High-end Archtops

[Patrick2]

As some Of you know, I recently forked over the cash to pick up a
Campellone Deluxe. My reasoning was simple. I wanted both the ambience of the acoustic tone, with the backing of my deluxe reverb. It is a beautiful combo when you can hear both the acoustic tone and the surround of a good amp. When I was looking for "that sound" I personally found it to be a no brainer between a plywood box and a true carved instrument. Would it have mattered if my Campy was $500 or $5000? Sure I would have prefered the $500, but was happy to pay what I did to be done with it and get the sound I was looking for.

Newport . . . I think you might be misinterpreting some of the sentiment expressed in the "why the hell would anyone want to spend $5,000 on an arch top". I believe that their (those who would post such a question) rationale is that you could more than likely have spent less than half the amount you spent on your Campy and achieved an equally great "that sound" level of satisfaction. And, that's probably true. Unfortunately, what many people either don't understand, or refuse to accept . . . is that it is purely up to the person buying the guitar, what is desirable and accpetable. Each of us have our own motivations behind a guitar purchase. For each of us, it is a very personal choice. And we owe an explanation or a justification to no one. You bought that Campy because that's what you wanted.

Most of those who question, or demean those of us who can afford to, and choose to buy high end arch tops will never get it. We're not just collectors. Many of us are players. Some even have only that one very special and very expensive arch top. But, the choice is ours alone and we need not be held accountable to justify why we didn't just buy a $1,500 Eastman.

[cjm]

As some Of you know, I recently forked over the cash to pick up a
Campellone Deluxe. My reasoning was simple. I wanted both the ambience of the acoustic tone, with the backing of my deluxe reverb. It is a beautiful combo when you can hear both the acoustic tone and the surround of a good amp. When I was looking for "that sound" I personally found it to be a no brainer between a plywood box and a true carved instrument. Would it have mattered if my Campy was $500 or $5000? Sure I would have prefered the $500, but was happy to pay what I did to be done with it and get the sound I was looking for.

Which is all good on several levels...It's good you got the sound you are looking for...It's good you could afford the price...and so on.

And, a Campellone Deluxe IS one of the way cool guitars.

But to bring it into the context within which some of my comments are intended: There are comparatively few gigs in which the acoustic properties of a high end archtop electric are perceived by the audience. If a player's niche is small, quiet, intimate clubs and restaurants -- maybe working solo and playing chord melodies-- a fine guitar in the class of your Campellone makes sense. And even if it is just your own ears that need to be pleased...if you've got the dough...it's a rational decision.

In most gigging situations however, an audience won't hear it. They'll hear the Deluxe Reverb and that's all they'll really hear...and in a combo, the guitarist won't hear very much of it either except from the amp.

Then it becomes almost entirely a matter of musical content and a decent amplified sound...which can be delivered with a much less expensive instrument.

That's what I'm getting at.

[cjm]

Most of those who question, or demean those of us who can afford to, and choose to buy high end arch tops will never get it. We're not just collectors. Many of us are players. Some even have only that one very special and very expensive arch top. But, the choice is ours alone and we need not be held accountable to justify why we didn't just buy a $1,500 Eastman.

Patrick, the thing you are not getting, is that no one is demeaning those who choose to buy high end archtops.

There is merely a counter point being offered.

The net effect (and perhaps unintended) of much of the discussion on such message boards today...or around a music store 40 years ago...is to instill a belief in younger players (of all ages ) that they're missing out on something of great importance to their own art if they don't spend a great deal of money.

Some of the jazz "greats" played very high end guitars. Others played more utilitarian axes. And while this should demonstrate that the choice of "high end versus utilitarian" is strictly optional...that too often gets lost.

Collecting is a legitimate pursuit, and you shouldn't feel you have to defend your interest in collecting by explaining that you're also a player: It's your business, and no one else's, and in any event, your choices are not being attacked.

All that is happening is that your opinions are being presented in a milieu where other, sometimes contrary, opinions are also presented...mostly as little more than an opportunity for people like you and me to "mouth off," but also, in the hope they will be of some slight assistance to some one pushing hard to advance their art.

[Patrick2]

[quote=cjm;175547]Patrick, the thing you are not getting, is that no one is demeaning those who choose to buy high end archtops.

There is merely a counter point being offered.

cjm . . . while your rebuttal is true as it relates to your own commentary on this matter, it is not totally correct. As I have stated in other threads, and you have admitted to seeing them, there are those who have openly posted their resentment to collectors buying high end guitars. The specific post that you agreed with was one that referenced a previous post stating "those are some really beautiful guitars . . . I just hope they went to some real players and not some collector who will treat them as wall art".

That specific quote came from someone in a thread which was discussing The Chinery Collection and what might have happened to it after his untimely passing a few years back. Also, in a currently active thread, that you and I are participating in . . someone went as far as stating that "they loathe those who would buy guitars as an investment". So, your statement that "I don't get the fact that no one is demening . . . " is just not totally accurate.

Yours has always been a counter point, as you have indicated. You have stated that one doesn't need to buy an expensive guitar to make good music. I agree with that. You have also posted on the TI vs D'Ad Chrome vs inexpensive nickel round wounds that you disaggreed with and didn't buy into the need for $20 per set TI strings. I understand that too. But, you didn't trash those of us who choose to buy high end arch tops or expensive strings. You tactfully presented a counter point and you did so with civility. I respect you for that. However, not everyone openy posts with an attitude so mature and reasonable as it relates to these matters. I will hold those people accountable when I feel that their demeaning sentiment might be targeted towards me, whether intended or unintended.

As a collector/player . . . I do tend to take it personally when someone openly posts that only blue collar gigging guitarists have the right to buy guitars . . . and that all guitars should be within the financial reach of all blue collar gigging guitarists. I have far more guitars than anyone realistically "needs" to have. But, that's my choice and is not to be questioned or scorned by anyone!

[cjm]

As I have stated in other threads, and you have admitted to seeing them, there are those who have openly posted their resentment to collectors buying high end guitars.

Well, yeah, but as a practicing drunkard I forgot about that.

[cjm]

You have also posted on the TI vs D'Ad Chrome vs inexpensive nickel round wounds that you disaggreed with and didn't buy into the need for $20 per set TI strings.

Only sort of...what I was explaining for the benefit of the OP in that discussion is that some one who has "always used round wounds" and "didn't dig" Chromes is unlikely to see any benefit from premium flatwounds that are more similar to the Chromes he didn't like than they are to the round wounds he preferred...but that in any event he would have to try them to know for certain.

[Newport]

I played the eastmans, and even played a few higher end Andersen(emerald city), and Triggs(new yorker). The Campy was just hands down the best sound. Not for the money, but period. I think that we can all agree on the fact that there are alot of over priced/over hyped guitars out there, but performance, tone, and build quality definitely come into account when your talking about price point. There is also a level of service that comes into play with a small shop builder that you just don't get from an Asian import.

[stevedenver]

at first i was thinking apples and oranges
guitars as objects of desire / possessions
or
music played on an instrument you can afford-ie tools

i think live and let live
im not sure when a guitarist becomes a collector-do you as a guitarist need a les paul, strat, tele, 335, dobro, national, classical , 175 maybe a ricky-that covers most of the sounds-do those variety of tools a collector make? and what if they do???do you need a red one and blue one? do you need one to travel with ?? etc

i guess im in the camp, simply, if i can afford it thats my business-no merit, no judgment, no resentment-theres always someone better off or worse off-someone with a nicer car or nicer house, someone wit a 'great life' and a miserable marriage, or a bigger saving account, more time with family, more time in the mountains, more time in the bar, etc-the point is there is no point-its all relative-everyone has their own perspective-respect it, it doenst have to be yours, and yours isnt in jeopardy because someone thinks differently

but,
besides the first focus being upon MUSIC-which i agree with as really the only thing that matters
there is also simply the love of 'stuff'-guitars, f'rinstance
and there is envy, unfairness in life, etc-it colors our perceptions and values

all i know is i dont think about some sort of 'legitimate right'/merit to play a high end guitar based on merit as a musician-i recall thinking that in high school though-being a great player is its own reward-
i dont hear Porsche owners complaining about how many cars a person owns or how well they drive-its simply -they paid for it-thats all it takes

one thing i do see -are guys that have a lot more and a lot less than i do-jets, islands etc, or no place to live

simply, with income comes a different perspective-to me a $400 dinner with my wife is a major occasion-to others inconcievable, to others -a daily thing -and it doesnt hurt at all-

same with possessions-your perspective changes with your means-thats my opinion


and as far as the guitars i own, i love em, they inspire me-to play, and to simply enjoy looking at them-for decades i had AN accoustic and AN electric -that seemed to cover my needs for everything -probably still would

funny thing is, as far as loving an insturment i think this can be the case with almost any instrument - i used to marvel at my old harmony soveriegn before i saved for my martin-that was because it was such a step up from my miserable SEARs Silvertone in every way

its only about the ability to purchase-sounds hedonsitic, but in the bigger picture, it simply about a person's ability and choice-anything else is subjective judgment-and thats fine too

sometimes its great to have an old pair of comfortable blue jeans-sometimes fancy expensive clothes are great too-and in any given crowd, youll never fit in-and someones going to look down on you

[Marcis]

I regularly using my Saowsky semi for gigs - its really great instrument - but I realise that this is a instrument made for jazz not for other styles and thats my opinion.
Thank to Roger for beatiful JAZZ instrument I own

[MikeJ]

When I was young I dreamt of owning a nice archtop.. Saved and bought a 175 only to sell a few years later to pay for my wedding.. Many years later now semi retired (divorced and remarried) and having sold my business I am the proud owner of a Super 400, a Johnny smith and a Maton messiah can’t play for *&^% (that’s another dream I am working on but getting a little old to realize ) But I love to try to play them and feel good that I was lucky enough in life to be able to afford them.. Use them both for Gigs (few and far between) Am I a better player because of them? No but I certainly feel better and more inspired and play every day. And someday down the track hopefully they retain a reasonable value such that my kids or grandkids will benefit etc.

[uburoibob]

I played the eastmans, and even played a few higher end Andersen(emerald city), and Triggs(new yorker). The Campy was just hands down the best sound. Not for the money, but period. I think that we can all agree on the fact that there are alot of over priced/over hyped guitars out there, but performance, tone, and build quality definitely come into account when your talking about price point. There is also a level of service that comes into play with a small shop builder that you just don't get from an Asian import.

I agree that Mark's guitars are absolutely wonderful. But at some point, subjectivity comes into play. What do YOU think sounds the best? For you it was Mark. For me it was Steve Andersen. Both build perfectly made instruments. For me, in that over-hyped price range ($25K plus) there is only one builder who concentrates on sound and playability vs fancy adornation, and that is Ken Parker. His Archtops literally usher in an entirely new world.

Bob

[uburoibob]

And those luthiers are indeed artists in their own right...they create works of art, not merely artifacts.

An original Picasso or Monet hanging on the wall of one's living room should inspire one to greater heights too, but for some reason, that is almost never cited as necessary to playing guitar.

The mess my dog just left on the floor does have a certain Impressionist look to it...I better clean it up and go take a shower myself. I got a gig again tonight and even though I don't really want to play it, duty calls. The puke isn't inspiring me, even if it does have a rich texture...

Sorry, but that response makes no sense whatsoever in this conversation...

An original Picasso or Monet might well inspire a painter, but interaction with a painting is completely different than interaction with a guitar. An artisan-made paintbrush might be a more apt analogy and indeed is.

The bit about the dog, though... I suggest you change his/her diet from something that works for you to something that works for him/her.... ;-)

Bob

[NSJ]

There are comparatively few gigs in which the acoustic properties of a high end archtop electric are perceived by the audience. If a player's niche is small, quiet, intimate clubs and restaurants -- maybe working solo and playing chord melodies-- a fine guitar in the class of your Campellone makes sense.

Do people actually bring high end arch tops costing 5-10-15-20K to a local restaurant gig? Seems risky. I'd think these would be used primarily for home and for recording.

[JohnW400]

I have braught my Super 400 to several gigs over the years until I started noticing a lot of good player showing up with Epi's, etc. The last 3 gigs I played were during the day or ended before 9 so I brought out the " heavy guns"

If I started gigging regularly I would look to pick up something less expensive too like maybe an ES-137 or an old Howard Roberts

[cjm]

Do people actually bring high end arch tops costing 5-10-15-20K to a local restaurant gig? Seems risky. I'd think these would be used primarily for home and for recording.

Well, the L5CES is certainly in that price range, and you still see people gigging with them...and that's just the most recognizable model.

I suppose it matters where you are, who you know, and even how you define jazz. And perhaps age/demographics plays a role.

As far as actual financial risk, I don't think that's a major issue. If you're going to play where people don't act like animals, and if you have to drive a car to get there, odds are a used car of the sort you would only carry liability insurance on is going to cost as much as the L5CES, and is more likely to be totaled while traveling to or from a gig than the guitar is. That's not an enormous exposure.

But then, that's not the basis for my position, either.

[cjm]

Sorry, but that response makes no sense whatsoever in this conversation...

And I'm sorry that it was over your head.

[hot ford coupe]

. If you're going to play where people don't act like animals, and if you have to drive a car to get there, odds are a used car of the sort you would only carry liability insurance on is going to cost as much as the L5CES, and is more likely to be totaled while traveling to or from a gig than the guitar is. That's not an enormous exposure.

But then, that's not the basis for my position, either.

I agree with you which is why I take my 39 D'A to the nursing home where I play. They're pretty quiet and easy goning there but I think they've all been sedated anyhow. Still, anywhere you play, some jerk who usually doesn't drink that much can still get plastered and fall right on your guitar.

[2bornot2bop]

I stumbled upon this thread while Googling an L5 historic reissue. I'd not previously read it, and having now done so I feel it's one of the best ever threads on the forum. From the story teller himself, there's some fabulous archtop history, and priceless common sense per CJM. Required reading, imo, by chance someone else missed the thread.

There is guitar collecting and there is guitar playing. Many people do both, and as long as they understand which activity they're engaging in at a given moment, there's no harm.

But unfortunately, many people don't manage to separate the two in their minds and it is to these people I offer the following advice: Don't get caught up in a colossal waste of time and money. "The perfect guitar" won't make you sound better.

Speaking from personal experience, for example, I would agree that only an L5 is an L5 except when the L5 is an L7 costing a lot less money. Neither will help you sound like Wes Montgomery, and the L5 didn't help Wes Montgomery sound like Wes Montgomery either. Wes Montgomery sounded like Wes Montgomery before he started playing L5's.

And "a Johnny Smith" won't help you sound like Johnny Smith. The sound came first, and only then did anyone deign to speak with him about an endorsement deal and signature guitars.

All this is really basic and most everyone feels they clearly understand it. Unfortunately, most guys (and I used to be one of them) particularly when they're young, get caught up at some point and begin to think, "If only I had _________, I could get the sound ________ gets." And potentially productive years are wasted in a quest to buy something that isn't for sale and never will be.

Most of the high end archtop market revolves around carved woods with a large dose of thin and quick to peel/corrode gold plating.

"Tradition," being the reason we continue to do something after the original reason is forgotten, drives this market.

Obviously, 75 or 80 years ago, a "real professional's" archtop was made of carved spruce and was the size of a small house. Otherwise, the brass section couldn't hear the four to the bar rhythm being played on an unamplified guitar.

But then came the magnetic pickup and purpose built combo guitar amp...and without really objectively analyzing the wood's contribution to sound, guitar players continued to regard large, hugely expensive, carved spruce guitars as the mark of a professional, because a mere decade earlier, a carved spruce acoustic archtop had actually always been the professional's choice out of practical necessity.

Never mind that companies like Gibson didn't carve the tops the same on their electrics in an effort to help manage feedback...and never mind that a lot of the surviving "iconic," and "defining" recordings of the late 1940s through the 1960s by past masters associated with certain high end guitars, were actually made with much cheaper plywood guitars.

So, I'm not speaking to the collector in many of us. By all means, if you've got the itch and the discretionary income to scratch that itch without causing your family (if any) to feel the pinch...go for it! Buy two at a time if that makes you happy.

But since this is not primarily a collector's forum, I am speaking to the younger guys and gals out there who are mostly interested in fulfilling their potential as jazz guitarists: Don't fall into a time and money wasting trap. That Ibanez/Samick/Washburn/etc., will do everything you need it to do, and if you wear out the frets on it, by the time you do you'll have a FAR better sound than you'll have if you take time away from wearing it out to chase an illusion in the form of the "ultimate guitar."

priceless.

After reading your comments I had the thought...hmmm, at $250k vs. 75k a pop, no piano player lusts after a Bosendorfer over a vintage restored Steinway. Or for that matter, no jazz piano player I know lusts for a Steinway over a Yamaha C7, one of that companies best pianos, commonly found as the house piano in live jazz venues.

one night in 1990, while listening to the genius created at the crappy house piano of Seattle's New Orleans restaurant, at the hands of one young Cuban player Gonzalo Rubalcaba, whose technique this night on this inferior piano had NO rival, it became obvious to me in that moment, the music is in the musician, and the instrument is but a mere tool.

I find this contrast among musicians rather striking. Prior to branching out from piano to guitar I'd never known such emphasis being placed upon gear as it appears to have among some archtop owners. So much so that if there were an equivalent piano forum, for no such forum exists for piano as this forum, one would likely find that any discussion of "gear" very uncommon. just an observation.

Wow! Both cjm and kuz said a mouthful. I couldn't have said it any better myself and believe me I was trying really hard to say just that. One of the problems I had when I was chasing "the dream" was I really didn't know what a particular guitar was supposed to sound like. There existed a "mythical sound" that only an L5, a Super 400 or a D'A New Yorker could produce. At least that's what all the magazines and the books said. I saw descriptions of guitars like "in another galaxy", "beyond belief", "the best I've ever heard" and on and on---and I believed it. This is what I needed to validate my playing. Then it happened. I got a hold of one of the mythical beasts and ---- it sounded like crap. It sounded like me. I must have had a busted one. The disappointment was deafening. Then I finally got a hold of a D'Angelico Excel. Oh wow!! This was it! The Holy Grail!! The audience will fall down and melt at my feet when I start playing the sweetest music. I struck the first chord and ---------it sounded like crap, i.e. it sounded like me------again. I've had over 30 collectible archtops over 18 years. They all sounded like me. They all couldn't have been busted. What the hell was going on!?!? The scoop? After all that time and money I spent and wasted, I finally realized there was no mythical sound. After reading all the hype, I made that sound up in my head and that's the only place it existed. In reality, there is balance, playability, clarity, volume, sustain, quality workmanship and decent tone but no magic. Now that I know what the good guitars are supposed to sound like and what to look for in one, I can tell the differences to some degree.

What have I found out? You don't need to spend a lot of money to sound like a million bucks. Know what you want and work to accomplish it. A guitar won't make you play better, you have to do that. It's all about good technique, practice, knowledge and experience. To the younger folks, if you want a high end guitar, that's fine, but get one for the right reasons, not because you think it will make you a better guitarist or have the sound that will beat everything you've ever played. Thanks you guys for pointing this all out.

excellent post!

I tell folks "No piece of gear will improve your sound more than adding an extra hour a day of practice will."

great daily reminder. thanks!

[Patrick2]

2b . . . you referenced an old friend in your post above. cjm was quite a contributor here a while back. His knowledge, maturity, his whimsical approach to getting his point across in a post were all priceless. He and I seemed to hit it off rather well on the forum and I always looked forward to communicating with him through the JGF venue. cjm had been struggling with his health. He told me he was going through some pretty tough chemo treatments. Then, he just dropped off the radar a while back. I PM'd him to check on him about 3 months ago and haven't heard back from him. I know his PM is forwarded to his personal email account . . . so, I'm fearful that his condition has worsened . . . or maybe he's even left this life. My prayers are with him, where ever he is.

[Bluedawg]

While it's true that an expensive guitar with a well respected name on the headstock won't make you play better ......


Having an easy to play guitar that sounds good can make you play better ... sometimes you get lucky and find this with an inexpensive guitar, but the more expensive guitars are more likely to perform better in these areas

and having an exquisite guitar that makes you go "wow" every time you open the case may cause you to pick that thing up and play it more often .... and therefore result in improved playing


Of course we each have our own budgets and priorities and that will determine how much we spend and what we spend it on

[Flat]

My suggestion is just to get some insurance for your guitars, then play them anywhere you want. Life is short. You can always find another guitar.

[Bill C]

Do people actually bring high end arch tops costing 5-10-15-20K to a local restaurant gig? Seems risky. I'd think these would be used primarily for home and for recording.

I managed to crack the headstock on a cherished high-end jazzbox in my sitting room ...

[Bill C]

My suggestion is just to get some insurance for your guitars, then play them anywhere you want. Life is short. You can always find another guitar.

I'd agree, see my previous post ...

[hot ford coupe]

While it's true that an expensive guitar with a well respected name on the headstock won't make you play better ......


Having an easy to play guitar that sounds good can make you play better ... sometimes you get lucky and find this with an inexpensive guitar, but the more expensive guitars are more likely to perform better in these areas

and having an exquisite guitar that makes you go "wow" every time you open the case may cause you to pick that thing up and play it more often .... and therefore result in improved playing


Of course we each have our own budgets and priorities and that will determine how much we spend and what we spend it on

Absolutely, Bluedawg. That's buying a high end guitar for the right reason. You can't beat quality and you can't beat good value. It's never guaranteed that a higher priced guitar would be the best tool which is why you have to try each guitar you encounter but you have a better chance of finding that jewel.

[hot ford coupe]

My suggestion is just to get some insurance for your guitars, then play them anywhere you want. Life is short. You can always find another guitar.

That goes without saying. If the builder is still producing guitars, you can always get another one. When it comes to a vintage guitar, that would be more difficult but vintage instruments is a completely different story.