The idea that studios are not as good players as standards/classics should be complete BS as they are made with a very similar density wood,weigh about the same and i beleive they have the same neck profile. The only major difference is finish (no binding,etc).As you say they've all got the 490 series pups. I've played a recent studio and an old one ..they're fine..I don't think you'll find much wrong with the neck or anything else,playability wise... having said that all individual instruments vary.

I have a thin bodied Gibson "The Paul" 2 and while i won't say that this sustains as well as a standard Les Paul, it will sustain at least as well as an SG,because it has a slightly thicker body. I still love this cussed machine,neck (LP profile) is fine and the pups sound just as you'd expect.

One major point make sure you get it somewhere nearish (mine had a duff switch,a Gibson may need to go back to the shop), Gibson's QC is variable, make sure you inspect it thoroughly externally and also play it unplugged to check out it's natural sustain.


"'Ware the Quality Control, my son"

The studio is a fine guitar, and i think Les' original idea was to keep costs down by not putting any fancy bindings,inlays etc in it..in this respect some consider the studio "inferior".

Try a couple of studios against a couple of classics. Try a couple of Yamaha SBGS or a Gordon Smith if they have them too,they come very close to the LP sound..