»

[Jan Deal]

That Les Paul looks very yummy, especially the finish, but I'd be scared off by the EMG pickups...

Originally Posted by Jan Deal

That Les Paul looks very yummy, especially the finish, but I'd be scared off by the EMG pickups...

See! I told you!

[Jan Deal]

haha, but I'm snobby when it come to guitars/musical equipment. My current guitar Nirvana is a Fender Mustang, so slapping EMG's into a Les Paul isn't going to float my boat or light my candle.

[HateEvent]

I have plenty bed sheets thanks

Yeah, I think stock pickups are the way for this one.

You know your Les Pauls as far as pricing goes

The stock pickups just didn't suit my needs - but I bought the guitar knowing I'd change them out cos I liked the feel (and look) of it...

As Zakk has proved, nowt wrong with an EMG in a Les Paul... but not for everyone.

so in summary....

you need to stop buying guitars because of WHO plays them...

did you buy the les paul partly because hetfield used/uses them? (as well as your mentioned reasons that it looks ace)

[britheguy]

Originally Posted by five years

so in summary....

you need to stop buying guitars because of WHO plays them...

did you buy the les paul partly because hetfield used/uses them? (as well as your mentioned reasons that it looks ace)

I think there is nothing wrong with that. If your fav guitarist uses a LP why not buy one.
It goes for anything really,
football boots
darts
snooker cues
etc,etc.

i'm not saying there's anything especially wrong with it either...

just that this guy seems to have a thing for signature guitars, be they actual signatures like the hanneman one or guitars that have become synonymous with a certain person: black gibson explorer + james hetfield for example, which he says he also has..

why not buy a non-signature esp which (as he admits he's not loaded) will be cheaper, look the same and play the same?

personally i think playing a guitar like the urban camo one (with slayer logos all over it) will make people watching his band play - how d'you say this - think the guitarist is limited in his influences? whereas a matt black esp the same shape looks more diverse...

nevermind.

[Spoonie]

i've never seen the appeal with a signature edition as a first guitar either. sure, it's a nice thing to own but the point of a sig, to me, is that it's a guitar made to the specification of the person who's signature it bears. hence, why not spend the money (and these thngs are usually expensive because of the name) on getting a guitar that suits YOUR style and your sound and modifying it accordingly if there's not one available that meets your needs. if you want to be recognised and appreciated as having an individual style and not be told that you remind everyone of X guitarist, this is a pretty bad start by playing their guitar!

of course, that's just my opinion and buying an instrument is a very personal thing.

/x

Nothing stopping you developing your own style on a signature model though.

Let's face it, the Les Paul itself is a signature guitar, but of course very few people over the years have played them in the same way that Les himself does. Ditto the Grestch Chet Atkins models, countless people have developed their own unique styles on them, Duane Eddy, Eddie Cochran, Brian Setzer, George Harrison etc