Just saw a youtube video about the SG. The guy who made it knows his stuff...I'm not going to knock him. But he does say something that folks here might gasp over. The guy said that for many a guitar player, the SG is really a "steeping stone" guitar for guitarists on their way to getting a Les Paul. Or, SGs are simply Gibsons bought for those who can't get (afford) what they really want - a Les Paul. I can understand both perspectives. You get an SG, love it and say to yourself, "I like this SG and now I'm going to move up the Gibson ladder and buy a Les Paul." SGs are far cheaper than Les Pauls so the stepping stone theory or the "I can't afford a Les Paul" theory does make sense. Now I ask you folks, and please be honest: is any of that true for you? Did you buy an SG because they were far cheaper than a Les Paul? Did you buy an SG and use it as a temporary stepping stone on your way to a Les Paul? Or did you buy an SG because you wanted an SG and not a Les Paul?