Semi vs hollowbody?

[GuitaRoland]

I already have a ES-335 type semi acoustic but thinking of a full bodied jazz guitar like L-5 or ES-175. What would you consider to be the advantages and/or disadvantages of the different models ES-335, L-5 or ES-175 - what are your experiences?

I mostly play, what I would call jazzy blues, but I'm more and more leaning towards pure jazz.

Is it worth the money buying another guitar or is the difference marginal? I'm talking of a decent copy, the real thing would be too expensive for my wallet.

/R

[Bill C]

I would say (imo) that the L5 and 175 would be less suitable than the 335 for fusion/blues/other non-jazz styles.

The 175 and L5 are quite different animals. Firstly you are comparing a laminate body with a carved wood body - so tonally some difference and possibly some difference in feedback resistance. Secondly, the L5 has a 17" body with a 25.5" scale, vs the 175's 16" body 24.75" scale, which may or may not be an issue for you.

[ES125er]

^ Agreed.

Your mileage may vary of course, but I would not buy and ES-175 (copy) if I already owned a 335 (copy). Not enough difference to justify the purchase. I would either get the L5 (copy) or something with a floating pickup, or something with P90s, etc.

If I REALLY wanted that ES-175 (copy), I would then buy it and swap the 335 for something else: Tele, ES330, Gretsch...

[fep]

Imo the Es 175 and L-5 sound more similar than either of those vs. a 335.

The big difference is as far as the string vibration and pu is concerned, and that is what matters, the 335 is a solid body guitar (i.e. the bridge and strings and pu are attached to a solid piece of wood).

Biggest difference between an L5 copy and a 175 copy will be the pu and the way they feel when played. Best is to give them a listen.

The difference in sound may be insignificant.

Give this post a listen:

http://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guita...-you-tell.html

[Doctor Jeff]

Back a long time ago I got an ES-175 because my 2 guitar heroes at the time were Pat Metheny and Steve Howe. It was also the preferred guitar of Joe Pass, who sometimes recorded with it unplugged. And Scotty Moore started out with Elvis with an ES-295, which is basically a gold-colored 175. That gives you an idea of the versatility of this guitar. Other than feedback issues--a common problem with hollowbodies--this guitar could play just about anything.

I have read some good reviews of the Epi ES-175, and when I tried it in the store it seemed quite nice. You can always change out the pickups if you want. I've had several Epi's over the years and think they're quite a good deal for the money.

[Little Jay]

I have an ES335 (actually an ES333 coverted to ES335 specs) and a ES175 (Japanese copy). I think this is an excellent pair of guitars to cover most musical styles. I think the ES335 is slightly more versatile in the hi-gain regions, but I agree with Doctor Jeff that the ES-175 is a pretty versatile guitar too (especially the 2 PU version).

In my case both are fitted with .012 flats and both are used playing jazz and I sound very very alike on either of them. Still the ES175 invites to more 'traditional' jazz playing, so I use that with my strictly jazz-groups, while the ES333 is used in my jazzy-hard-bob-funky-groove band where I use effects like overdrive, delay, phaser etc. and it feels somehow more suitable in that setting.

And I am very surprised about the jazzsounds I can get out of my ES333, I do not agree with fep that the ES335 is a solidbody guitar. It definately has a hollow feel as well! (So it's a semi after all.... :-). Mind you, I'm not talking about the sound (even myself I can hardly tell the difference sometimes), but about the feel!

For old-school rock 'n roll and T-Bone Walker-like blues, the full hollowness of the ES175 adds some authenticity I'd say.

But to be honest: I could do what I do - both old school jazz and the more modern stuff - on either the ES333 or the ES175. Heck, I even did a lot of pop/disco/danceclassics sit-inn jobs on the ES175 playing weddings and parties! It's truly a very versatile guitar.

To compliment an ES335 towards the jazz-side, I would rather go for an L5, L4CES or another solid-top instrument I guess.

Well, maybe it's not in the guitar, but in the fingers after all......

[oldane]

I have owned and played a 1964 Gibson 175 with PAFs for 40 years. For 15 years I have had a Bendetto Fratello with a floating Benedetto (Kent armstrong that is) pickup. And in the latest years I have bought a strat and assembled a pretty ideosyncratic Warmoth parts guitar (mahohany strat shape body, mahogany neck, rosewood freboard, custom "Charlie Christian type" pickup made by Pete Biltoft in the neck position). I must say, that I lean more and more towards the solid bodies for electric playing. IMHO, the strings means at least as much for the tone as does the guitar. With suitable strings (I use flat wound Daddario chromes 11-50 on those two) and a not so low action I can get an excellent and very clean jazz tone even on the strat (using the neck pickup only). So now the 175 is more or less in retirement, and the Benedetto is used acoustically only. In fact, I have never liked the amplified tone of the Benedetto too much - too boomy and too prone to feedback. Acoustically it's quite another matter, however.

Check out on You Tube how much Ed Bickert can get out of a Fender tele.

Personally, I would stick with the 335 type for electric playing and shape the sound with the controls on the guitar and the amp. If you don't like the pickups, you can swap them for something else for a moderate cost. Of course, a L5 is one of the most beautiful guitars ever designed - but a strat shaped guitar is much more comfortable and ergonomic to play.

And oh, that only MHO - other peoples mileage will very likely vary.

[lpdeluxe]

I have had several thin archtops, including a '63 Chet Atkins Country Gent, and, currently, an '00 335. I also have a Samick L5CES clone, which I never play for the simple reason that the least amount of amplification causes it to feed back. Another thing that influences me is that, after, oh, 30+ years of playing thin hollow and semi-hollow bodies, full body archtops feel cumbersome and awkward. That's a personal preference, of course.

If you play with a drummer, stay with the semi-hollow. You'll never get a true hollow body loud enough to compete.

Others, I am sure, play in quieter venues, but around here, that's not possible.

The issue of tone is a whole other problem. I can get a trad-jazz tone out of my 335 (I use Fender amps of various sizes), and also do duty on blues and rock. Others have difficulty getting the tones they want.

The full-body archtop guitar is a beautiful instrument, to be sure, but I think my blonde 335 is pretty close behind.

[Little Jay]

Originally Posted by lpdeluxe

The issue of tone is a whole other problem. I can get a trad-jazz tone out of my 335 (I use Fender amps of various sizes), and also do duty on blues and rock. Others have difficulty getting the tones they want.

The full-body archtop guitar is a beautiful instrument, to be sure, but I think my blonde 335 is pretty close behind.

I second this! I take lessons sometimes from a guitarplayer who ownes several vintage archtops (I think an L5, an ES150 and an ES350 or so) and some handmade Slaman-guitars (those are based on classic Gibson designs). All those guitars play and feel wonderfull and acoustically realy blew me away with their power and vibrant performance (no comparison to my ES333). However, when you plug them in - and I had many opportunities for direct comparison), I don't think my ES333 is lacking behind in tone very far, if at all! It holds it's jazzgrounds very well!