-
I wouldn't consider obtaining a laminate to be a tonal compromise at all, as I feel they often sound better amplified than carved tops. I just obtained a Heritage Groove Master which I like a lot.
Originally Posted by Broyale
Here is a fellow playing an ES-175 and getting some great tone (not a fantastic recording, but some real nice tone and playing IMHO):
-
08-19-2012 02:27 PM
-
Call me shallow, but I don't think i'd be satisfied with anything other than the Gibson. Just wanted to know if the laminate 175 would be worth it vs. saving up for the L-4.[/QUOTE]
You asked for it; You are shallow. You're not going to be happy with anything but a guitar you've never even played, but says Gibson on the headstock. JFC!
-
Oh come on there Gertrude.
Our OP is sorting things out. So with you and me that makes three people that sometimes need to throw stuff against the wall and see how it sticks (or drips down, or makes a puddle on the floor).
Chris
-
Attachment 4341
I always wanted a Gibson L5. Needed the size of an L4. Went to Heritage for something between a 575 and Sweet 16. Thinner than either a 175 or L4 with 2 3/4 sides and I could spec the neck carve and hardware. Carved spruce top, carved mahagany sides and back Throbak pickups came in at $4,000. Just what I wanted for what I wanted to pay.
-
That's one gorgeous and unique 575 there! There's a maple top sunburst with an uncommon ebony finger board that's been for sale at $1600 for weeks...I've been tempted to buy it, but another git' is what I don't need. I've 2 Heritages in a GE and Eagle custom. Great git's all around, and a bargain, compared to many others, to boot. Originally Posted by .02$
Would I love a L5 Wesmo', sure who wouldn't. But at $6k on average used I'd prefer owning 5 guitars to 1 guitar.Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 08-19-2012 at 05:03 PM.
-
With a budget of $4000, there are lots of options. However, as some have pointed out, the used market may be a better way to go. Since this is the OP's first archtop, and it seems he is going to buy without playing one, it makes economic sense to buy used. First, obviously less money than a new one, meaning more guitar for the buck. Second, what happens when the OP decides it is NOT the guitar of his dreams and wants to sell/trade for something else? His $4000 new guitar is going to have much more depreciation than a $2500 used guitar, making the loss much less hurtful to the pocketbook. Used means that the OP can consider models that aren't currently available. Guild, for example (disclaimer, even though two of my current four archtops are Guild, I've had Gibsons, pre-Gibson and post-Gibson Epis, Gretsch, Ibanez and a few others over the years). I'd put my X-170 up against any ES-175 I've ever played and you can get them for probably a third to half of a new 175. Someone on the Guild list just got an X-500 for $1500, a real bargain.
Anyhow, just my 2 cents on the matter.
Brad
-
+1 Originally Posted by brad4d8
My first reputed higher end archtop was a Guild X-500, and of course I soon had to acquire a X-170 as well. Great guitar's all.
That $1500 X-500 must have been acquired away from the Guild forum for sale board. That's a rare price, for typically an X-500 in great shape will bring in $2500. Mine sold for $2900.
Great guitar, and it's a laminate!
for size perspective that's my former natural X-170 left of a DeArmond X-135 and an Eastman 880 Pisano, which is one of my favorite guitars...they practically play themselves.
Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 08-19-2012 at 08:19 PM.
-
As I stated before, i'm certainly not opposed to buying used, but I am not interested in a laminate instrument if the instrument doesn't offer anything radically different than an Artcore or Epi at the $1000+ pricepoint. Originally Posted by brad4d8
Did Guild ever make any solid wood archtops? I've played a few acoustics from them and liked what I heard.
-
Yes, the Guild X-700 and their famed top shelf Artist Award are both carved tops. An AA was/is on the bay for $2650 as of y'day. Too many issues with it for my tastes, which is why it's listed for $2650...but even so there were 2 AA's listed on the 'bay for $3k and $3400 respectively over the past 8 months. A X-700 sold on the 'bay for $2400 about 4 months back. Originally Posted by Broyale
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Guild-Artist...item27ca255767
If it's solid woods you're after for the used prices of GE's you'd be very happy...well, I was...nothing touches this guitar at 3 times the price...GE's are the real deal and they're steals. Where else would I find a tap tuned all carved instrument for $2500.
there's a double HB GE on the HOC forum now...no one seems to have funds otherwise there's no reason that guitar would last 3 weeks without a buyer.
Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 08-19-2012 at 06:27 PM.
-
Sweet! Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
-
Nice guitar. I really like the Golden Eagles. Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
If it's solid woods you're after for the used prices of GE's you'd be very happy...well, I was...nothing touches this guitar at 3 times the price...GE's are the real deal and they're steals. Where else would I find a tap tuned all carved instrument for $2500.
there's a double HB GE on the HOC forum now...no one seems to have funds otherwise there's no reason that guitar would last 3 weeks without a buyer.
-
They're a lot of guitar for any money. Originally Posted by Broyale
Here's my tapped tuned blonde babe.
Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 08-19-2012 at 07:51 PM.
-
yes, here's mine. the Guild/Benedetto Johnny Smith Award (the design was "updated" by Bob from the Guild Artist Award) Originally Posted by Broyale
-
Yessiree, now you're talkin'! I purposely did not mention your model for his specified budget was $4k, and if your guitar was priced at $4k I'd consider owning one, but $8k is a bit rich for this kid. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Beautiful guitar!
Benedetto Johnny Smith
Guild Benedetto Johnny Smith Artist Award Archtop Jazz Guitar (Mint Condition) | eBay
Benedetto Artist Award
Guild/ Benedetto Artist Award Archtop Jazz Guitar (Mint Condition) | eBay
Patrick own's a Benedetto Johnny Smith too I believe.
-
My laminate Holst 16" blows ($2,800) blows away the Ibanez AF125 ($1,000) I briefly owned. No comparison. The Ibanez had fantastic fit and finish, but sounded totally dead acoustically and sounded "like an electric guitar" through an amp, i.e. pretty much like a solid body. The Holst has nice acoustic tone although it is quiet (2.25" body depth), but really comes alive through an amp. It resonates when other instruments in the room are playing; the Ibanez was dead.
Steve Holst makes his own laminate plates. A few other builders also do this - Painter, Andersen and Borys.
-
But aren't plywood guitars supposed be dead, acoustically, by nature of their construction? I was under the impression that the acoustic properties was the very thing you want to suppress when playing amplified. Originally Posted by coolvinny
This brings me back to my original question, aren't there certain grades of lamination that separates, say, a Holst or Benedetto from an Epiphone or Ibanez?
This quote from another forum pretty much sums up my impression of $1000+ laminate guitars
Originally Posted by EuroAussie
-
i paid $7K for mine brand new in 2004. retail was $11K. Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
i'll bet this seller will take less too. if you want to know anything about these guitars send me a PM.
-
Not actually dead, but so much supressed that they don't feed back easily. I'd say that plywood archtops - made by Ibanez or Benedetto - are NOT designed as acoustic instruments and they don't sound as such. They do have inherent acoustic properties which will made them loud enough for quiet practice, but I have yet to come across a laminated archtop with the sound quality of a carved archtop. I use to say that when compared to the sound of a carved archtop, a laminated archtop most often sounds like a monkey farting in a tin can. Just listen to Joe Pass first "Viruoso" recording - made with an ES175 with flatwound strings - to hear what I mean. And I'm not keen on the sound of floating PUs on an acoustic instrument, I like a built in PU better. I never use my Benedetto Fratello amplified. For that reason, I have ended up with separate instruments for acoustic and amplified playing. That also makes it possible to set them up differently (string type, action etc.). My guitars for amplified playing are either solid bodies or laminate archtops. My acoustic archtops are carved spruce top instruments. Originally Posted by Broyale
As for archtops with built in PUs, it's a never ending discussion - also on this forum - whether a carved instrument (like the L5) or a laminated one (like the ES175) sounds best amplified - or for that matter if the difference in materials means any significant difference at all to the amplified tone. A thread about this went on and on here some time ago with no consensus. Often such a difference is difficult to pin down because there are many other differencies between instruments such as different PU placements (for example the neck PU on a 175 is closer to the bridge than on a L5) which makes "everything else equal" comparing impossible.
Laminated archtops are more rugged than carved instruments and less prone to cracks and warping. As such, they are often chosen by gigging/travelling musicians.
Now, for your original question - are there differencies in sound quality of laminates of a cheap vs. an expensive archtop. There may be differencies between different laminates, but I very much douibt that it can be linked to the price of the instrument. In theory my Painter guitar with a thicker center mahogany ply should sound different from a laminate made of all maple. But I believe the difference is very small and insignificant. Such a small difference will be "drowned out" by a lot of other important factors of the guitar. One could also speculate if the glue used for the lamination has any effect on the sound. But all this is speculation only and not at all supported by any evidence and facts - and it likely has extremely little significance. Choice of strings and picks, amp settings and playing style will mean many, many times more to the sound.
But of course, laminates can in theory be made so badly - for example due to disintegrating glues - that the plies fall apart after some years. Lots of Gretsch guitars from the late 1950s and 1960s notoriously have problems with the glues used. The plies hold together (but then, they were likely not made by Gretsch themselves), but everything else fall apart - bindings, neck joints, glued seams - due to the use of poor quality glues. In comparison, Gibson guitars remain in one piece decade after decade because good quality glues were used.
-
Why? Originally Posted by oldane
What aural or performance differences between a routed pup vs. a floater have guided your preference of one over the other?
And isn't any archtop with a floater, preserving the tops integrity, still essentially an acoustic guitar?
-
I sold my Guild Benedetto JS Award back in June (July?) at the Philly Guitar Show. Lee from Grinning Elk nailed me right at the door before I even got in the show. It's currently on his web site with a pretty nice write up. Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
-
Oh no you didn't! I thought you'd be buried with that one! Originally Posted by Patrick2
-
My Holst has very low volume acoustically and there are little or no "overtones" like I hear with my carved archtop. However, it still sounds pleasing to the ear, whereas my experience with the mass market laminates is that they sound like tin. That little bit of acoustic presence comes through the amp too - which is why I'm amazed how much better my Holst sounds through an amp (standard Lunchbox) vs. my solid body guitar which has the exact same Buscarino pickup in it. Even using the PocketAmp app on my iPhone, the Holst sounds like a million bucks whereas my solid body sounds sterile and grainy. Originally Posted by Broyale
-
[2Bop] >>> And isn't any archtop with a floater, preserving the tops integrity, still essentially an acoustic guitar?
In my opinion, not necessarily at all.
Sure some are. An Eastman or Benedetto or other very well made acoustic archtop with a floater is essentially an acoustic guitar with a magnetic pickup added.
But there are many, even most, floater-equipped guitars that have the floater as a fashion statement, vestige of some sort, or in many cases an arguably misguided choice that does not meet the expectation of many players.
How about an Ibanez Benson? Floaters. (EDIT: I mean the GB-10.) They sound fine. But a funny design choice considering the goal of the design. The PU's are dew claws that happen to do no harm in this case.
An Epi Emperor Regent. Very useful guitar, but how many would call it an acoustic?
Try those Korean D'Angelicos. The floater vs. the top-mounted HB. One appeals to some as a "look", but as a "listen"?
And how's about the floaters that people really love? They seem to be those that sound the most like a PAF.
Yeah, I guess the floater can preserve the acoustic integrity of a top. But when you go and screw a PU to a top up near the end of the FB, the effect of the sound is far less than one might expect on many (especially parallel braced) guitars.
It is funny how little area on an archtop really produces the acoustic sound.
Touch the felt pad behind a pickguard to the top and you can hear a difference. Lay a baloney sandwich (or a pickup) on other areas and it is very hard to tell if it is there.
I guess floaters are thought of as thin sounding. And the majority of players experiences with them may support this.
But there are also some exceptions. The KA 12-pole (usually followed by a small wave of love in a forum thread) sounds fuller than most. The Benedetto S6 also manages to avoid the tin can effect (too bad about the weak-ish B response,...)
ChrisLast edited by PTChristopher; 08-20-2012 at 01:30 PM.
-
Greg . . . selling this guitar was a very unsettling decision for me . . . and one that I still can't totally put my finger on. The guitar is an amazing example of design and flawlessly executed workmanship. It's acoustic tone is very different than that of any of my other arch tops . . and superior to all others except the Aaron Cowles built American Classics . . . especially the 18" . . . which is just in an entirely different league altogether.
The Guild Benedetto JS Award generated great volume, a big voice, very articulate across all 6 strings . . . but, with a gentle warmth that is characteristic of all Benedetto full size arch tops. I really do believe that the Engleman spruce top along with Benedetto's carve and bracing techniques made the tonal difference. Unfortunately, it just never quite seemed to fit in my collection. I never did bond with it. I took it to the Philly show expecting to generate some interest from show attendees, not dealers . . . because my asking price was pretty much near current retail selling price for that model. I was very surprised when Lee's counter offer to my asking price was still within reason. Here's a statement that will further define my mixed feelings . . . I wish I still had it . . . but, I don't regret selling it. WOW!! That doesn't even make sense to ME!!!!
-
The routed PU to my ears has a more clean sound with less irregular overtones. I find it easier to control the tone of the routed PU with the tone controls. The floating PU often has a brighter and more harsh sound though there are exceptions. Please note, however, that this is my personal preference (ideosyncracy?) of sound based on the way I hear sounds. The reason I dislike floating PUs is very reason some other people like them. I figure it's a matter of how much you want your guitar to sound like an acoustic when amplified. Apart from this, floating PUs are often more prone to feed back even at lower volumes. And it's easier to adjust PU height with routed PUs - especially PUs in humbucker mount (and you can get almost any PU type in the convenient humbucker mount). Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
Yes, if it is made as an acoustic archtop in the first place. But then I didn't say it wasn't an acoustic - at least that was not what I meant. But as Chris has pointed out, some archtops with floating PUs are not that good as acoustic instruments, and they may just as well have had routed PUs. The example with the Ibanez GB-10 is a good one. I never understood why they made it with floating PUs since it's not an acoustic guitar at all. Some plywood boxes also have floating PUs for reasons I don't quite get.And isn't any archtop with a floater, preserving the tops integrity, still essentially an acoustic guitar?
Reply With Quote
Jimmy Smith at Newport ('72) Kenny Burrell on guitar
Today, 03:31 PM in The Players