Page 4 of 7
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:15 am
by llllllllllllllllllllllll_Archive
Jose Luis Perales wrote:i sincerely don´t get why those guitars have a resonant not crap when they are in my ignorant opinion really similar to les pauls. wtf?
okay, the look cooler perhaps and are more lightweight.
not crap anyways because it´s obviously a good guitar. but i´m tired of them, 4 of each 5 bands here have guitarists with black sgs.
They're brighter and not quite as heavy in the low end as Les Pauls. If you played a run of the mill SG vs. a Les Paul side by side, you'd know the difference.
I really haven't noticed that many people playing SG's, though. A few year, but they don't have as many devotees as, say, Strats.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:18 am
by llllllllllllllllllllllll_Archive
By the way, I once plugged in a Gibson SG Classic through an old Gibson Skylark combo. It was a really beautiful sound, and it kind of left an impression on me---plugging a Strat or Tele or Les Paul into the amp only sounded okay, as did plugging the guitar into any other amp. But something about that amp's voicing really compliments that guitar. If the guy who's amp it was would've sold it to me, I've would still own that guitar.
So anyways, in the right hands and through the right amp, not crap.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:52 pm
by sayer_june_Archive
two things:
- you'll poke your eye out
- neck dive.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:38 pm
by chrisc_Archive
I've gone through a lot of SG's, and have almost always liked them. Broken most of them, but never on the neck. I'm extremely rough on them too. My current is an Epiphone Classic. I've thrown it on the ground as hard as I could straight down and it still plays as good as it always has. Somebody had to use degreaser on it to get the beer off of it because windex wouldn't work. Are the "real" SGs much different than these? Considering buying one soon. I'm growing bored with humbuckers all the time though, so am going back and forth on it.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:51 pm
by zom-zom_Archive
The manner in which you abuse your SGs leads me to believe that you should not get any recommendations on them.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:58 pm
by chrisc_Archive
I'll be treating the next one nice. It's easy to do all these things with the cheap ones. Never spent more than $200 on one that I can remember.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:09 pm
by sack of smashed assholes_Archive
I played an epiphone version, when I couldn't afford much, and it was garbage. I sold it right away. there so light, and I kinda hate that. I don't know I'm partial to them, but I'd rather play something else.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:22 pm
by SecondEdition_Archive
I almost got a SG. It was either that or a Telecaster, and I went with the Telecaster. I don't regret getting the Telecaster, but I would like a SG someday, and considering the Epiphone models are cheap as hell and pretty well-made, I'd invest in them next, probably.
Weird thing: I tried a couple Gibson SG's and a couple Epiphone SG's at Guitar Center one day and the Epiphones blew the Gibsons away. I mean, it wasn't even close. Bizarre.
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:58 pm
by Hexpane_Archive
SecondEdition wrote:I almost got a SG. It was either that or a Telecaster, and I went with the Telecaster. I don't regret getting the Telecaster, but I would like a SG someday, and considering the Epiphone models are cheap as hell and pretty well-made, I'd invest in them next, probably.
Weird thing: I tried a couple Gibson SG's and a couple Epiphone SG's at Guitar Center one day and the Epiphones blew the Gibsons away. I mean, it wasn't even close. Bizarre.
SG + tele is my 2 guitar set up of choice for a band, its PWESOME!
Instrument: Gibson SG.
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:18 pm
by Bradley_Archive
I <3 my '61 reissue. Bigtime.