Epiphone Devon versus Triumph

[dixiehwy25]

I've been shopping for acoustic archtop. There are a couple Epiphones that interest me. One is a 1951 Devon, The other one is listed as a 40's Triumph. Pricewise the Devon is considerably cheaper than the Triumph, and has Grover Imperial tuners on it.

I know that the guitars have pretty much the same construction, but the materials are different. The back and sides of the Devon are mahogany with a cherry neck. The Triumph has maple back and sides, and a mahogany neck, as well as having a bit more glitz. My information is from the catalogs on the NY Epi Registry site. I'm wondering if the materials will make a big difference outside of appearance

I will be trying them out in person, but I'm fishing for opinions on either of these guitars individually- as well as compared.

Thanks!.

[daverepair]

Assuming both the Triumph and the Devon are in good condition(playability, frets, neck relief, neck angle, etc), I think either would be an excellent choice. Apart from the b&s material(maple vs mahogany), the Devon has a laminate back, and the Triumph has a carved back. The laminate back should not deter you in the least: I've had several lam. back NY Epiphones, and they've all been good, and have, I think a somewhat different sound that the carved back models(perhaps the laminate back is more stiff, producing slightly more 'bark'). I've played and worked on several Triumphs, but not played a Devon.

If the Triumph has a mahogany neck, that would date it no later than around 1940, after which they too had necks made from cherry.

I have a FB page, David Richard Luthier, where I've posted numerous demo videos of vintage Epi archtops, including Triumphs, Broadways, and other models.

[dixiehwy25]

Thank you Dave! I will check out that Facebook page.

[stevo58]

All I can tell you is I have a ‘50 Devon, and barring a catastrophe that guitar is not leaving my possession as long as I can play. Don’t be afraid of the laminate back.

I’m sure you are aware there can be issues with vintage guitars. Mine needed new frets and a complete rebind, and the braces were loose. Even including the repair costs, I got a good deal on the guitar. I had to adjust my technique because it is so loud. It has “the tone” in spades. I would be quite happy sitting in the obscure section of a big band, raking out 7th chords on this guitar for the rest of my life, never playing a featured solo again.

That said, in my opinion, it’s hard to go wrong with a New York Epiphone. If I didn’t have a controlling instance at home, I’d have one of each, from the Spartan through the Emporer. As it is, I’m happy with the one, and feel privileged to be its current curator.

Steven

[SierraTango]

As the owner of a 53 Triumph Regent, I also agree you can't go wrong with either one. A Devon was for sale locally a few years ago, and if I would not had my Triumph, I would have bought it. However it did need some work-binding, as stated is usually a issue with these vintage Epi's. I think it will really come down to which of the two is in better condition and, of course, which one speaks to you.

[dixiehwy25]

When my quest started, I really had the Loar in mind. But then I got to looking around and there was a possibility of getting one of these old Epis with the Devon being in reach and I could stretch things and either get a Blackstone or a Triumph as well. 17 inch archtops really don't bother me since I'm 6 foot 5 and have 36 inch arms. I know that big guitars fit me well, I have an Aria FA-77 which is a healthy 17 inch. However, I do keep the Loars in mind as they can be had in the mid three figures.. I may be asking about the LH500 pretty soon.

[stevo58]

I’m not a big guy, and I find dreadnoughts very uncomfortable. I do not find the Epi uncomfortable at all - it isn’t as deep and has a narrower waist. An Emperor might be another matter. I can’t imagine it would be an issue for someone your size.

I sold a Loar LH-700 to finance the Epi. It was a very nice guitar. I would have liked to keep it, but I couldn’t justify two carved top guitars in the house and I liked the Epi more. They are very different guitars. If I played a lot of solo chord melody, I probably would have kept the Loar. But I’d probably look for a walnut Spartan to replace it.

[powerwagonjohn]

I will never regret buying my 1950 Epiphone Triumph. It's a beautiful beast.
Thanks John

[SierraTango]

When my quest started, I really had the Loar in mind. But then I got to looking around and there was a possibility of getting one of these old Epis with the Devon being in reach and I could stretch things and either get a Blackstone or a Triumph as well. 17 inch archtops really don't bother me since I'm 6 foot 5 and have 36 inch arms. I know that big guitars fit me well, I have an Aria FA-77 which is a healthy 17 inch. However, I do keep the Loars in mind as they can be had in the mid three figures.. I may be asking about the LH500 pretty soon.

I'm probably stepping on some toes here. IHMO while the Loar products can be very good, IMO there is something about the old wood and yes, just the mojo about these late 30's-early 50's Epi's that the Loar just doesn't have. As has been said, condition on vintage Epi's really, really is a huge factor.
The Loar's I've played (maybe 3) have also had a pronounced "V" neck shape-some like it, some don't, just keep it in mind. I don't know if all models are that way.
My 53 has a soft "V" shaped neck and I have no issues with it.
It may be impossible, however if you can play a Loar and a vintage Epi back to back, it would go a long way to deciding what you like better.
Also, again many here may disagree, however if the Epi comes with the OHSC IMO that is a very big plus.

[powerwagonjohn]

Yes, my 1950 triumph came with the original case and that helped my decision.
Thanks John

[dixiehwy25]

I'm planning on taking a long drive and looking at the Devon tomorrow. I've been assured that there are no cracks, repairs, or anything major that is wrong with the guitar. It's obviously been well used and well played. The cosmetic condition isn't the greatest, the pick guard has been replaced, it's had an old piezo pickup added, and the tuners have been replaced. It looks like there's plenty of rash on it. But if it is a sound guitar I think that's what's most important. Here are some pictures from the ad so you can take a look.

[dixiehwy25]

Ignore that last image, obviously it's not the same guitar. I can't seem to get rid of it.

[dixiehwy25]

I spent something like 14 1/2 hours yesterday driving round trip to check out the Devon. I was pretty impressed with it.

There are those scratches on the top side that are in the pictures but they're not as deep as they look. There were no cracks or any other imperfections or repairs in the wood that I could detect. So all the woodwork was pretty sound. I The binding also had no flaws. I gather that's kind of unique for Epis of this vintage. All you would really need to do to get it cosmetically in great shape would be to just fix those scratches. There's nothing else to do with the wood in the guitar. The original tuners have been replaced with Grover Imperials which is fine, the pick guard is obviously a replacement, I'd probably get a replica Epi pickguard for it sometime in the future. If you get the replacement pick guard, fixed the rash, and ignored the tuners you would have a remarkably original, nice Devon- the Frequensator looked original and not split. As far as the playing and tonality go, I really did like the action and the neck on it, doesn't need refretting or anything else major. It is loud and does project. I found the tone of it to be rather rich and warm with a fair amount of depth. It does come with a fitted case, neither me nor the seller could quite determine if it was an original Epiphone case. It was well made and fit the Devon like a glove. This is not a guitar that has been sitting under the bed most of its life, it's been well played and looks it.

The Devon It is probably a 1949 or '50. The truss rod adjustment is in the heel and not on the headstock. Nothing to quibble over. It also has its original acoustic bridge.

Trying out this Devon has pretty much made me drop the Loar idea. The price is only a little more than a new 600, and a lot less than a new 700. So dialing in the VFM the Devon is a much better deal. I like the fact that it's 17 and 3/8 inches over 16 inches as well. I don't know that I'll ever play with a big outfit, but the Devon can give me that option.

After fooling around with this Devon, I am tempted to stop the search. But I think I should go ahead and look at a 1948 blonde Triumph over Thanksgiving. The most important thing I should bring out about it is that it is said to have a small crack in the back below the neck. Not sure how that will influence my thinking, but I want a really good look at it before I decide. The asking price is also quite a bit more money over the Devon.

All this being said, I did find the Devon to be quite wonderful!

I really do appreciate the comments here, they've helped me quite a bit.

[ThatRhythmMan]

The binding used during that period is pretty stable. The 1940s, except for the very beginning have binding that typically has held up with no more than maybe some shrinkage. The late 1930s and the mid 1950s seem to be the worst in my experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[deacon Mark]

Binding in the mid 1950's was the worst I have ever seen in most guitars. Mostly notably D'angelicos but it extends to many other manufacturers. IF fact the stuff is a biohazard and will explode under the right conditions. Some binding in the early 1930s is absolutely fine it must have been some manufacturing process but I am not sure. TRM I believe is a pathologist maybe he can get to the bottom of it with some slides and analysis

[ThatRhythmMan]

Binding in the mid 1950's was the worst I have ever seen in most guitars. Mostly notably D'angelicos but it extends to many other manufacturers. IF fact the stuff is a biohazard and will explode under the right conditions. Some binding in the early 1930s is absolutely fine it must have been some manufacturing process but I am not sure. TRM I believe is a pathologist maybe he can get to the bottom of it with some slides and analysis

LOL. Maybe we have a polymer chemist in the house. I doubt my microscope will help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wintermoon]

not to mention, unknown to him Jimmy D'Aquisto continued to use bad binding well into the 80s and a number of his later guitars exhibit binding rot.

[SierraTango]

So exciting to hear your detailed experience with the Devon. It looks to be in good shape and ready for another 70+ years of music. I recall going to the Hollywood Guitar Center in the late 60's (just a small shop on Gardner an Sunset then) and seeing old Triumphs, Broadways, Spartans and Blackstones piled up in the corner like firewood. Nobody wanted them. Some were bought for pennies and tops were cut for PAF's, cutaways were added. Wish I knew then what I know now.
Finding a clean old Epi is one of life's great joys. By all means, check out the Triumph. It will sound different and more cutting due to obvious mahogany vs. maple, carved back, etc. Personal decision. If you can stretch your budget and pick up either one you will be rewarded with a great guitar with lots of stories to tell.
Also, if you don't have a copy, the book "The House of Stathopoulo" by Fisch and Fred is really a fantastic work with lots of photos, history and reference info. Here's a photo of a Devon from the book.

[Cunamara]

That is a great book; I am partway through it. It's interesting how many top-notch jazz guitarists were associated with Epiphone. Nowadays, it's thought of as the budget subsidiary of Gibson, but in its heyday it was a solid competitor in the middle range and at the high end. George Van Eps rated his Deluxe as the finest instrument he ever played. This was originally a six string guitar that was converted to seven string.

[2bornot2bop]

As the owner of a 53 Triumph Regent, I also agree you can't go wrong with either one. A Devon was for sale locally a few years ago, and if I would not had my Triumph, I would have bought it. However it did need some work-binding, as stated is usually a issue with these vintage Epi's. I think it will really come down to which of the two is in better condition and, of course, which one speaks to you.

Absolutely beautiful guitar ST!

[2bornot2bop]

not to mention, unknown to him Jimmy D'Aquisto continued to use bad binding well into the 80s and a number of his later guitars exhibit binding rot.

I actually observed one of those being repaired. The luthier did an incredible job on the restoration!

[deacon Mark]

I actually observed one of those being repaired. The luthier did an incredible job on the restoration!

Who did the work that is surgery!

[2bornot2bop]

Who did the work that is surgery!

It sure was. I saw the guitar with all of the binding removed. It wasn’t pretty.

So, here we have a very qualified luthier. Yet a year after this rebuild he folded up shop because he wasn’t getting enough business to support himself. Last I heard he was working in a bakery. Sad story!

[Hammertone]

Old Epis are still the best deal by far in the world of carved acoustic archtops.
Among the fun toys, I have a '38 Epiphone Triumph. Repaired, rebound, refretted, re-tunered, and god knows what else. What a joy to play!

[SierraTango]

Absolutely beautiful guitar ST!

Thanks very much B2B! It holds a special place in my heart. My duo plays a small, intimate cocktail venue and the Epi gets the call. No need for a pickup or amp. Trumpet guy uses mutes and it's the perfect volume. Love it!