Would You Sell an Eastman AR910 for a 40s Epiphone Triumph?

[omphalopsychos]

Question in header.

I have the opportunity to get my hands on a 40s Triumph. But I'd have to part with one guitar to make it work. I love the Eastman. Is it just FOMO that makes me think this is a good idea? Or is it actually a good idea?

[ThatRhythmMan]

If the Triumph is a good one, I would do it in a heartbeat. I’m a huge fan of the New York Epi Acoustic Archtops.

[TH]

How do they both compare as far as playability? Do you play a lot? Is it a good fit?
Or are you a collector? Is it in good condition?
Let the trade befit the place it'll have in your life. If it'll make your life better, than it's an opportunity.

David

[Greentone]

Yes

[Dave Richard]

They're both (potentially) great guitars- you already like the Eastman, have you played the Triumph? One is modern & x-braced(I believe), the other tone-bar braced. While I love my '38 Broadway, it's very different from the Eastmans I've played; it was built to play rhythm chords, with a pick, and doesn't lend itself to fingerstyle(mine is setup with PB strings, no pickup). Try it out, if you can, before parting with the Eastman.

[whiskey02]

You "love" the Eastman and you're considering trading it for a 70 year old guitar you've not touched or heard? Whether the Epi is good or not, getting rid of a guitar that you love is a bad move I think.

[omphalopsychos]

Thanks for the input to my hasty question. I guess I should provide a bit more context, since there were some fair comments calling out my train of thought.

Here's my motivation: I have the Eastman 910 and I have a Gibson L7 (1937). When I got the L7, my plan was to get rid of the Eastman, but then I decided to keep it. Regardless, I found myself playing only the L7 acoustically, and I eventually put a Rhythm Chief Reissue on the Eastman. I'm well aware of the tonal differences between my Eastman and the 40s ladder braced Triumph, and that partially motivates my question. I like the Eastman's natural reverb and fullness as an acoustic*, but I feel that it's almost at odds with the tone of the pickup, which is relatively midrangy. For this reason, the Triumph got my attention, because it has a distinctly drier tone with more fundamental and less harmonics. It gets closer to the style of music I was hoping this guitar to support, which is perhaps swing, jump blues, and early bop. It's entirely possible that I just need to try out different strings on the Eastman.

*(some describe the Eastman sound to be somewhat flattop like, which is a bit of an exaggeration but not totally wild)

I'm not so strapped that I would have to sell the Eastman before getting the Epi. I could have both simultaneously and make a call, but the Epi has a no return policy, so if we don't bond, I'd have to put it up for sale, which can take a while and be mildly inconvenient.

[Dave Richard]

If you can, keep the Eastman(because you like it), and get the Triumph. Then you can take your time deciding if it works, and if you like it, and then decide which one to part with.

[mr. beaumont]

Assuming the Triumph was in good playing condition, yes, yes, and YES. YES.

[campusfive]

I've kept my Eastman 805 non-cutaway, even after buying three 30's vintage guitars.
Part of that owes to the fact that it was picked out for me at the warehouse, and they put my name on the label, so it's sentimental.
But, I have to say, my Eastman easily stood up to all three of my vintage guitars. Sure my 1932 L-5 is better, but that Eastman is still quite good in comparison - mostly it just sounds "newer", despite having been playing very consistently by me for 12 years.

But, if I'd had to sell my Eastman get my L-5, yeah, I definitely would have. I would have felt bad, but I would have done it.

I guess the real question is, if you've played 40's triumphs, are those more what you are looking for than what you get out of the Eastman?

[deacon Mark]

I am not a huge Ephi fan so I would not. Now a good L7 you have so if you like the Eastman keep it. Pick ups can be changed so I would change that on the Eastman. I recommend a KA floating single he makes that are single coil like a Dearmond. PM if interested I have one.

[Hammertone]

It really depends on the individual instrument. I tried a bunch of old Epiphones and Gibsons before settling on these two '38s. Both great instruments that sound very different from each other:

[jads57]

For me having 2 guitars that sound more or less alike and perform the same function doesn't seem to work. That applies to Teles, Strats,LP's.335's,flat tops arch tops,etc.
Seems like your Gibson and the Epiphone would be more similar as opposed to the Eastman and Gibson?

[ThatRhythmMan]

My ‘40 L5 and my ‘38 Broadway are very, very different guitars. I can’t say how either would compare to any Eastman. Interestingly, even though the Broadway has walnut back and sides, my ‘46 Triumph share far more with the Broadway, tonally, than it does with the similarly maple back and sided L5.

[Hammertone]

They are quite different in terms of their specifications as well as their voices.

Epi Masterbuilt Triumph
-25 1/2" scale
-17 1/2" lower bout
-parallel braced
-boat neck

Gibson L-12
-24 3/4" scale
-17" lower bout
-x-braced
-round neck

Both wonderful instruments, both great for great for rhythm, single lines, fingerpicking.
A useful way of describing the difference in tone to those not familiar with high-quality acoustic archtops is likening it to the difference between two great flattops, one rosewood and the other mahogany.

[omphalopsychos]

I guess the real question is, if you've played 40's triumphs, are those more what you are looking for than what you get out of the Eastman?

It took me all day to think about this, and I still don't think I can express it very clearly. To me there's something very special about how archtops of the 30s-50s behave when you hit the strings. Of course, Gibsons differ from Epiphones, and from D'Angelicos, and among Gibsons, there are huge differences from the early 30s models, the advanced, and postwar models. I'm definitely aware of the huge variety. However, I think the following is common among these based on what they were meant to do. There's a bit of a natural growl, there's a quick attack and a quick decay, and there's a very focused punchy quality to it. There's not much more I can say other than that this inspires me. The Eastman sound (not all of their guitars but some) has more harmonic "stuff" going on, it feels slightly more compressed, the notes sustain longer, and it doesn't growl or punch you in the face in the same way. I think that's what people mean when they say the Eastman has a flattop-like quality.

Many styles of music benefit from the qualities the Eastman has to offer. But I think I just may be going for something else. So that's why I say I 'love' the Eastman. I appreciate it for what it is. I just wonder if it's really the right instrument to express the sounds in my head.

[omphalopsychos]

I am not a huge Ephi fan so I would not. Now a good L7 you have so if you like the Eastman keep it. Pick ups can be changed so I would change that on the Eastman. I recommend a KA floating single he makes that are single coil like a Dearmond. PM if interested I have one.

Thanks but no need since the Eastman already has a Dearmond (reissue).

[omphalopsychos]

Seems like your Gibson and the Epiphone would be more similar as opposed to the Eastman and Gibson?

I would still think they're sufficiently dissimilar. Not just because of the construction but also because I'd be amplifying the Epiphone and playing it with nickel or monel strings, and I never care to amplify the Gibson, which is happily strung with bronze strings.

[omphalopsychos]

A lot of "yes"s from members whose opinions I respect and trust and whose taste in sounds I tend to share.

Thanks everyone for the input. I think it's going to happen, pending review of the Epiphone's condition.

[skykomishone]

Yes.

[omphalopsychos]

Ok, second question - what if the heel looks like this? I can get more info on the stability of the heel over the last year, but what can people say about heel separation generally?

[ThatRhythmMan]

Ok, second question - what if the heel looks like this? I can get more info on the stability of the heel over the last year, but what can people say about heel separation generally?

I can’t tell from the pic if that’s true separation or just shrinkage of the binding.

[mickmac]

this picture looks almost identical to my 1942 triumph .Which required a neck set

[mr. beaumont]

Ok, second question - what if the heel looks like this? I can get more info on the stability of the heel over the last year, but what can people say about heel separation generally?

I would like to see that a lot closer...

If the price is really good, a neck reset might be well worth it. You should be able to gauge the acoustic voice of the instrument even if the action is high from needing a set (heck, these guitars do kinda thrive on action a little on the high side)

I missed the earlier posts--will you get a chance to see this guitar in person?

[omphalopsychos]

Here's the catch, I won't get a chance to see it in person. These guitars are hard to come by in person where I live. I've played them in person in NY but I didn't have the scratch at the time and the ones I checked out are off the market.

The seller has sent me some videos and it sounds great. If anything goes wrong with the order, I can still return it (or issue a dispute on my credit card in the worst case scenario).

The seller has provided some additional images. Here's a closeup of the heel. The seller claims it's sturdy, but it looks like more than just binding shrink from that heel cap. Any experts care to comment on this photo?