I will start by stating this instrument was not modified by me, and the obvious major modifications were most likely done when the instrument was still relatively new and long before I got it. The instrument had a deep even patina when I bought it, which has only deepened and become more pleasing in the 30 years I have owned it. The year was 1990 and I was a "broke ass" college student playing rhythm guitar in my first rock band. We were playing mainly Classic and Southern Rock in dive bars. I was playing a 1978 Gibson "The Paul" which was my first and only electric guitar at the time, and I needed a backup axe in case I broke a string in the middle of a show. We were playing for some rowdy crowds that could get bored and start throwing things if the music stopped for even one minute, and one did not want to be the source of such an interruption or risk getting pelted with garbage. We were on a regimen of two 3 hour rehearsals as a band every week in an actual woodshed at the end of a dirt road up a dark holler. One night, one of our two lead guitarists brought in this instrument which he found in a pawn shop and wanted to try out. It was covered in grunge, and had a hodge podge of assorted types of strings and fence wire on it. The pots were dead over most of their travel and one of the pickups was completely non-functional. The "bridge" looked like it was whittled out of a bar of aluminum with a butter knife and attached with mismatched cabinet screws. The height adjustment such as it was, was accomplished by placing some hardware store washers underneath which was every bit as bad as it sounds. Pretty grim stuff. The asking price was $200.00. I knew little about the various brands and models of electric guitar. I was coming from a general music background and had about 6 years on acoustic guitar. I got the gig in the first place because I knew my chords pretty well, and could play in any key without a Capo. The crew figured they could teach me how to rock. In short, I thought this thing looked enough like my Les Paul (which I knew I liked) that it would probably be pretty much the same thing. (Something which turned out to be totally incorrect as most here already know, but it would come as a complete surprise to me.) Looking through the dirt and grime, I saw a much higher quality instrument than I was finding in the same price range elsewhere and decided to take it on as a project. I took it home, trashed the strings and the offending "bridge like object", and got started. It actually cleaned up nicely, and immediately started to take a subtle kind of hold over me even though it was in an unplayable condition. I took it to several shops looking for parts and advice. The instrument created quite a stir as the modifications I was unaware had even been made were done so well that they did not appear to be modifications at all and looked to be original even to eyes more educated than mine. The serial number had been scrubbed in the refinish leaving no trace any had ever been there. This lead to all sorts of speculations and theories. A few people offered me a 50-100 dollar profit, which I thought about briefly but declined. One ex Gibson employee turned music store owner even suggested a "non-zero" possibility the guitar might have been an early Norlin prototype that had jumped the fence and escaped into the wild. I didn't know what he was talking about until decades later, but unlikely as it was the very idea sounded intriguing. The guitar became referred to as "the Bastard Child" during this period, a name which has stuck and became it's Nom de Plume. I replaced the missing Tune-o-matic bridge using the original pockets and after a minor truss rod adjustment got the action and intonation set up "good as new". After replacing the pots and some highly suspect wiring I found out the pickups were actually quite good. I had planned to replace them at the time, but never did. Now I am glad I didn't. They are a pretty hot set of T-tops and sound fantastic. It would have been a shame to take them off. There are a few other oddities worth mentioning. I have read here and other places about the small necks on SG's of this period, and this one has it in spades. It is the smallest neck I have ever played, measuring exactly 1.50 inches at the nut (E to E sting spacing is about 3/32" narrower even than that). Also the stop tailpiece is a bit over 3 inches behind the bridge, which is about 3 times what most factory SG hard tails have, but appears to be the original location. There is no sign that this spacing has been modified or that there was ever any sort of vibrato unit installed. It is just another oddity I have only seen on one other SG (also a '71). The best way describe how it plays is "slinky". To play with perfect intonation requires a very light touch. Even with the low, wide "ghost frets" it is very easy to bend the notes inadvertently and you can bend a full three frets worth with about the same pressure as a two fret bend on "The Paul". It's about as slinky as "riding the whammy bar" on my strat, and can be very expressive once you learn to control it. It also feels very "wide open and breezy" as you go up the neck. You never feel the body and neck joint "getting close" even with the pinky at the 22nd fret. It's just one long unobstructed fingerboard. It demands you play differently than any other guitar I own, and it invites you to use those differences to take a new approach to how you play familiar lines and phrases. While some might find it frustrating, I find it liberating and I will grab this guitar any time I feel like I am in a musical rut. In summary, this is a guitar that was challenging in the beginning, but has really grown on me over the years. I love the looks, I love the feel, I love the attitude, and while it may not have much collector value, it has become quite valuable to me as a player. It is one of the last guitars I would want to part with at any price. It is obscure, unique, unapologetic, and cares not a whistle what the world thinks of it.