard, don't tell me is only the pick up and the lightnings on the fretboard...It's the wood dude! if you ever test these instruments without an amp then you will see the difference!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.