Loar LH-300 vs LH-600

**gwilder** · 03-04-2015, 05:16 PM

Greetings. I have learned a great deal from this forum but have kept quiet as I'm still just learning jazz guitar basics -- principles of harmony, chord progressions for standards in 2 positions, some basic comping rhythms etc. All rhythm, no lead lines or improv. at this point. This is an intimidating but rich and rewarding space for me to read (given my level). (I'm 50 and only started trying to learn guitar a couple of years ago, so this is all new ... and thrilling.)

So I am a beginner looking for a first acoustic archtop guitar and am deciding between a Loar LH 300 and Loar LH 600. I have read every thread in many different forums I could find on each and watched every video on each. But I have neither read nor heard direct comparisons between these two in terms of tone difference. I had a chance to play an LH 309 just to get a feel for it (though I don't want electronics) but have not played an LH 600. I have a Loar LO-16 which I do like (actually I like better than a couple of more expensive flat tops I have for the first level swing/gypsy four to the bar comping I've been trying to learn).

I'm definitely looking for the dry percussive vintage sound and suspect that laminated back and sides would be fine. But I would be very grateful to anyone who has actually played and listened to both and can describe their impressions of tone differences.

Many thanks for any words of advice about these two!

**christianm77** · 03-04-2015, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by gwilder

Greetings. I have learned a great deal from this forum but have kept quiet as I'm still just learning jazz guitar basics -- principles of harmony, chord progressions for standards in 2 positions, some basic comping rhythms etc. All rhythm, no lead lines or improv. at this point. This is an intimidating but rich and rewarding space for me to read (given my level). (I'm 50 and only started trying to learn guitar a couple of years ago, so this is all new ... and thrilling.)

So I am a beginner looking for a first acoustic archtop guitar and am deciding between a Loar LH 300 and Loar LH 600. I have read every thread in many different forums I could find on each and watched every video on each. But I have neither read nor heard direct comparisons between these two in terms of tone difference. I had a chance to play an LH 309 just to get a feel for it (though I don't want electronics) but have not played an LH 600. I have a Loar LO-16 which I do like (actually I like better than a couple of more expensive flat tops I have for the first level swing/gypsy four to the bar comping I've been trying to learn).

I'm definitely looking for the dry percussive vintage sound and suspect that laminated back and sides would be fine. But I would be very grateful to anyone who has actually played and listened to both and can describe their impressions of tone differences.

Many thanks for any words of advice about these two!

I went to the shop and tried both, and the Loar 600 seemed quite a bit better. Just richer, warmer, more balanced. The 300 was pretty good though.

**gwilder** · 03-04-2015, 08:45 PM

Thanks for your response. This is very helpful. I would of course be happy to hear from anyone else who has had a chance to compare both.

**mr. beaumont** · 03-04-2015, 08:47 PM

I played a 309, thought the quality was terrible.

I owned a 600 for a while. It definitely has the sound you want. Try before you buy--the V shaped neck isn't for everyone, and ultimately, it aas the reason I sold it.

**gwilder** · 03-04-2015, 08:57 PM

Thank you Mr. B. (Your insights and advice here have been gold for me.) Can I ask whether it was the build quality or the sound quality (or both) on the 309 that was terrible? Trying to try before I buy but even in NYC I can't seem to find one in stock anywhere.

**mr. beaumont** · 03-04-2015, 09:16 PM

Crappy fretwork, bottomed out bridge with high action, and the worst excuse for a P90 I ever heard.

**gwilder** · 03-04-2015, 09:57 PM

Got it.

**Kojo27** · 03-05-2015, 02:45 AM

Originally Posted by gwilder

So I am a beginner looking for a first acoustic archtop guitar and am deciding between a Loar LH 300 and Loar LH 600.

I'm definitely looking for the dry percussive vintage sound and suspect that laminated back and sides would be fine. But I would be very grateful to anyone who has actually played and listened to both and can describe their impressions of tone differences.

Many thanks for any words of advice about these two!

I hope I can help a bit here. Your interest is in ACOUSTIC guitars, right? Those I have: I own two LH-600s and have played the 300. If you want the sound of early jazz - Eddie Lang, Carl Kress, those guys - you're in the right department.

Just my opinion: get the 600! It's MUCH better. Solid wood back and sides, and a better quality carved spruce top - you'll like it more and therefore you'll play it more.

A fact of life with the Loar guitars is that you may have to spend another $100 or so getting it set up. But when you get it just right - oh! Look what you have: practically a clone of an early L5. They put really good wood in these things, and if you want very close to L5 quality, get the LH-700. This thing is in a class by itself, within the Loar line. But again, the neck angle/bridge adjustment thing may be an issue you'll just have to take as part of the price of the guitar -- but it's worth it, imho. Once set up, you have a super guitar for getting that early jazz sound, and it's a one-time thing! Why they don't fix this is beyond me. But the guitars have survived despite it, and the reason for that just may be the awesome tone that roars out of them.

I understand your concern with the V-shaped neck, but honest, it never bothered me at all. If you keep your thumb in the back, it's a non-issue, seems to me. If you hook your thumb over, it's not a big problem unless you have really small hands, and for thumb-hooking, I find it is actually MORE comfy. That's just me, but I think if you play it for a little while, you'll forget all about the "V" neck, and may even love it.

Maybe get it from a company with a liberal return policy, but do give it a fair chance.

Good luck!

kj

**christianm77** · 03-05-2015, 09:58 AM

Yes a fret stoning and a bit of a set up is a must.

I set up my own - truss rod adjustments are easy and the action is simple to adjust using the thumbwheels on the bridge.

You can experiment with how much neck relief and what sort of action suits your playing then, for acoustic I'd say a medium (3mm) action with medium bronze strings and a touch of relief in the neck is best, although once the neck is set for the string gauge you can tweak the action until you get the best compromise between playability and acoustic projection.

I have fitted a magnetic pup to mine and use it as an electric, and often have the action set a bit lower and quieter, but the K&K Definity in the bridge works well for quiet gigs where I want an amplified but acoustic sound.

The electricity got cut off at a gig I was playing the other day - couple of tweaks to the bridge and I got a 100% increase in acoustic volume, enough to play rhythm and chord solos with drums!

I may have to think about getting a 700 now - they only had a 300 and 600 at the shop!

**christianm77** · 03-05-2015, 10:02 AM

The vintage 1930s archtops I have tried have a low neck angle by todays standards - a friend has a 1932 L5, another has a ES150 and I've tried a few budget models of the era - L50's, Kalamazoo's and so on. They all had similar low neck angles to the Loar, don't know if that is neck creep or original. It does limit your options for magnetics pickups, should you be interested in one.

**gwilder** · 03-05-2015, 10:19 AM

This is all very very helpful! It sounds like folks do agree that there is a significant tone difference (improvement) when moving from LH 300 to LH 600. This is exactly what I've been wondering. (My understanding is that the LH 700 is braced differently for a more modern sound and I definitely want the vintage ladder-braced sound).

**Jonah** · 03-05-2015, 10:42 AM

I tried quite a few of both in various shops (wherever I go I try to find a guitar shop and try archtops they have) and the quality in all cases was very very bad.

I heard on youtube good-sounding well-balanced Loars.
And I saw positive reviews from players that I respect. On the other hand with all my disatvanges I think I can distinguish an acoustic instrument.
And solid top as it is is not a guarantee of a good acoustic quality.

So I do not say they are all like this, probably they started with better quality then went down... not really sure.
The only thing I can say - try to try The Loar you will buy, or agree possibility to return with the dealer.

Solid spruce top is not always a guarantee of a good acoustic sound.

And consider v-neck also!

PS
I know maybe lots of people would argue that but I would go for used Godin 5th ave Kingpin with one pickup (or acoustic and install pickup myself). To my experience acoustic have better acoustic quality - I cannot say why, maybe because they do not have knobs, pickup on the top, maybe there is some difference in top production or construction

I would say ifor laminated archtop the soundinbg quality of Godin 5th ave is very good

IMHO this is the best one can get for the money. And a very good starter

**Kojo27** · 03-05-2015, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by gwilder

This is all very very helpful! It sounds like folks do agree that there is a significant tone difference (improvement) when moving from LH 300 to LH 600. This is exactly what I've been wondering. (My understanding is that the LH 700 is braced differently for a more modern sound and I definitely want the vintage ladder-braced sound).

The 600 and 700 both have parallel "tone bar" bracing, just like the early L5s. The 700 sounds so much different because of the big rock maple neck, and because of AAA-quality spruce and maple. The 600 has a mahogany neck and a lower-grade spruce and maple. STILL, the 600 has a touch of the "reverby" sound the 700 exudes in the video below. For all the bad things folks have to say about these guitars (they need a setup!), it's often forgotten how doggone good they sound. I don't know another inexpensive archtop that can give you this kind of tone. The Godins are electric guitars - even when they have no pickup, they need one.

**Dennis D** · 03-05-2015, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Kojo27

I hope I can help a bit here. Your interest is in ACOUSTIC guitars, right? Those I have: I own two LH-600s and have played the 300. If you want the sound of early jazz - Eddie Lang, Carl Kress, those guys - you're in the right department.

Just my opinion: get the 600! It's MUCH better. Solid wood back and sides, and a better quality carved spruce top - you'll like it more and therefore you'll play it more.

A fact of life with the Loar guitars is that you may have to spend another $100 or so getting it set up. But when you get it just right - oh! Look what you have: practically a clone of an early L5. They put really good wood in these things, and if you want very close to L5 quality, get the LH-700. This thing is in a class by itself, within the Loar line. But again, the neck angle/bridge adjustment thing may be an issue you'll just have to take as part of the price of the guitar -- but it's worth it, imho. Once set up, you have a super guitar for getting that early jazz sound, and it's a one-time thing! Why they don't fix this is beyond me. But the guitars have survived despite it, and the reason for that just may be the awesome tone that roars out of them.

kj

....Had I not found a Gibson '34 L-5 Reissue, I'd have been real close to buying a Loar I found at a nearby store. They nailed the feel, and got the sound close. While I don't remember the exact neck profile, it wasn't even close to being a dealbreaker for me....
.....and another important lesson / piece of advice here - - find a luthier !!......not the 'string guy at the store' but a luthier !!........then, from that day on, you have a go-to guy for your instruments who takes 'just ok stuff' that you paid ' just ok ' money for, and makes it playable and worth something !!!....

**mr. beaumont** · 03-05-2015, 12:56 PM

I would not call the Loar 600 I owned a "great" guitar, but it was certainly a "great sounding" guitar. If you can ignore some finish flaws, be willing to pay for a good setup, some nut and fretwork, and hold out patiently for one with a good neck angle, they really are the ONLY budget box that nails the "vintage" sound.

**Jonah** · 03-05-2015, 12:57 PM

The Godins are electric guitars - even when they have no pickup, they need one.

I agree, as acoustic it works for practicing unplugged

But it can be not that bad too

**mr. beaumont** · 03-05-2015, 01:08 PM

I own a single pickup Kingpin, I've played the all acoustic fifth av, and I can definitely say, they lack as an acoustic archtop--if you're looking to chunk out swing rhythm. The all acoustic model has kind of an old Harmony vibe to it, a couch picker or blues box, maybe. The Kingpin has 125 vibe--definitely not an acoustic.

The quality is very high on these, though. Really great values...mine needed no work out of the box. Crap, now I really feel like playing it and it's in the company of a friend right now. I gotta get it back.

**gwilder** · 03-05-2015, 02:32 PM

Thank you Jeff (and all for these incredibly helpful suggestions): I am definitely looking for something all acoustic to "chunk out swing rhythm," as you say, as well as to practice standards and slowly learn to put together (simple) arrangements (basic basic basic chord melody), and play some rhythmic jazz blues progressions in less percussive ways. I am less concerned about cosmetics and understand from these comments that I will need to invest in a set-up if I buy a Loar LH-600.

This Gretsch New Yorker also looked appealing:

But from what I've read people seem to prefer to sound of the solid carved Loar.

And it sounds like people have heard an appreciable tone difference between 300 and 600.

**mr. beaumont** · 03-05-2015, 02:46 PM

That Gretsch sounds awful to me. All shrill top end, and very buzzy.

**Jonah** · 03-05-2015, 03:35 PM

Guild A150 Savoy re-issue with floating pickup has surprisingly a nice acoustic tone for electric hollow-body cutaway, much better than any in that price range I tried - it was about 1000-1100 usd

But it is first of all electric hollow-body

**Jonah** · 03-05-2015, 03:44 PM

I am less concerned about cosmetics and understand from these comments that I will need to invest in a set-up if I buy a Loar LH-600.

i was approximately in your situation... i also wanted to get acoustic archtop first, and I had practically nothing to try in the shops.
And I really was going to order The Loar... but when I finally tried it I changed my mind.
those I tried needed not just some investment but complete reconstruction including additional top work.
For me the problem you really never know what you'll get, it may be a cosmetics but may be also something much crucial which may be difficult (if ever possible) to correct...
Solid top is not everything, I would say it is only beginning of good acoustic instrument
Besides, I do not like to have drops of glue on guitar for usd 1000... it is cosmetics but you know...

I do not say: don't buy it.
I just say: try to find a way to try the one you want to buy before a deal

And again - v-shape neck, also worth trying before byuing... for some player it may be a serious problem.

**blindjimmy** · 03-05-2015, 03:59 PM

Are you absolutely decided on a Loar ? For dry percussive sound , i tend to think about the Django guitars, the reproductions of the Selmers. Perhaps some people here can comment on the dry percussive qualities of those guitars.

**gwilder** · 03-05-2015, 04:45 PM

No I am not absolutely decided on a Loar -- still interested in the LH-600 but now feel like I would definitely have to try one first. As for Selmer-style - I was certainly curious about the Gitane D-500. Looks and sounds very cool. But my real hope has been for a vintage style and sounding acoustic archtop with f-holes. By the way, as I practice home in a New York apartment nice tone is more important than sheer volume.

**jtizzle** · 03-14-2015, 06:00 PM

I have a Loar LH350 which was my main guitar for about 2 or so years. I still love that guitar. I considered getting rid of it at one point, but I actually want to keep it now. However, since you're in NYC, you're more than welcome to try mine out, and decide if you want to order one.

I think they're great guitars for the price. I hear a lot of talk about the whole "V-Neck" shape, as Jeff mentioned, which I still to this day don't understand what it means. The neck has a bigger radius than my current guitar, but I don't feel any V type shape there.

**Kojo27** · 03-14-2015, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by jtizzle

I have a Loar LH350 .....I hear a lot of talk about the whole "V-Neck" shape, as Jeff mentioned, which I still to this day don't understand what it means. The neck has a bigger radius than my current guitar, but I don't feel any V type shape there.

The LH-350s and 650s (the full-body Loars with floating pickups) do NOT have the V-neck. The necks in these are "normal" sorta C-shaped necks, and aren't chunky (imo) at all. It's the acoustic archtop Loars that have the beefy V-shape necks, but that's something you can get used to really fast, and as it's the secret to the ungodly loud tone, you might learn to like it. : )

Btw, I thought the Gretsch New Yorker sounded really nice. Twangy and jangly, like an archtop is supposed to sound. Not very loud, but loud isn't everything. I think the guy playing it in the video could have been the problem. There's another video with a Gretsch employee playing one, and in that video it sounds really cool.