Discussion in 'Gibson SG' started by NMA, Oct 13, 2020.
You can put it that cynical way. Others would say he has remained true to himself.
Let me try to explain. He is a very rich man, who is trying to look and act like a poor man. That is going to win him no friends. Other rich people are going to view him as an idiot who is not living up to his achievements and to people who are actually poor it is an just unpleasant slap in the face, mocking their position. Yours is supposed to be the classless society where every person can be as rich and successful as he pleases. Well, he has created his own class system and is falsely placing himself in the lower part of it. I'm not impressed.
Been to a lot of concerts in my life, Bruce is the only show I've ever left early. After hearing all the hype for years about his live shows I was disappointed. Entire concert seemed so choreographed and staged. Not spontaneous at all.
Depends upon when you saw him.
Go see The Stones right now. Choreographed, staged, not spontaneous at all. I seriously doubt they were like that in '66 or '69. Same would go for Bruce or any other artist. I saw Bruce back in '78. He really was astonishing. I saw him about ten years later...the staginess was setting in.
Trying to look and act like a poor man? How so? Because he plays a Telecaster..??
Actually you know what, too much negativity on this thread for me, and this kind of thing isn't why I signed up here, (my fault no one else's) - so, checking out of this particular convo..
I will just finish by saying - no, the SG is not merely a Les Paul substitute :)
Sorry, I'm not going to rerun an entire conversation for you. You'll have to go back and read.
nah, the SG is very much its own beast.
I think with any definitive type of guitar, you have to spend some time with it to really “get it”.
I owned Les Pauls before I owned SGs, but I play SGs more than Pauls now. I like the more workhorse feel of an SG, perhaps.
My main “beater” guitar is an SG, but being a beater guitar is not a bad thing, that just means that you play it a lot but don’t care about it looking shiny...which is fine because guitars are made to be played, otherwise what’s the point?
I have to hand it you you, no one can start inflammatory threads like you can. I think I get it, you seem to have a sense of humor about it and sure, that works well and can be fun if you're hanging in the pub with people you know. But with people you don't know, can't see and have probably never met, probably not always a good idea. Things have a tendency to get sour rather fast.
This one is like the old "some would say" ploy, as favored by american journalists and politicians. Since it targets peoples feelings most will go NO! or YES! and not Who the fck are these "some people"? (So yeah, who the fck is this youtube guy you refer to btw?) I bet that for instance "Some would say SG players aren't as good as players of other guitars and that they also are closeted nazis" would start a riot on an SG forum too.
Sooner or later all discussions about guitars and gear will boil down to stupidity like tone and then it's all over with the friendly discourse.
By the way, some would say that buying lots of guitars from different brands shows that one is an insecure loser who doesn't know sh!t about tone and probably tries to hide the fact that they can't play. What do you guys think?
I never wanted an SG, it never even crossed my mind to buy one until I couldnt afford the LP I wanted so I figured the SG was the next best thing. Fast forward a few years later after getting my LP, I play my SG far more than the LP. Go figure!
No, not true.
A player who buys from various brands KNOWS what he he wants. He wants to cover all the basic food groups of tone that guitars can offer. Below is a picture of my Big Four of electric guitars. A Gibson, Fender, a Gretsch, and a Rickenbacker. I have the flagship model from each brand (OK, the Les Paul is the flagship model for Gibson, but here we would say the SG is), and those four guitars below can play every single song on Earth. My Big Four has all bases covered. Funk, punk, reggae, rockabilly, jazz, goth, pop, alternative, new wave, metal...you name it, I can play it on these four.
Some would say that people who can't choose one style of music and stick to it.... No, but seriously, I don't honestly think a pro agitator such as yourself actually fell for that one but just in case someone is prone to; that was a joke, ok? I have an Ibanez, a Fender, some Gibsons and a Tanglewood. Why? Because I like them. People have different reasons for similar things. If you're a true rebel you'll hail satan in church or, if you're too old for that sh!t, at least hail LP in the church of SG. Can't help it I guess, at least I can't.
I would never hail the Les Paul.
I do realize Les Pauls are the guitar that many SG owners aspire to own. I do realize Les Pauls are the guitars that are the big brother to the little step-child SG. But I also realize Les Pauls are too heavy. Les Pauls are too muddy. Les Pauls are too much of a rock cliche. I like the SG. Yes, it is a rock guitar, but it is cooler and more trebly (and lighter) than the Les Paul.
Full disclosure: I recently went online to price a Les Paul. One of the greatest rock tones in the universe is The Sex Pistol's Steve Jones Les Paul into a dimed Fender Twin. My SG into my cranked VOX sounds great, but it is not the glorious tone of The Sex Pistols Les Paul/Fender Twin tone. In the back of my head there is a fire burning for a Les Paul.
$2,499 for this '60s Standard Unburst finish Les Paul. I am seriously thinking of getting an industrial laser beam and using it to break into Fort Knox so I can have some spare change to buy this beauty below:
"I do realize Les Pauls are the guitar that many SG owners aspire to own."
...sigh...that crack pipe is really working for yah
"I do realize Les Pauls are the guitars that are the big brother to the little step-child SG."
though the SG guitar was born and bred in a Kalamazoo Gibson factory
In response to that Les Paul pic, I feel absolutely nothing. If I were the lucky recipient of that guitar via some contest/giveaway I'd quickly sell it for another one of my fave SG's or maybe a nice bass guitar
Then all you would be playing for the rest of your life is AC/DC covers.
Variety, my friend, is the spice of life. You already have SGs. Go get yourself a Rickenbacker. Then A Gretsch. Then a Les Paul. Then a Stratocaster. With an arsenal like that you can play every single guitar tone on Earth. And if you make the charts the girls will tear you apart.
That only takes an SG and a pub gig... But yes, I agree on variety and I agree that there's a possibility some people aspire to one day own a Les Paul even though they have an SG but it's also very likely there are a lot of people who just want both, like me. (yes, I count my Ibanez 2651 as a Les Paul)
I have been a LP player for a couple decades. I still like and play them. I was late to the SG club. They have some tonal similarity. They are differt tonally different. Different eq curve to me. Cut better and feels great to play. I feel much more nimble with a SG.
As much as I love the agitation factor of some of your posts, I can't think of one person *ever* that bought an SG in lieu of a LP on their way up the ladder toward their ultimate goal of getting a LP.
It just doesn't happen that way In real life.
People buy SGs because they want an SG. Or, they buy an Epi SG on their way toward a Gibson SG. Or they buy any number of fake LPs on their way toward a real one.
People just don't buy SGs on their way toward a LP.
but i have known ppl who bought a LP then ended up with an SG
And again: WHO is this youtube prophet then?
Separate names with a comma.