-
Well, im 5'9". 180, wondering how comfortable an 18", 3"+ body is
and of course, how these play and sound,
thinking most about a CES type
ive been a thinkning (oh oh) and reading-and saving $$$ for a while,
and i guess these are the consumate warm round jazz guitar
comments, observations and directions please
would really appreciate any insight into any Gibson pluses and foibles as well as Heritage equivalents-
Super Eagle
rarely read threads about theseLast edited by stevedenver; 06-04-2012 at 09:44 AM.
-
06-04-2012 09:28 AM
-
I have a non-cutaway acoustic Super 400. It has rich tone with a depth not found in my smaller archtops. Sure, it's loud, but I don't do the chunk-chunk thing much in my playing. It is resonant enough that one can play fingerstyle or folk/eclectic acoustic music on it. It does feel like the "best of breed" that it was in the Gibson lineup.
All this said, I do find it to be too large for my 5'7" body. So it doesn't get a lot of playing time, except to remind myself periodically how nice it sounds. I also don't prefer dreadnaughts or jumbo flattops for the same reason. OM size and 17" or 16" archtops fit me quite well.
-
6ft... 215lbs ... played Michael McCarthy's 18 in last year specifically for the "does it fit" factor (as opposed to how does it sound).
Very comfortable but only played for 5 min.
My brother in law cant play my 17" for more than 5 min because of back problems. Point being.. you really need to spend some time on one to know.
-
I'm tall and also have a long torso, so I dont have problems as such with big guitars. But the most comfortable for me is a 17" body. 16" is to small when sitting. 17" brings up the neck up in just the right position for my body size. I have an acoustic 19" Triggs which I handle without problems, but I play it laying rather flat (30 degrees from horizontal) like Freddie Green.
That said, I don't think you should ever buy such an expensive guitar as a Super 400 or the Heritage equivalent (The Super Eagle) without trying one first. It would be too frustrating to have handled over the money just to discover it doesn't work for you ergonomically.
And yes, acoustically, those biggies has an extra depth as compared to the smaller guitars. My 19" Triggs has an extra majestic dimension when compared to my 17" Benedetto. Some feel that a 16 or 17" guitar actually projects better because it's brighter. Berry Galbraith preferred his 17" Stromberg to the 19" Master 300/400 for that reason. OTOH, Freddie Green has always played 18 or 19" guitars (Epiphone Emperor, Stromberg Master 300 and Gretsch Eldorado).
Don't expect a two pickup Super 400 CES to be as rich or loud acoustically as a purely acoustic Super 400. The CES guitars are primarily electric guitars. The top on a CES is carved thicker and has more bracing in order to keep down feed back somewhat.
If you are into Super 400, also consider an L5 (for example the Wes Montgomery model).
-
this is exactly the type of info im looking for-thanks all-
of course i will try to try them first-9had my licks earlier this year as you may remember with a mckerrihan)
however, its always great to have info and finer points to consider
i am thinking , as a CES, re value and actually playing out, perhaps a super eagle will be an excellent guitar but hard to find, new or used, in denver
would love to try a super KB-
i have a 17", 2 3/4 and im really comfortable with it as well as drednaught accoustics
just trying to get a feel as super 400s are , a step up in price from even the L5, and, as noted, bigger , sweeter, and with less cut
-
Just my opinion (and I've been known to have some very extreme opinions on this issue) ... I owned a Golden Eagle for a while and I thought it was miserable to play. It was a beautifully built guitar and I was able to get some great recorded sounds but it was huge, uncomfortable, and I never did get the feedback under control. The size was the worst part for me though. It caused a lot of fatigue in both forearms, but especially on my picking arm. Having to reach out and over the top of the guitar just to get into playing position and having the edge cut into the underside of my arm really ruined the playing experience for me.
-
Jim Soloway . . . did you mean Super Eagle and not Golden Eagle? Most Golden Eagles usually end up measuring out at 16-7/8" lower bout and 2-7/8" rim depth. Not at all too big or uncomfortable for an average size man to play. I do remember you took a beautiful Golden Eagle in on trade.
stevedenver . . . the Super 400 is a very special breed of guitar and IMO in a class all its own. When the late Scott Chinnery commissioned 26 luthiers to custom build his "Blue Guitar" collection, the Gibson Super 400 was the only "production type" guitar he included. They are ALL big, beautiful, sweet sounding iconic jazz guitars. I once had a dead mint 1970 that I flew from NJ to Seattle to buy from Val at Al's Guitarville . . . now known as just "Guitarville". I still regret selling that guitar. But, they are definitely a handful. I never play any of my arch tops while standing . . . . and I never play any of my solid bodies while seated. When I'm seated, I do use a strap, but I play with the guitar between my legs . . classical style. In this position, there is no guitar, (even oldane's gorgeous Triggs Stromberg Master 400) that is too big for me to play. I had Aaron Cowles make me a Unity American Classic to the EXACT dimensions of a Super 400. In my classical seated position, I could play my 18" Unity for any length of time with absolutely no discomfort at all.
For you, at 5'9" tall, if you play while standing and wish to continue to do so, then the Super 400 is going to be a bit of a challenge for you.
The Heritage Super Eagle is a smaller guitar than the Gibson 400. The upper bout is shorter, the guitar length is a whole inch shorter and the body depth is 3" . . . that's 1/2" less deep than a Super 400. However, with that being said, it too will be a problem for you if you like to play while standing. Definitely more manageable than a Super 400 . . . but a challenge none the less.
I also concur with everything that oldane posted in his reply to you.
Also, the thing to remember about a Super 400 is this . . . you will never lose a dime on that guitar . . . unless you pay considerably more than its current going market value. I don't think there is another guitar out there right now with with a better retention of its value for resale.
Good luck in your choice.
-
I meant Golden Eagle. It was a serious struggle for me to deal with guitar that size (and i'm pretty much and average sized man. In fact I'm almost exactly the size of the OP). I'm sure you know much better than I what the dimensions are. It just seemed so big to me that I assumed that it was larger. I did start by saying that I've been known to have some very extreme opinions on this issue, and my lack of comfort with guitars in this size range is a big part of that attitude. When evaluating any instrument, my first concern is not tone but playing comfort. If it doesn't pass that test, then whatever else it may do is superfluous for me.
Originally Posted by Patrick2
-
It's certainly not impossible that the guitar you had was larger than the standard specks. I custom ordered one with a 17-1/4" lower bout, 3'-1/4" body depth and 3/4" longer. It came in dead nuts on that spec. Jim Deurloo had to use a Super Eagle mold/form and shim it down to my spec. He couldn't use the Golden Eagle form. I love it because those dimensions are closer to the L5 dimensions. (forgive me for shamelessly taking advantage of another opportunity to post this picture) Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
-
I'm 5'10" in stocking feet with a long torso. I've played several Gibson Super 400s that belong to friends who are Merle Travis freaks and also a 1948 Epiphone Emperor that belongs to a swing playing friend. For my size I find 18 inches and over to be uncomfortable especially at the right forearm and shoulder. My friend with the Epiphone is about 6'3". He tilts the guitar and slings the guitar low ala Rev. Gary Davis.
Awkwardness can be overcome but if it causes real discomfort then perhaps a smaller guitar would be a better choice. I've played several 16" and 17" instruments that had great tone and were real cannons.
I spent most of a year shopping for my first "really good" acoustic guitar and played dozens of high end guitars from all over the world before making my choice. Don't get in a hurry. Once you have the money to spend, don't hesitate spending all the time necessary to find just the right guitar.
-
I find that I don't even play my Heritage Sweet 16 because of the body size...and...it's 1/2" thinner than a regular Sweet 16. I just don't get on with larger guitars. I love my Heritage Prospect that's only 15" across the lower bout, and prefer 000 or OM flattops.
My wife loves the look of the Sweet 16 so it resides on our living room wall.
Do I give up some tone? No doubt but the smaller sound of the smaller guitars is still bigger than the sound of a large guitar not being played.
To me a Sadowsky SS-15 would be a dream guitar, or perhaps a Prospect with a deeper body.
-
I don't know if you're aware, but, Merle's son Tom Bresh had this 18" "Super 400-ish" guitar custom built for him by Aaron Cowles. He looks pretty comfortable with it too. But, he's a pretty big man. Originally Posted by monk
-
ah yes...
thats a replica or extremely similar to a super 400 built for merle travis (???) someone famous and country as my tired old brains recall
-recognize the florabunda on the headstock
not exactly subtle.......but love the sheer size of the headstock..not crazy about the shoot on the burst-but perhaps its the pic
-
Good eye Steve. The color is way off due to the camera flash. There is a more representative picture of that guitar on Tom Bresh's web site . . along with an explanation of how Tom went to Aaron to duplicate his father's Gibson Super 400, because it was Aaron who originally did most of the work on the Super 400 . . . "back in the day" at Gibson. Originally Posted by stevedenver
-
I'm 5' 6" and the most comfortable guitar I play is 16" wide and I never play standing. I sit with a strap. I used to play a 43 Emperor that was 18" wide and wasn't all that comfortable with it. It had a great sound but the thing was just too big to handle.
-
Hi Steven
i'm 5' 7" and weigh more than you !! I have a Super Eagle and love it .I play in the classical position which helps with the size to some extent. I got it a few months ago (in the UK) it was for sale for a good price but I was worried about the size .Patrick 2 made some helpful comments so I had a drive to the dealers for a tryout .Love at first sight, the best arch top I have ever played including a Gibson L5 ces and a 175D
Alan
-
We Dutch are on average the tallest people in the world ; and I'm 6'
Just send those 18+ inchers over here !
-
Yeah, I know Thom and I've played the guitar. He and I are about the same height. But he plays standing most of the time as did his dad. I generally sit and that's probably why I find 18 inchers uncomfortable. Notice that the lower bout extends from his armpit past his waist. Even if I tilt the guitar, it's more than a lap full for me. Originally Posted by Patrick2
I don't know if you're aware, but, Merle's son Tom Bresh had this 18" "Super 400-ish" guitar custom built for him by Aaron Cowles. He looks pretty comfortable with it too. But, he's a pretty big man.
Last edited by monk; 06-05-2012 at 12:31 PM.
-
think ill just have to sit down with an 18" to make sure
i play jazz mostly sitting, in both positions-ie ??folk??flat top?? and classical, depending on the guitar
-
This is an interesting thread and really helped shed some light on the whole "big guitars are uncomfortable for me to play" topic that I have read so much about.
I am 6'5" 235lbs and I have never played a guitar that was too big for me, so I could never empathize with others when they said a 17' or 18' archtop was too big.
I guess I was born with the size to play big archtops, but missed out on the genetics of any talent when playing them!!!
But the question still beckons, how does Kenny Burrell still play his Super 400 (and his Heritage Signature Super K guitar) at the age of 80, when he can't be more that 5'9"????
-
Kuz: I'm thinking that the only way Kenney Burrell is 5'9" if he's standing in a 5" hole. Here he is with one of your favorites at a NAMM show a few years back.
-
I play a Super 400 and love it. It is kind of large, but not unmanageable. I tend to switch between holding it on my right knee or putting it on a classical guitar cushion on my left knee with the headstock nearly pointing upwards. I don't play it standing to avoid scratching the back with clothing.
-
Well, I will admit he looks closer to 6' tall in that pic. I have watched a lot of videos and seen a lot pics of KB. I thought I even read he was average height, but if not I stand corrected.
-
Kenney's well over 6' tall. It's been pretty well documented that the reason he gravitated towards the Super 400 was due to it's size. He loved his ES175, but was never quite "right" with it's 16" body. Here in this shot, he's standing next to Henry Johnson. Henry is at least 5' 9". Mimi is about the same and Greg DeLorto is 5'7"-5'8" ish. But, Greg, Heritage rep from the left coast, loves his Golden Eagles. Originally Posted by Kuz
-
Same here. I have an old 175, but I feel much more comfortable with a 17" or my 19" Triggs when sitting. Standing with the guitar on a strap, it doesn't matter much. Originally Posted by Patrick2
Last edited by oldane; 12-27-2019 at 01:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Yesterday, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos