Assessing a Prewar Gibson ES-150

[j.l]

Hi all—I had the chance to play a couple of 30s "Charlie Christian" spec ES-150s today (along with a few other amazing guitars—the highlight being an original D'Angelico that is laughably out of reach for purchase, but a lot of fun to play); one of them seemed like a real possibility.

I've got tolerably good skills for setups, and if I'm serious about it I'll have the chance to have a local luthier with lots of archtop experience check it out in detail, but I wonder if any of you have advice about what to look out for with 30s ES-150s specifically. What should I be worried about, and what's just the cost of doing business with a 90-year-old guitar? Thanks!

[AllanAllen]

Reach out to ThatRhythmMan

[deacon Mark]

Hi all—I had the chance to play a couple of 30s "Charlie Christian" spec ES-150s today (along with a few other amazing guitars—the highlight being an original D'Angelico that is laughably out of reach for purchase, but a lot of fun to play); one of them seemed like a real possibility.

I've got tolerably good skills for setups, and if I'm serious about it I'll have the chance to have a local luthier with lots of archtop experience check it out in detail, but I wonder if any of you have advice about what to look out for with 30s ES-150s specifically. What should I be worried about, and what's just the cost of doing business with a 90-year-old guitar? Thanks!

GIve us the rundown on the D'angelico and the model and year that is of interest to me but also it was your favorite.

[icr]

Charlie Christian ES-150; look for original pickup, of course, original knobs, original bridge and saddle, original tuners. Finer points would be original screws (slotted) on the truss rod cover. Original tailpiece. Etc.

Otherwise, neck and fingerboard issues can usually be corrected. Same for body cracks.

But absence of essential, unobtainable ES-150 parts, will be a shame.

[j.l]

Thanks for your suggestions, and help online and off-line! I decided not to go for the ES-150: it was a fair price, but had more issues than I was comfortable dealing with. (Happy to talk privately for more details if others are interested, it's not a guitar that's presently listed online!)

I did, however, get to spend another couple of hours playing the D'Angelico, and all I can say is: wow. It's this one, a 1959 New Yorker cutaway; the linked listing is from the last time the guitar was for sale a decade ago, it's been back in the shop about six months. I'm fairly new at getting a feel for the tone of non-Eastman carved archtops, so take this all with some heaping grains of salt—but, I've had the chance in the last few weeks to play a 40s Super 400, a 40s L-7, a Golden Eagle, and a few ES-150s at various shops. Guitar Exchange (where the New Yorker is) also has a 1929 L-5 at the moment and some old Epiphones that I hope to play in the future.

The D'Angelico is in pretty good condition overall: some checking across top and back, but the sort that you can only see if you angle the light the right way; one moderately-sized lacquer chip out of the back, and a couple other points where there's starting to be some rough edges around the binding, which seems to have shrunk a bit. The wood is stunning; the guitar is very easy to play; the neck is the best I've ever played, full in my not-huge hands but not ever feeling chunky, just right. I didn't check to see if it was parallel or x-braced, but I may be back with a set of digital calipers at some point so I'll take a look...y'know, for science.

As far as the tone goes, this is the only one I've ever played, but I can't imagine how this could be anything but a good one. Once I figured out not to mute the back of the guitar with my body (like I said, still learning all this...), it opened up like a bell. Really full-range frequency response, and in my estimation very sweet across the range—and that's with a fairly low action on old and light strings. It could go from very even and mellow if played with a soft touch to growly if I put some mustard on it. Getting to spend so much time with it was one of the best guitar experiences I've had, and cemented for me that an acoustic archtop is what I want to be playing the vast majority of the time from here on out.

Deacon Mark (or anyone else on here), is this one of the D'As you've played? I'd be interested to know how my non-informed evaluation stacks up with those of others!

[deacon Mark]

Thanks for your suggestions, and help online and off-line! I decided not to go for the ES-150: it was a fair price, but had more issues than I was comfortable dealing with. (Happy to talk privately for more details if others are interested, it's not a guitar that's presently listed online!)

I did, however, get to spend another couple of hours playing the D'Angelico, and all I can say is: wow. It's this one, a 1959 New Yorker cutaway; the linked listing is from the last time the guitar was for sale a decade ago, it's been back in the shop about six months. I'm fairly new at getting a feel for the tone of non-Eastman carved archtops, so take this all with some heaping grains of salt—but, I've had the chance in the last few weeks to play a 40s Super 400, a 40s L-7, a Golden Eagle, and a few ES-150s at various shops. Guitar Exchange (where the New Yorker is) also has a 1929 L-5 at the moment and some old Epiphones that I hope to play in the future.

The D'Angelico is in pretty good condition overall: some checking across top and back, but the sort that you can only see if you angle the light the right way; one moderately-sized lacquer chip out of the back, and a couple other points where there's starting to be some rough edges around the binding, which seems to have shrunk a bit. The wood is stunning; the guitar is very easy to play; the neck is the best I've ever played, full in my not-huge hands but not ever feeling chunky, just right. I didn't check to see if it was parallel or x-braced, but I may be back with a set of digital calipers at some point so I'll take a look...y'know, for science.

As far as the tone goes, this is the only one I've ever played, but I can't imagine how this could be anything but a good one. Once I figured out not to mute the back of the guitar with my body (like I said, still learning all this...), it opened up like a bell. Really full-range frequency response, and in my estimation very sweet across the range—and that's with a fairly low action on old and light strings. It could go from very even and mellow if played with a soft touch to growly if I put some mustard on it. Getting to spend so much time with it was one of the best guitar experiences I've had, and cemented for me that an acoustic archtop is what I want to be playing the vast majority of the time from here on out.

Deacon Mark (or anyone else on here), is this one of the D'As you've played? I'd be interested to know how my non-informed evaluation stacks up with those of others!

I have not played that particular guitar but the period and general look suggest it would be a fine guitar. Your description of it playing even with soft touch to a growl is interesting. To me D'angelico guitars possess a rare attribute of some archtops. They cannot be "over driven. " Meaning they respond to the touch are built such that the sound does not break up. Some acoustic archtops that sound very nice played with a medium or light touch will actually break up in sound and not be full with power and push if you play hard. The structure of them is that cannot handle hard playing due I believe to neck block construction and over all carving and bracing.

D'angelico guitars on the hand do not break up and actually respond as you play either hard or soft. I just have seen and played enough of them that this is my general assessment of them. In my own case my 1949 cutaway New Yorker sound very smooth and mellow when played soft with a pick or fingers. However if you start playing hard and punching out full sound it simply goes up another notch and responds. It gets much louder with more power and no breakup in sound, very pointed and full.

This to me is a cardinal virtue in an archtop guitar for sound. The guitar responds to the person's touch, with a wide range of ability. I think that other guitars also do this but Dangelico seemed to have it down. I might add my 18 inch Campellone reacts the same way. If you punch it the guitar will respond but on a delicate chord melody it sounds like a piano.

[j.l]

I have not played that particular guitar but the period and general look suggest it would be a fine guitar. Your description of it playing even with soft touch to a growl is interesting. To me D'angelico guitars possess a rare attribute of some archtops. They cannot be "over driven. " Meaning they respond to the touch are built such that the sound does not break up. Some acoustic archtops that sound very nice played with a medium or light touch will actually break up in sound and not be full with power and push if you play hard. The structure of them is that cannot handle hard playing due I believe to neck block construction and over all carving and bracing.

Thank you—that's exactly what I was hearing. When I dug in, the tone became more assertive and cutting, but I wasn't close to exceeding the headroom of the top—no compression, no breakup in the way my D-18 will. It was really something!

[ThatRhythmMan]

I have not played that particular guitar but the period and general look suggest it would be a fine guitar. Your description of it playing even with soft touch to a growl is interesting. To me D'angelico guitars possess a rare attribute of some archtops. They cannot be "over driven. " Meaning they respond to the touch are built such that the sound does not break up. Some acoustic archtops that sound very nice played with a medium or light touch will actually break up in sound and not be full with power and push if you play hard. The structure of them is that cannot handle hard playing due I believe to neck block construction and over all carving and bracing.

D'angelico guitars on the hand do not break up and actually respond as you play either hard or soft. I just have seen and played enough of them that this is my general assessment of them. In my own case my 1949 cutaway New Yorker sound very smooth and mellow when played soft with a pick or fingers. However if you start playing hard and punching out full sound it simply goes up another notch and responds. It gets much louder with more power and no breakup in sound, very pointed and full.

This to me is a cardinal virtue in an archtop guitar for sound. The guitar responds to the person's touch, with a wide range of ability. I think that other guitars also do this but Dangelico seemed to have it down. I might add my 18 inch Campellone reacts the same way. If you punch it the guitar will respond but on a delicate chord melody it sounds like a piano.

I am in complete agreement with this. My very early (#1034) snakehead D’A that was made for a player (Andy Jackson) who played in large bands like Blanche Calloway and Her Joy Boys and the Edgar Hayes Orchestra is exemplary of this seemingly endless headroom. I’ve never been able to max it out even when consciously trying. It’s quite phenomenal. It seems John D’A knew how to make an instrument with such capacity early in his career.

The one Al Casey used can be heard very well in recordings with Fats Waller. I wonder if anyone knows the serial number of that one and where it is now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rickco]

"Thank you—that's exactly what I was hearing. When I dug in, the tone became more assertive and cutting, but I wasn't close to exceeding the headroom of the top—no compression, no breakup in the way my D-18 will. It was really something!"
I find this to be true of prewar Epis as well.