Adjusting to LP Neck

For those that have experience with a Les Paul (copy) or a Gibson Les Paul...

Do you find it easy to play a song on a Les Paul after playing a modern C neck shape like a Strat, Tele or similar?

I'm practicing w/ the Les Paul clone more often to adapt w/ the neck shape.

What's your experience?

For those that have experience with a Les Paul (copy) or a Gibson Les Paul...

Do you find it easy to play a song on a Les Paul after playing a modern C neck shape like a Strat, Tele or similar?

I'm practicing w/ the Les Paul clone more often to adapt w/ the neck shape.

What's your experience?

These days I'm so used to my Baja and SG necks - which are both chunky - that my old #1 Strat, with it's modern C neck, feels totally alien to me. Part of the reason I want to sell both my Strats and replace them with an LP and a "V" neck Strat.

The biggest difference for me was getting used to the scale length. I had to lighten up my playing. I play with a lighter touch, because the shorter scale length equates to a little bit less tension on the strings.

And the neck shape seems pretty natural for me. I have a fav strat with a 12 radius and pretty chunky profile, although that on is a v shape. No real issue for me going to the LP neck other than what I mentioned above.

The only modern C Fender I have is an American Std Strat. My LP has a 59 profile, which I much prefer as it is chunkier, with rounder shoulders. It is more comfortable to me.

My LP has a 50's profile neck, and I have an AmStd Strat with Fender's modern C. But in spite of the difference between scale lengths, frets, fretboard radii and profiles, my hands and fingers adjust quite easily.

I have a 70's Tele with a fairly chunk U, and a MIM Esquire that is fairly similar, but my slight favourite is the fat Gibson.

I think my Tele has the modern C profile, don't quite recall. My Les Paul has the '50's baseball bat profile. It took a week or two to get comfortable with the Paul, but now I find that switching between the two is pretty easy, now. Biggest difference I feel is the weight. The Paul is a Traditional, so no chambering, and it's an anchor! Strapping the Tele on for fun practice after doing scales on the Paul is a huge difference! I run 12's on the Paul, and 11's on the Tele, so string tension is similar.

My last two LPs did not have the chunky/clunky 50's neck profile. But I did have a recent Epi Dot with a honkingly big neck. I ended up swapping it for an older one with a early '70s neck profile. I can switch quickly between scale lengths but too big (Gibson 50s)or too small (Squier CV) neck profiles require some adjustment.

[QUOTE=flyingbanana;4284356]The biggest difference for me was getting used to the scale length. I had to lighten up my playing. I play with a lighter touch, because the shorter scale length equates to a little bit less tension on the strings.


I've been playing my Heritage LP alot more onstage lately for this very reason. I've been fighting with tendonitis and arthritis for the past 7-8 years, and the LP strung with 9's is MUCH more forgiving on my left forearm. BITD, when I played rhythm git in a rock band, I preferred LP's strung with 10's for a beefier sound and higher tension. These days, though, I need all the help I can get. I'm starting to see the logic now in why Billy Gibbons uses 7's on all his stuff.

Great responses, anyone else?

I decided I wanted a Les Paul so I borrowed my friends LP Studio which has a chunky neck. I played it for a couple of weeks but just could not get used to it. I now have an Epi LP Ultra II which has a slim neck, much more to my liking.

May be something wrong with me, but recently acquired a LP with a 50's profile neck (fat) and going from a Fender modern c is a seamless transition. I got rid of 2 LP's that had slimmer 60's necks that I couldn't get used to.

Epiphone calls theirs a SlimTaper™; D-profile. (1960's - Version 3.)

This tells me that lots of the imported copies are, or may be smaller than the traditional baseball bat size.

Just got a LP Studio 50s Tribute with the "50s Studio" neck profile. I have to admit that I really like it. In fact, there were a couple of issues with the guitar (including a ding on the back) that typically would have resulted in my returning the guitar. But the neck on this thing felt so right, I decided to keep her. And I should mention that I do not have very big hands, but the chunky neck, 24.75" scale, and tall frets just feel right in my hands.

I've got guitars that have Gibson scale lengths and Fender scale lengths, soft V necks, C or D shaped necks, baseball bat necks and regularly jump from one to another without any problems whatsoever.

Im not that sensitive to neck profile or thickness. I go back and forth pretty easily.

Im not that sensitive to neck profile or thickness. I go back and forth pretty easily.

What he said. Absolutely.

My LP has the slimmer 60s neck, and I don't notice much difference when moving to a modern C neck. For me it's not a big problem moving from one to the other. In fact, I like the LP neck a lot.

Just me, o' course...

Im not that sensitive to neck profile or thickness. I go back and forth pretty easily.

same with me, I've had both teles and strats, les pauls, and sg's for years. After a while they are all old friends.

I'm more sensitive to the overall neck profile that the scale length. But I have everything from Mosrites (extremely small/almost fretless) to Gibson LPs, and I have never had problems going from one to the other.

My Les Paul Standard has a 60s neck, with the shorter scale it's a lot faster and action can get a lot lower than my Baja, but not as comfortable for chording. I own 17 guitars, best neck for playing is on the Sheraton, they have everything right.