Is The SG Merely Just A Les Paul Substitute?

[Pageburst]

You have very strong opinions which is fine but opinions are not fact no matter how emphatically you like to thrust them on a forum.

It’s fine that you think a humbucker SG covers humbucker tones. And maybe in a highly generic wedding band sense it does. But many of us can hear differences especially when we actually play the guitars in question. I can hear differences between my humbucker equipped Les Pauls and SGs even blindfolded.

Funny, while you are dismissive of the differences between Les Paul, SG and ES not to mention higher end Gibsons with their more basic counterparts, you apparently can hear the differences between imported Fenders ans Squires and those Fenders made in the USA. That seems like a rather incongruous position.

And while I certainly like the aesthetic of the White Falcom and have been a Cult fan for many years, I have no desire to own a White Falcon or for that matter a Rickenbacker. Ah salute that you do, but your choice of guitars is no more valid than mine or any one else’s. Variety and quality have no intrinsic correlation. So by all means enjoy your White Falcon, Ric, and basic SG but don’t disparage those that prefer other choices when it comes to guitars including owning multiple Les Pauls, SGs, Strats etc.

SG and Les Paul tones are so similar as to be almost exact. Off the top of your head can you tell me if this fantastic opening lick in the video below is an SG or a Les Paul? Point is if you have an SG, you don't need a Les Paul. One of them is essential, owning both would be unnecessary.

 

[Jason]

SG and Les Paul tones are so similar as to be almost exact. Off the top of your head can you tell me if this fantastic opening lick in the video below is an SG or a Les Paul? Point is if you have an SG, you don't need a Les Paul. One of them is essential, owning both would be unnecessary.

Off the top of my head it's a Les Paul Kossoff

 

[NMA]

I have no desire to own a White Falcon or for that matter a Rickenbacker.

I find that hard to believe. I feel that, yes, you do have a desire to own a White Falcon and a Rickenbacker.

Do I like Corvettes? No, I prefer the lines of a Mustang. Never really wanted a Corvette. But if someone were to give me a Corvette tomorrow I certainly would accept it. Meaning? I did not know it, but, yes, I do desire a Corvette.

Same goes for you with a Falcon or a Ric. You certainly would accept either of these right now if I offered one or both to you.

 

[Steve D]

When I was a dumb kid I wanted my first real electric guitar and I wanted it to be a name brand, Gibson Les Paul preferably because Jimmy Page and Randy Rhoads and so many others and it had humbuckers which were the rage in the hair metal I fancied (so fender was out). I just wanted to play what my guitar heroes played, simple as that.

So I went to a local music shop and looked over what they had. Les Paul's were out of reach. An old SG was not. It was a special from the '60s but had been modded with humbuckers, T-tops I think (I hope, if someone back in the day had put real PAFs in it and I didn't know I'd really be sad). It met my criteria and even though nobody famous was playing SGs at that time but the guitar you can have is better than the one you wish you could. So I bought it. Over my high school years I imagined I'd 'trade up' to a Les Paul or an explorer (a la Juda Priest) or flying V (Randy Rhoads). But along the way, something happened ... I fell in love with SGs.

So in my case, as a matter of ignorance, the SG was bought as a stepping stone to a Les Paul but it became the stepping stone to a bunch of more SGs over time. I did eventually get two Les Pauls over the years, a Standard and Studio. Both had their merits but there weren't SGs. They had to go.

 

[mtsv]

I've been a Strat player since the end of 80's... However, finally I was tempted to buy a Les Paul (Traditional) 6 years ago with '57 pups, and I was happy with it. Couple of years later, one of my friends was selling his 2016 SG Standard, and I said hey, what the hell, let me go for it... It was such a comfortable guitar to play, I stopped playing the Les Paul, which game me back aches several times and finally sold it. Now I play mostly my SG and sometimes my Strat, depending on the playlist of the gig night. Bu in my case, Les Paul seemed to be the stepping stone, I God knows I've never complained about it.

 

[arcticsg]

I've been a Strat player since the end of 80's... However, finally I was tempted to buy a Les Paul (Traditional) 6 years ago with '57 pups, and I was happy with it. Couple of years later, one of my friends was selling his 2016 SG Standard, and I said hey, what the hell, let me go for it... It was such a comfortable guitar to play, I stopped playing the Les Paul, which game me back aches several times and finally sold it. Now I play mostly my SG and sometimes my Strat, depending on the playlist of the gig night. Bu in my case, Les Paul seemed to be the stepping stone, I God knows I've never complained about it.

Nice combo!

Mainly SG for me also, although the strat gets a little time once in a while.

 

[SteveFord59]

Yes, the SG is what Gibson substituted when Les Paul sales were going down each year.
The OP is insinutating that the SG is a poor man's Les Paul to get a rise out of everyone.
Different flavors of Gibson is more like it.
It would be like asking is a Telecaster a guitar for Strat owning wannabees?

 

[Von Trapp]

Yes, the SG is what Gibson substituted when Les Paul sales were going down each year.
The OP is insinutating that the SG is a poor man's Les Paul to get a rise out of everyone.
Different flavors of Gibson is more like it.
It would be like asking is a Telecaster a guitar for Strat owning wannabees?

It isn't?!

 

[NMA]

Folks, there is a very real hierarchy in the world of guitars:

Gretsch: Falcon is above the 6120
Rickenbacker: 360 is above the 330
Fender: Stratocaster is above the Telecaster
Epiphone: Casino is above the Dot
and, yes...
Gibson: Les Paul is above the SG

Look, I own an SG. I love my SG, but it is cheaper and less iconic than the Les Paul because the SG is below the Les Paul in the guitar hierarchy. Why does speaking truths here bother some?

 

[Chuteboxehero]

Folks, there is a very real hierarchy in the world of guitars:

Gretsch: Falcon is above the 6120
Rickenbacker: 360 is above the 330
Fender: Stratocaster is above the Telecaster
Epiphone: Casino is above the Dot
and, yes...
Gibson: Les Paul is above the SG

Look, I own an SG. I love my SG, but it is cheaper and less iconic than the Les Paul because the SG is below the Les Paul in the guitar hierarchy. Why does speaking truths here bother some?

Be cause that isn't a truth. That's some you just typed up. Your opinion isn't any more valid than anyone elses. And as far as I can recall, no one elected you to be the mouthpiece for guitar players and collectors. Know your role and shut your hole.

 

[mtsv]

I know that Strat has lots of improvements over Telecaster. Likewise, Gibson (at the time) thought that they are making improvements by manufacturing the SG, but as time goes by, Les Paul became iconic years later due to not technical reasons but sentimental reasons. So this brings us the fact that Les Paul is not above the SG.

 

[Biddlin]

Be cause that isn't a truth. That's some bullshit you just typed up.

So this brings us the fact that Les Paul is not above the SG.

I play the guitar I like best. Sometimes that's an SG, others times a Les Paul, other times a Riviera, other times a Strat, ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
This is a click-bait thread designed to stir up passions and start fights. Threads like this are one of the main reasons old-timers leave this forum.

 

[Von Trapp]

Folks, there is a very real hierarchy in the world of guitars:

Gretsch: Falcon is above the 6120
Rickenbacker: 360 is above the 330
Fender: Stratocaster is above the Telecaster
Epiphone: Casino is above the Dot
and, yes...
Gibson: Les Paul is above the SG

Look, I own an SG. I love my SG, but it is cheaper and less iconic than the Les Paul because the SG is below the Les Paul in the guitar hierarchy. Why does speaking truths here bother some?

Not bothered at all, here's my truth, and my list. It's shorter than yours:

My guitar: My guitar is above
some other guitar: which is below mine.

Quite simple really.

 

[NMA]

This is a click-bait thread designed to stir up passions and start fights.

Wrong.

No one here is calling anybody names. No one here is being rude.

It is a thread that is simply designed to get conversation going. You want to voice your thoughts, have at it. You don't want to...then don't.

 

[Huntroll]

C'mon now, Les Paul's and SG's are two totally different instruments.

Along with a bad back, I do have many more SG's than LP's, so what does that tell ya ?

 

[Biddlin]

You want to voice your thoughts, have at it.

I did, but that apparently chafed your Willy.

 

[Von Trapp]

.

 

[Robert Nunn]

Absoluely not. I have both. They are so different.

 

[Von Trapp]

I know that Strat has lots of improvements over Telecaster. Likewise, Gibson (at the time) thought that they are making improvements by manufacturing the SG, but as time goes by, Les Paul became iconic years later due to not technical reasons but sentimental reasons. So this brings us the fact that Les Paul is not above the SG.

From a pure playability point of view I'd say they most definitely did.

 

[Voxman]

The best Les Paul .... ​

Is an SG Les Paul!​