The SG: Gibson’s bestseller or is that Fake News?

[SG standard]

Yeah, I believe them until proven otherwise. I like real news.

The 'real news' is in the production figures: It took Gibson a decade to make the first 18,000 SG Standards, so they couldn't have sold more than that in just three years. Year on year production numbers even fell at points during the 1960s, which suggests there was no serious back order problem.

But of course, beliefs can often be stronger than facts.

 

[Sootio]

You haven't changed my mind. Why would Gibson lie? They could easily say that about Les Pauls if that was the case. You don't have any facts. You have a theory. A conspiracy theory. I've got to go with what it says on the Wiki SG page.

 

[SG standard]

You haven't changed my mind. Why would Gibson lie? They could easily say that about Les Pauls if that was the case. You don't have any facts. You have a theory. A conspiracy theory. I've got to go with what it says on the Wiki SG page.

I really don't care about changing your mind - but why do you keep asking 'why would Gibson lie?'

Gibson aren't lying - there's just one decade-old and error-riddled article written by Dave Hunter archived away on their web site, that's all. I'm not even sure Dave Hunter actually worked for Gibson, or if he was just employed to knock out some words to liven up their web site...

I just found another SG-related article by the same Dave Hunter, but from 2017, in this one he says:

"Gibson shipped 1,662 units of the redesigned model in 1961, compared to a mere 635 single-cut Les Paul Standards in 1960"

So do you still believe that article on Gibson's site where the same guy claims Gibson sold "sold more than 6,000 units" of SG Standards in 1961?

1,662 is NOT more than 6,000! One of his statements isn't true... Of course, I'm sure you're still going to believe the larger number, even if Gibson didn't actually make that many.

I do not have a 'conspiracy theory' - just look up the word conspiracy if you're unsure what it means - I'm not theorising about anyone conspiring to do anything. My 'theory' is that Dave cobbled together some incorrect numbers, wrote an article, wondered about a title, read a sentence with crazy made up numbers in it, thought 'wow, that must make the SG Standard Gibson's best seller...' And the rest is history. Fake history...

BTW, The Wiki page references the same old article, so it's unsupported in terms of evidence.

 

[Sootio]

It's on the Gibson website, so I'm assuming they ok'd it. Hunter may even have gotten some information from someone that actually knows something. I would think they would know what they have sold the most of. Fake history indeed.

 

[Biddlin]

someone that actually knows something.

We had a number of such folk here. Blatherskites keep flooding the forum with nonsense. Their constant assaults on sensibility drive many cognoscenti away.

 

[Logan]

We had a number of such folk here. Blatherskites keep flooding the forum with nonsense. Their constant assaults on sensibility drive many cognoscenti away.

Are you talking about yourself?

 

[SG standard]

Fake history indeed.

Yes indeed! Totally fake.
Hunter obviously got the number of 1,662 SG Standards for 1961 from someone who knows - it's the same figure you'll find in other reliable sources (i.e. from people who have researched the Gibson archives). How he previously got to the 6,000+ figure for the same year is anyones guess, but Gibson never once made that many SG Standards in any year up to 1979 (last year I've seen figures for). Most years were well below 3,000.

 

[Sootio]

And yet, they say it's their best seller. I personally have no doubt about it. Good luck with your quest.

 

[Logan]

And yet, they say it's their best seller. I personally have no doubt about it. Good luck with your quest.

Honestly, we have sold more Les Pauls and acoustics recently at the store I work at. Usually customers come in not knowing what they are going to buy, so it's mostly down to what the employees give them to try out and say is the better option.

 

[58pit]

yea, this is the wrong forum to be arguing that SG propaganda is overblown.
Few of us gives a hoot what some writers might say. We like our SGs, that's all.
You might find more sympathetic readers on My Les Paul, or maybe the Telecaster forum.
People on fora like those will actually say they despise SGs, and get likes.
We just feel sorry for them. A closed mind is nothing to be proud of.

I too have read just about everything I could find on the subject of
my favorite electric guitar.

For the record, I tend to agree with the OP, that saying the SG is "Gibson's all-time best selling guitar" might be considered an exaggeration. This statement is right on the cover
of Paul Balmer's SG Manual, bold as love. And if you read Balmer's book, you can tell that
he doesn't even like SGs, or at least he doesn't get it about them. So why would he put
that statement on the cover? ...He just wrote his book for the money,
because his literary agent told him there was only one other SG book at that
time, John Bulli's (dry as dust) history, with it's nuts and screws perspective, and shitty
illustrations. Bulli's book was printed in 1989, and until Balmer published his in 2013
we had no other reference work to refer to. ...the horror... the horror!
I bought one...

Now we have Tony Bacon's excellent SG book, published in 2015, so we are flush
with great writing and fine photographs of cool SG players over 55 years of time.
Bacon tells the SG story very well, and I don't think he makes any claims about
sales figures. He (like me) perhaps thinks it unnecessary. Gilding the lily, even...

The facts are obscure IMHO. Gibson doesn't release sales numbers, or production figures.
So if you favor Les Pauls, you can say the Les Paul is the best selling instrument, and
if you like SGs you can say the SG is the top seller, but it's all just blowing smoke IMHO.
I confess that I myself have made this statement about the SG's sales figures,
(because I saw it in a BOOK! so it must be true!) ...but I have since repented of
such nonsense, thinking rightly that there wasn't much to back it up. *shrugs

The OP is quite right in saying there is no proof.
And of course, I am quite right in saying it doesn't matter. Personally, I would guess
that the best selling electric guitar of all time is likely the Telecaster, because it's been
for sale the longest. But the Strat might have sold more. Start counting those, and you
have to count the foreign made ones and pretty soon my head starts to spin.
Enough already.

I really can't care much about which instrument has sold the most.
I know what I like. I'm like that about the upcoming election. I know how I'm going
to vote, so I'm totally uninterested in any political propaganda. I just turn it off.
I don't know what to believe any more, so I don't believe anything.

 

[58pit]

Just an Amzing post Col. well said

 

[gasket]

We had a number of such folk here. Blatherskites keep flooding the forum with nonsense.

It's the same all over the net.
When a younger man I raced motorcycles and worked in the industry. There's one particular bike I purchased NEW back in 1969, I cut my teeth on it and variants of the same. I still own one today and feel qualified to comment on the changes during that period. BUT a couple of false comments appeared on the net about 10 years back and have been perpetuated into "fact", I shake my head and have given up talking with the "experts".

 

[Sootio]

I have learned that internet forums are an incredible source of misinformation.

 

[GrumpyOldDBA]

I’m no average cognoscenti I shower daily?