Getting an Acoustic Tone from a Gibson ES-175

[gianluca]

[quote=hurricanebob;104685]...A solid-top archtop would get you much closer and much more quickly toward the sound I think you seek.
...[quote]

thank you hurricane.
actually, when I bought the 175 six years ago, I wasn't aware about this difference: I had a 347 and I trade it with the 175 because it looked more wes/pat/ronnyjordan style.
so, maybe I need a second guitar, a solid top archtop.
coul you suggest some?
how can I realize that a guitar is solid top and not laminated?

[oldane]

The 175 is made of thick plywood and was never meant to be an acoustic guitar, though you can practice with it without an amp - if you can stand the sound (I can't). I have a 1964 175D which to my ears sounds awful acoustically. Frankly, I also think Joe Pass' sound on "Virtuoso" is bad. It's interesting to note that as his acoustic playing caught on, he had Jimmy D'Aquisto make him an acoustic archtop.

If you can afford it, I'd recommend getting a true acoustic archtop for acoustic playing and keep the 175 for electric playing. That way you can set up both optimally for their specialized uses (for example the acoustic with phosphor bronze and a higher action and the 175 with nickel roundwound or flatwound and a lower action).

As for pickups, I prefer single coils to humbuckers due to their clearer sound. I know the hype about PAF/Pat.no. pickups, but nevertheless I have swapped the neck pat.no. pickup on my 175 with a P90 (in humbucker disguise) from Brian Gunsher, and the guitar now has a clearer tone, especially in the bass, where the PAF tended to be muddy. The individual notes of chords stand out more well defined, and the sound quality is more uniform across all the six strings. The sound is also a bit more woody - much like Jim Halls old 175, before he replaced its native P90 with with a humbucker in the late 1950s (check out for example the Sonny Rollins album "The Bridge" with Jim Hall and his by then typical P90 sound). Of course, my PAF is well kept in the box the P90 came in, so it can be put back in the guitar if a future owner should want that.

Only my 5 cents, and others may beg to differ.

[hurricanebob]

So, Gianluca: how to tell if an archtop has a solid top: in many cases, you can't, it's not self-evident (as it can be on a flat-top acoustic), and so you have to do a little research. That said, you'll find a) it's not difficult to find out, and b) most of the archtops you'll be looking at have solid tops.

On a flat topped acoustic, you can look at the grain of the wood at the soundhole. It's generally easy to see whether it's solid wood or not--on solid tops, you can see the grain of the wood for the entire width of the soundhole.

This is more difficult with archtops--the f holes are smaller, and often bound, so you can't see the grain cross-section.

Eastman has all solid wood guitars, and I think Heritage does as well--a quick trip to their websites will tell you that. If you get a handmade archtop (usually a fairly expensive proposition, beyond $2K), it will have a solid top (and back, and sides).

If you have $2K in hand already, and were willing to sell your 175, you could end up with some serious change for an archtop. But be darn sure before you do it, because 175s are not cheap these days.

[hurricanebob]

As for guitars to try: certainly the two previously mentioned: Eastman and Heritage.

Eastman guitars are solid wood throughout, made in China. I have one, and thoroughly enjoy it. I *never* thought I would spend over $1,000 on a Chinese guitar, but well, there you are. I play it through a Polytone Mini Brute II, and it sounds nice and warm. Putting on a tone control (I think they come with one, now) greatly improved the range of tone.

Heritage is the company started by former Gibson employees who stayed in Kalamazoo when Gibson moved to Nashville. Those employees bought the factory, the jigs, and began making guitars in 1985. Gibson promptly sued for copyright infringement. The judge ruled in favor of Heritage, noting that when Gibson sold the jigs, there was an implied use.

[Steve Hoffman]

Hey, but a carved archtop that is only 16" is still going to give you the bare midrange of tones. The 17" and 18" acoustic archtops will give you more body and dynamics. A 16" archtop either carved or pressed is only going to do so much for you. My Heritage Sweet 16 is a wonderful fully carved guitar but playing it acoustically is just not really something that is satisfying IMO... It's nice, but not powerful. It's tuneful but not awe-inspiring.. Get a big ol' box for that...

[backliner]

I once owned a '54 ES-175 with a single P-90 pickup. It was a much better sounding guitar acoustically, than the '51 L-4C I also had (which was carved spruce of the same size).

Charlie Christian used to lower his pickup away from the strings to get the sound more "stringey." Yes, the volume goes down but it works and most amps have power to spare.

Acoustic strings (bronze wound) will bring out certain qualities on an archtop (more bass -acoustically), but pickups will only read the core so be prepared for thinner sounding wound strings when plugged in.

DR "Zebra" wound strings may be worth a try.

Finally, using a supercardioid mic like a Shure Beta57A, might get you to performance levels. I once played a gig at the local Kuumba Jazz center by mic'ing an old ES-125 with an SM-57, but I was whammin' chords for a vocalist, not playing lines.

[Bill C]

if possible, try a good laminated guitar with a maple neck/ebony fretboard - eg the Sadowsky Jim Hall - with roundwounds or polished/semi rounds this guitar still has the laminate sound similar to the 175 but with a little more acoustic/high-end sparkle, detail and sustain imo

[mattymel]

vintage epiphones are also solid top and can be had for around the $2K range. archtop.com almost always has a few triumphs in. great guitars that sound amazing plugged in or acoustic. plus they only sound better and get more valuable with age