Does anyone here own both or compared them. Is the SL2/Mah worth the extra$$.I have a chance to grab one at a good price but Iv'e always been a graphics fan and they don't come that way. How about some feed back. [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
SL2H/Mah vs SL2H
Collapse
X
-
Re: SL2H/Mah vs SL2H
I've had both, I preferred the MAH, but honestly I always do favor a mahogany guitar and finishes vs. graphics. Tone wise the SL2MAH seemed a bit smoother and had more solid highs....just more balanced overall. I wouldn't hesitate if your interested, if your concerned about quality etc...it's a USA Jackson=Non Issue.
-
Re: SL2H/Mah vs SL2H
If you have a chance to grab one at an excellent price, buy it. Is it worth the money? It's up to you.
The MAH is heavier in weight (duh) but sounds good. I don't know if I'd go as far as to say it's the best soloist ever, but it's damn good. That and weren't there only like 200 of them made per year?
Comment
-
Re: SL2H/Mah vs SL2H
Another fan of mahogany I would go it.
My CS is also going to be made of mahogany.Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SLS TG // SLATQH TSB // 2 CS Soloists both 24.75 scale // 5 Archtop PROs //
Comment
-
Re: SL2H/Mah vs SL2H
-1 here.
I prefer the brightness and crispness of maple/alder over an all-mahogany guitar. Les Pauls get away with it because they have a very thick maple top to provide some bite, but I find all-mahogany superstrats to be kind of dull sounding.
All in what you're looking to sound like, I guess. For classic rock, you might be better off with mahogany.
Comment
Comment