Studio Model Guitars

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

They usually have quieter electronics and what else?

 

NB: I suppose there's a thread on this already, but if I look for "studio guitar" with the inverted commas, the search engine finds nothing.

 

If I take off the inverted commas, the search engine trawls up every post that contains the word "studio".

 

If there's a thread on this out there, please send me a link?

 

Otherwise, what's the diff between "studio" model guitars and normal guitars?

[picker]

Marketing, I guess. The Les Paul Studio was a downmarket version. It was kinda plain jane, no binding or really elaborate inlays, or anythig like that. Maybe they called it "studio" because they figured binding and such is for audiences to drool over. I guess not everything that says "studio" on it is a primo model or something...

[webe123]

My mistake, thought you meant a guitar built for a studio!

[dave251]

xxxxxxxxxx

[dave251]

Generally, and this mostly refers to Gibson products, the term means downgraded cosmetics, while retaining the quality of the "standard" lines. There might be some other construction features, such as "sound chambers" on the Les Paul series, that are particular to that model.

 

It's still a guitar, though.

[webe123]

Sorry, my mistake. I thought you meant a guitar just for a studio!

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Ok, thanks for all that.

 

I thought "studio" meant they'd splurged a bit on quieter electronics but apparently there's no diff in that regard?

 

Thanks again!

[Bluesape]

Ya might look at low impedence instruments, but they've become rare.

[rw2003]

Originally posted by Bluesape:

Ya might look at low impedence instruments, but they've become rare.

Yes... Gibson made the Les Paul Recording guitar in the early 70's. This version of the LP was designed by Les Paul for studio use and featured loew impedance pickups and extra electronics/switches to provide different sounds/tones.

 

http://www.muc.de/~hm/music/Guitars/gibson-lp-recording-136522/

[fantasticsound]

Gibson has blurred the lines between their products, but generally

 

• Studio - No binding, dot or trapezoid inlays
  
• Standard - 3 ply binding, trapezoid inlays
  
• Custom - 5 ply binding, gold hardware, block inlayws
  

 

Of course, there's also the Classic line, which resembles a Standard but has ceramic p'ups (harsher, hotter p'ups than the alnico p'ups) and the 60's slim taper neck.

 

Of course, now there are so many permutations of p'ups, necks and other accents these are very generalized statements about Gibson models.

[LPCustom]

The gold hardware thing doesn't hold true anymore. You can get gold hardware on standards and most customs seem to have nickel or chrome hardware, now. And I prefer guitars with chrome or nickel hardware. My LP Custom has nickel hardware.

 

Of course, since the LP Custom isn't mainstream anymore and is a product of Gibson's custom shop I don't know how that works anymore anyway.

 

I don't know what the Supreme brings to the table. I have only seen a couple and both had chrome hardware. And I can't stand the headstock inlay. It's very ugly IMHO.

 

But Neil's right for the most part, especially when you consider vintage Gibsons.

 

There's very little difference between my Les Paul Studio and my Les Paul Custom. They weigh the same, they play the same, they sound almost the same (different pickups). The differences are almost entirely cosmetic.

 

The Les Paul Custom comes with Burstbucker or Burstbucker Pro pickups. The Les Paul Studio usually comes with 490R/498T pickups. My Studio has '57 classics on it because the original pickups were dead and I put new ones in.

 

So, other than cosmetics, the only difference between the Custom, Standard and Studio is the pickups. With the same pickups, they would sound almost exactly alike. With your eyes closed, there's no difference.

[Caevan O’Shite]

rw2003 is right about the low impedance pickups in the older '70s vintage LP Recording, etc. models. I believe they were intended for going direct into the board.

 

Since then, though, all of the other LP models have just had variations on basic Gibson humbuckers, or P-90 single-coils.

 

Concerning the Henry J. era Lesters, Neil's right.

 

But, Neily, don't forgot those LP Studio "Gem" models, still without binding, but with gold hardware and P-90 "soapbars". I think it uses the same pots and caps as the Classic (and probably Standards of the same era of production). They have the same quirks, anyways (see below).

 

Isn't there someone around here who's got one?

 

Some of the early/mid '90s LP Studios (with humbuckers) had particulary nice ebony fretboards, they're choice finds amongst used Studios.

 

The LP Classic also has all very yellowed-looking cream ABS binding, and those "tinted" inlays that many call "green". (Some look awful, but I kinda like the ones in mine.) Also the press-in Kluson tuner hardware, as opposed to those with hex-nuts, for a vintage appearance. (The hex-nut Kluson tuners on my Studio are definitely noticeably better tuners than the similar looking Klusons on my Classic.)

 

If you lower those ceramic 'buckers on the Classic, and raise the polepieces, they take on a little more vintage sort of tone.

 

And if you pluck a harmonic over the 9th-fret, roll back the bridge-pickup's tone untill you can hear the harmonic note's being notably dropped off, and then just back enough to be before the drop-off point, it takes out the harshness and subtly refocuses the upper-mids more than rolling off treble. There's a little 'notch' or 'kink' in the tone-pot's taper there, around 7-&-3/4's or so on the tone-knob. I always leave my Classic's bridge-p'up's tone-control there, with the neck-pickup's wide-open. Same with my Gem, too.