-
Just curious if one of you could possibly put into words how different, if they are different, the Gibson Super 400 is to the Gibson L5CES. These two guitars are held in pretty high esteem, and I am wondering what sonic territory each covers in comparison to the other.
I still have the crazy fantasy of one of them being a retirement gift to myself (used of course). There are other older threads but I would like to hear some current thoughts.
Thanks for any informed thoughts you can share.Last edited by AlsoRan; 03-18-2018 at 09:05 PM.
-
03-18-2018 07:55 PM
-
Well I'm no expert but I would think that its voice (The Super 400) would be a bit fuller and richer on the bottom end of things.
And it may be just a tad louder when played acoustically.
-
I can ALMOST answer the question. I have a 97 Super 400 CES and a 96 L-5 WESMO. The Wesmo is way more acoustic, but feeds back way earlier and is brighter and has less fullness in the bass. I assume that an L-5 CES splits the difference. I kind of am interested in getting one eventually to see where the CES lands in the comparison.
-
Thanks for your thoughts, men.
I know people around here are getting a little "Gibson Fatigue." I played a Super400 briefly and it just felt so good in my hands. And to be honest, all that shiny surface area didn't hurt either.
I don't really have any lusts left these days, but that something about that Super400 gets to me. I only hope I can get a good used one in the 5,000.00 - 5,500.00 range, like you can with the L5CES. But I get the feeling this guitar is a bit more rare.
-
I've owned the Super 400, the L5WesMo, and the L5CES. The great trifecta as I used to think of them. I didn't find the Sup' 400 as expressive, or articulate as I would have liked. I found the L5WesMo brighter than the L5CES. I found the L5CES most preferable in tonality. Each has a different voice. My first L5CES was the first time I personally experienced that full bodied fat jazz guitar tone - that sound that says, 'okay, that's it'. And I preferred my first L5CES to my 2nd.
-
I think it comes down to the individual instrument. I own both and they are both wonderful.
I definitely prefer the feel of the L5. The S400 is really big!
I’ve recorded a video a while ago where I thought that the S400 sounded a lot better than I thought she would.
happy hunting!
cheers
frank
-
Some, like Kenny Burrell, feel a Super 400 is comfortable, and I know I like the sound. Here is a quote from "Vintage Guitar " magazine:
"Gibson made me an L-5 with a deep cutaway in the late ’50s. They did it reluctantly. I played that guitar for a while, but it was too heavy. It had a much bigger block; they thought the body wouldn’t hold the neck with the deep cutaway otherwise. The 175 was too small and always felt clumsy; I couldn’t grab it comfortably with my arm. The Super 400 feels perfect for me."
https://www.vintageguitar.com/18443/kenny-burrell-4/
Excellent article BTW
-
I value your opinion highly because of the many guitars you have played. Thanks.
Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
I am not surprised to read that some articulation might get lost considering the huge chest the Super 400 has. Maybe more sound bouncing around inside?
-
I don't know much about the S400 CES, but I do have an acoustic non-cutaway Super 400. I can compare it with an acoustic non-cutaway L-5 and would agree with 2B. The Super 400 has a deeper tone, but is less articulate and expressive in the trebles. Its attack is a bit smoother, which is good or bad depending on your needs. It is better for strumming but might not cut through as much. I prefer single-note soloing on the L-5. The notes on the L-5 feel more intimate due to the smaller body (which is still a nice size for sure).
To reference an analogy from the flat-top side, it's kind of like a Martin dread vs. a 000.
-
I'm lucky enough to have an '08 L5CES, a '10 L5WES, and an '11 Super 400 CES
They are all three great guitars and each has it's own voice worth having around ..
To my ears the Super 400 is fuller and richer ... there's a nice acoustic flavor that comes through even though its a 2 pickup CES version .. even the high notes are richer, not thin and brittle
I like to play with a strap and hold my guitars in a "classical position" over my left knee ... the big guitars are quite comfortable in this position
They're all dream guitars to me ... I hope I never have to sell any of them
-
"I like to play with a strap and hold my guitars in a "classical position" over my left knee ... the big guitars are quite comfortable in this position"
+1 Amen, brother.
-
Also ...
when I was looking around for a Super 400 the best prices were on the 70s era Super 400s ... some even under $5K if you could tolerate some scratches and finish issues .. or a maybe a Bigsby ...
The main difference is they tend to have very plain unfigured backs and sides ... no flame or quilt
I played a 76 Super 400 in Austin that was quite nice ... I was considering saving up for that one and doing a road trip to pick it up
I ended up picking up a more recent used Super 400 from Guitar Center thanks to their no interest financing
-
Thanks for saying that AR! But OTOH, I'm not Kenny Burrell. That S400 sounded pretty darn articulate in his gifted hands! Originally Posted by AlsoRan
-
Very true! Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
From this thread, it seems that to most ears, the L5CES might be a bit more focused than the Super400, given the average player. But guys like me would probably not be able to tell the difference.
Sweet is sweet, and both guitars are magic.
-
I have a Gibson 51' Super 300 non cutaway which is the same dimensions and design as a 400 without the deluxe trim . I also have a 17" bout x 3" cutaway non gibson archtop . While the difference between a 18" and 17" bout might sound slight it is not. The Gibson is a big and very different guitar!!!!!!! I have a Dearmond Guitar Mike and currently have the guitar strung with TI Benson Flatwounds. I play with thumb Wes/ish style. There is massive dynamic range available but I find it takes a very light , considered and sensitive touch to keep things balanced . There are places on the neck where the tone is like ringing a fricking bell and it is tough to not go there all the time
. To be honest I find it easier to play my 17" it is more forgiving of my crappy technique and less dynamic so I go back and forth because it is less demanding . I am just now back into a Super 300 phase and every time I do this I feel I am picking up an instrument that deserves the very best of technique to articulate its full voice of which I am still discovering the full depth and complexity.
I play mine with a strap Joe Pass style of to the side over the thigh because it is comfy that way and looks "jaunty"
I can't comment on an L5 but I have played a number and variety of 17" high end archtops and nothing compares to the tone and dynamics of the Super 300.
Will
-
I did not consider the skill involved in playing a bigger guitar. I can envision the longer strings and the effects that can have. Is it possibly comparable to playing a baritone guitar? Originally Posted by WillMbCdn5
I have a Gibson 51' Super 300 non cutaway which is the same dimensions and design as a 400 without the deluxe trim . I also have a 17" bout x 3" cutaway non gibson archtop . While the difference between a 18" and 17" bout might sound slight it is not. The Gibson is a big and very different guitar!!!!!!! I have a Dearmond Guitar Mike and currently have the guitar strung with TI Benson Flatwounds. I play with thumb Wes/ish style. There is massive dynamic range available but I find it takes a very light , considered and sensitive touch to keep things balanced . There are places on the neck where the tone is like ringing a fricking bell and it is tough to not go there all the time . To be honest I find it easier to play my 17" it is more forgiving of my crappy technique and less dynamic so I go back and forth because it is less demanding . I am just now back into a Super 300 phase and every time I do this I feel I am picking up an instrument that deserves the very best of technique to articulate its full voice of which I am still discovering the full depth and complexity.
I play mine with a strap Joe Pass style of to the side over the thigh because it is comfy that way and looks "jaunty"
I can't comment on an L5 but I have played a number and variety of 17" high end archtops and nothing compares to the tone and dynamics of the Super 300.
Will
-
I haven't played a baritone guitar so have no basis for comparison. My Super 300 is 25.5" scale so on the long end of standard but standard nonetheless. The demanding aspect of playing the guitar is that the response of any input or variation of input - so right and left hand technique or lack thereof are immediately communicated .
Will
-
i have a 400 CES that i purchased new in 1976. Love its tone plugged in, especially in a big band scenario. Think Freddie Green ish, but again plugged in. That said, it's a very large bodied guitar. i've come to the conclusion that it's the body length of approx. 22.375 " that make this thing, at this point at least, a bit of a beast for me to play.
Two years ago i bought an ES 165. Did so ahead of a few hand surgeries i've had since, thinking a smaller scale length would be beneficial at that point. Turned out to be a very good choice. As the 165 is the most comfortable guitar i've ever played.
Keep in mind, i'm about 6' tall with fairly good size hands. An excellent guitarist by the name of Mike Elliot(deceased now i think) used to do clinics for Gibson back in the late '70's. His take was that it "might be a little too much guitar for me" when i told him i had ordered a 400. He was about 6-3 or so. Big guy.
Don't know if this helps. Just my experience to date. Thanks.
-
The L5 and the S400 have the same scale length - 25.5". The baritone guitars are longer. Originally Posted by AlsoRan
-
A-ha! Originally Posted by oldane
Question answered...
-
I am 6 feet tall (I used to be an inch taller, ah, the joys of growing old
) and am quite comfortable with my Super 400. Both the L-5 and Super 400 are 25.5 scale (there were some made in the 20's and 30's that had the 24.75 scale). If you are used to the 24.75 scale, switching to the longer scale will require an adjustment.
The 18 inch body is not for everyone, but neither is a 17 inch body. Play both before you buy.
-
Yes. That way, you could think of it not as GAS, but the advancement of Science! Originally Posted by Stringswinger
This message is brought to you by Enablers R Us.
Reply With Quote
Ben Monder talks Emily
Today, 04:08 PM in The Songs