High-end laminate vs. Low-end laminate guitar?

[Broyale]

Someone help me out on this, please.
I am currently saving for my first hollowbody guitar purchase and I do not intend on spending more than $4000. I've been looking at the Gibson ES-175 or one of the Ibanez Signature models, but the big turn-off is the fact that they seem rather expensive for a laminate box. Even used, they are rather expensive for what I would prefer to pay for plywood guitar.

This is mostly based on my experience with other laminate instruments and my perception (coming from being an acoustic player) that laminate = cheap/poor tone, just so you understand why i'm a bit cautious about this. I intend to play amplified, but I don't wanna lose out on any tone if I can help it. I understand the feedback issue, but if it were as big of a problem as i've heard people make it out to be, why are companies still manufacturing solid carved electric archtops? I don't understand.

Someone help me understand what companies like Gibson and Ibanez are doing that makes these particular laminate boxes so much more valuable than, say an Artcore. Is there a such thing as high-end laminating or something?

[PTChristopher]

>>> I do not intend on spending more than $4000.

Well that's leaving lots of room for some very fine guitars.

>>> Is there a such thing as high-end laminating or something?

No. There is no systematic use of finer glues, nicer invisible inner wood, more groovy arch shapes, or organic trees in some sort of high end laminates.

>>> (coming from being an acoustic player) that laminate = cheap/poor tone

Understandable. In my opinion you can really hear the difference in solid spruce flat tops vs. laminate. There are some notable exceptions, but yeah - solid spruce (and cedar) flat tops are generally providing a clear sound benefit.

Once you get into guitars used with magnetic pickups with the amplified sound being paramount the situation changes considerably.

My opinion:

- There are MANY variables in a top. Solid vs. laminate is only one. There is thickness, arch depth and shape, bracing (incl. soundposts), size, wood (spruce vs. maple typically), and how much stuff you mount on the top.

- There are many ways to balance acoustic character vs. feedback resistance. There are some surprisingly thick solid spruce tops (like 1/2") that are feedback resistant, and some very lively thin laminates that feedback like crazy.

- There is a constellation of variables and possibilities out there. It likely an error to pick one variable and declare it suitable or unsuitable for any particular type of music.

>>> what companies like Gibson and Ibanez are doing that makes these particular laminate boxes so much more valuable than, say an Artcore

There is arguably some better care in finishing and componentry on some Ibanez guitars vs. the Arctore line.

Gibson bashing is too easy. So maybe we can say that marketing and predispositions of the buying public are significant in Gibson pricing. They do use good components vs. the Artcores, which accounts for about $8 to $10 on an L5 vs an. Artcore.

Gibson also use a sort of nitrocellulose lacquer than many prefer for its traditional description. In my opinion, it bears no practical resemblance in hardness or surface feel to nitrocellulose lacquers as used for decades (including this decade) in many fine guitars.

But as for the actual laminated wood top of an Artcore vs. a more expensive Ibanez or a 175? In my view, there is no practical quality difference in the laminated wood itself.

But a player may very much prefer the selection of dimensions and overall guitar configuration of a given guitar over what is available in a line like the Artcore, or Godin, or Epi, or Gretsch, or Eastman, or,...

All my opinion, others will have better takes on the subject.

Chris

[PTChristopher]

>>> >>> I do not intend on spending more than $4000.

It used to be that $2,000 was a real threshold for a very fine pile of new guitars. While nobody was looking (and health insurance costs doubled), the line moved to $4,000.

But if you look at used guitars, there are MANY great guitars in the $2,000 to $4,000 range.

Guild X-500, X-150, X-170, X-180 (if you can find one). $1200 to $2500 - bargains. (And look at Corona Guild archtops as well for even more bargain-o-sity.)

The superb Epi Elite Broadway and Byrland - $1200 to $2500. The Byrd is a current darling and hard to value at $2500 vs. the old blowout price of new ones at $1699.

Benedetto Bravos - Currently sort of depressed at around $3,000 for mint used. I have one and will keep it.

Sadowsky archtops. Down in the $3500 range. Kind of pricey still, but extremely well designed and built.

D'Aquistos. I am not up on the pricing, but when I look, they seem to be great values.

I am missing a good dozen other guitars out there ready to play and sound great - and I mean really great, for $2,000 to $4,000.

This includes many small builder brand new guitars. Amazing what is out there.

Chris

[PTChristopher]

And another almost-interesting near-thought:

There are some basic types of solid tops. There are hand carved and "tuned" tops, CNC cookie-cutter tops made with no regard for the specific character of the piece of wood in question (and yet sold in the $5,000 + range,...), and pressed tops.

Pressed tops will often have a top layer laminated veneer (parallel grain direction) presumably for stability.

In my opinion the important distinction in a pressed top is the thickness, which does not change they way it does in many carved tops.

You may see a fine hand-carved acoustic archtop and conclude that the whole top is 1/8" thick. But the thickness at the f-holes and perimeter is not usually the same throughout the top.

Chris

[Broyale]

Thanks, PTChristopher.

I am strongly considering perhaps bumping my budget up and going for an L-4, which according to the specs, seems to be everything the 175 should be for maybe $1k more. I'm also considering Heritage's line of instruments, its just hard to pin down any consistent prices with them, and the 575 models they offer look a bit plain-jane compared to that wine-cherry red 175 beauty Gibson offers.
I wonder if I could get an L-4 in wine-cherry red similar to its 175 counterpart? I'm afraid that doing so might put me in L-5 territory (which I would love to own, but i'm perfectly fine with the L-4 being the stopgap-after all, this is going to be a keeper guitar)
I've looked at the other brands out there, I was even stuck on a VERY pretty Eastman for awhile, but experience has taught me that if you want something, its simpler and cheaper to just get it straight away. 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.

[PTChristopher]

>>> I don't think i'd be satisfied with anything other than the Gibson.

There are many who feel as you do.

>>>Just wanted to know if the laminate 175 would be worth it vs. saving up for the L-4.

Ah, that is a MUCH different question than I first read.

The 175 and L4 have some notable differences beyond the cosmetics and top technology.

The L4 is a noticeably warmer, fuller, darker (depending on how you hear it) guitar.

Part of this is the top, but the neck PU location is also a very big part of the sound difference.

The L4 is fairly feedback resistant. The top is quite thick, especially considering the 16" size.

I hear no general difference whatsoever in the mahogany back vs. the maple ply back.

I love the use of the light weight Kluson type tuners on both guitars. Despite being ignored as a design element in water-cooler guitar discussion, light tuners and a mahogany neck are a big part of the fine sound of these (and other) guitars.

I do not think the L4 is a "better" guitar. It is a noticeably fuller, darker sounding guitar. Not a muffled mess at all.

In both cases I would want to buy with the option to return the guitar for workmanship issues. My opinion on a significant part of the experience.

Chris

[Spook410]

I really hope you get to do some side-by-side comparisons before you buy. If you can forego preconceptions, (always challenging) you may end up with either a much finer instrument for the price or the equivalent quality for much less.

And yes.. feedback is that big of an issue once you step out of the home/studio. However, solid wood instruments do sound wonderful.

[Larry M]

Well Broyale, Chris just gave you a wealth of great information. Anything I could have said was covered. Thanks, Chris.

[Archtop 13]

Market driven. That's the reason for the prices of some laminate archtops.

Are they inferior? Yes, if you want to sound of a quality carved archtop. No, if you want to sound like your favorite artist who plays an ES-175.

Feedback? BS, There are numerous things you can do to an archtop during the build to fight feedback. Thats a marketing ploy to get you to buy a, cheaper to build, laminate guitar.

[Flint]

Somewhere I read that plywood was originally used shortly after archtops were amplified, to reduce feedback. This was a FEATURE, not a way to cut costs. I know I have both laminate and solid tops, and the solid tops I have suffer serious feedback problems in situations the plywood does not.

As for low vs. high end, I have always wondered. I notice Ibanez (who I think makes pretty good guitars) asks about $400 for an AF75, and about $3200 for a PM-120. So what do you get for your extra $3K? These are both jazz boxes, both archtops. The AF-75 sounds fine, intonates well, has good balance and action, a comfortable neck. So is the extra $3K all marketing, hype, and moonbeams?

[fumblefingers]

i hate to say this but, if you are looking at $4K you might want to bump that to $5K or $6K - and get a used Wes or Johnny Smith. you know - shop carefully, get on a wait list at Gary's guitars, go to the big guitar shows in LA and Dallas, etc., etc.

even if it takes you 6-8 years to pay off the extra $1-2K on a credit card you would probably not regret it. and you would keep the guitar until you're senile.

[PTChristopher]

This is a very interesting topic in my opinion. Laminates and general value in the market.

With respect to the OP and his personal sensibilities regarding his likely new guitar, I sure hope it does not become a "True Believer" (apologies to Eric Hoffer) collector/Gibson thread.

As for bumping the budget, a minty used L4-CES should run about $3,000 to $3,250 these late-recession days. There was one posted here a few weeks back.

Chris

[Broyale]

i hate to say this but, if you are looking at $4K you might want to bump that to $5K or $6K - and get a used Wes or Johnny Smith. you know - shop carefully, get on a wait list at Gary's guitars, go to the big guitar shows in LA and Dallas, etc., etc.

even if it takes you 6-8 years to pay off the extra $1-2K on a credit card you would probably not regret it. and you would keep the guitar until you're senile.

Yeah, looks like i'm gonna have to raise my cap a bit, no biggie. But (excuse my ignorance) would the L-5 be that much of a significant improvement over the L-4 to warrant the cost? I like the Wes L-5, but I need the flexibility of two pickups since I dabble in some blues every now and then. That, and i'm in love with the 175 body shape and florentine cutaway. Beautiful.
Coming from an acoustic world, I still can't get my head around spending $2k and upwards for a plywood instrument, when higher-end, solid-wood acoustic guitars coming from the same manufacturer actually cost less. Weird.

[Broyale]

As for bumping the budget, a minty used L4-CES should run about $3,000 to $3,250 these late-recession days. There was one posted here a few weeks back.

Chris

Thanks for the tip, PTChristopher. I'll be sure to keep my eyes peeled.

[Abaddon2005]

As I hold different view, I'll have to respectfully agree with Chris' opinion.
When I was in your position, I tried out a number of different guitars as well. I wasn't too sure whether I wanted plywood vs. carved either, though I did know that I would mostly be playing amplified. So I did what I think is the only real solution to this problem: play a bunch of guitars!

Originally I too wondered what the difference would be between an expensive laminate box vs. a cheap one. After playing several models by Eastman and Ibanez, I ended up with a Benedetto Bambino Deluxe in my hands. Let's just say that that first time I played it, it left me speechless. Not only was it louder, it simply had a wonderful, beautiful voice, with singing highs, and very well defined lows and mids. I was sold.

Now, I can't even say that this is due to the quality of the wood being higher or whether it is due differences in construction, but being able to having played these models side by side was a real eye opener for me. The one thing I suggest you do is play these models extensively at the stores, and then make up your mind.

P.S. I also tried out a Gibson L-4 at the time, and was left unimpressed unfortunately. While it was a loud, lively instrument, it didn't have the sweetness and roundness of voice I typically look for in an archtop. YMMV!

[Archtop 13]

Somewhere I read that plywood was originally used shortly after archtops were amplified, to reduce feedback. This was a FEATURE, not a way to cut costs. I know I have both laminate and solid tops, and the solid tops I have suffer serious feedback problems in situations the plywood does not.

Like I said, there are ways in the build process to reduce feedback possibilities. An instrument built to be amplified at a loud volume is subject to a different set of rules. I have guys playing my archtops on loud rock n roll situations & I have guys playing jazz with an amp as reenforcement. These guitars are extremely different birds but, they are both carved archtops with spruce tops & maple backs. You can't pick up an instrument with a carved top & assume they are all the same.

[feet]

Coming from an acoustic world, I still can't get my head around spending $2k and upwards for a plywood instrument, when higher-end, solid-wood acoustic guitars coming from the same manufacturer actually cost less. Weird.

having taken the same path, i'll say this:

they are different. not better or worse. just different. more pickups, less pickups, solid, laminate, hog back, maple back, ebony board... it all matters. it all changes things. play everything you can. listen to everything you can. find the one that matches the sounds in your head. don't worry about the ingredients, worry about the meal. things that don't matter include the aesthetics, point of origin and what it says on the headstock.

learn exactly what you want before you buy, and before your eyes and bank account get involved in the decision making process. you're in for an expensive lesson otherwise.

but laminate acoustics still suck

[ruger9]

but laminate acoustics still suck

Actually, I had a laminate TOPPED acoustic, a Revival, that most certainly did not suck. It wasn't what it's all-solid sibling Revival was, but suck? Not even close. I've played solid-topped and all-solid acoustics that sounded much worse than the Revival all-laminate. Like it's state above, it's all in how it's built.

Having played all sorts of flattops now, tho, I do steer twds all-solids... "just because." The few guitars that have blown me away have been all solids, but in this "golden age of acoustic (and archtop) guitars builders", there's an awful lot of really good stuff out there, even all-laminate.

[marcwhy]

Broyale, et al.,
Some great feedback here, but people keep overlooking your first comment: "I am currently saving for my first hollowbody guitar purchase and I do not intend on spending more than $4000."

I would never, never, and then never recommend anyone spend that much on their first hollowbody/archtop!! On their second, third, or fourth archtop, which means they've really lived with different guitars, worked on developing the "sound" or "vibe" they want from a guitar, etc., then sure, that's an excellent budget, and as others have pointed out, there are many wonderful builders -- beyond Gibson!! -- that can give you exactly what you'd like.

Warning: Please do NOT buy a $4000 Gibson (or any other guitar) as your first archtop!!

[fumblefingers]

i bought an Ibanez GB as my first jazz archtop and had to trade it in for an L5 after a short period. i was used to a nice, well set up ES 335 and just couldn't take the cheapness of the Ibanez. (sorry Ibanezers). i'll admit, that was a VERY long time ago.

i agree that you should try them out extensively. one challenge is that Benedetto only sells direct. i love Benedetto guitars, but am more a fan of his flagship line. i don't know anything about his laminates but i'll bet they're great as well.

you should have a firm opinion - do you want a 24.75", 25.0", or 25.5" scale length? you should also know how 1 11/16" nut width feels vs. 1 12/16". whatever you do DON'T buy the guitar first and then discover that you like it the other way!!! that is a financially impactful discovery if you are on a budget, and can frustrate your playing comfort as well.

as for playing the blues, i think you would be happiest with a Wes or Johnny Smith - plus - a blues/rock guitar. in other words, use the right tools for the right job. as has been stated a million times before, if you want a crossover guitar, get a semi-hollow. it may leave you wanting though...

[Broyale]

i bought an Ibanez GB as my first jazz archtop and had to trade it in for an L5 after a short period. i was used to a nice, well set up ES 335 and just couldn't take the cheapness of the Ibanez. (sorry Ibanezers). i'll admit, that was a VERY long time ago.

i agree that you should try them out extensively. one challenge is that Benedetto only sells direct. i love Benedetto guitars, but am more a fan of his flagship line. i don't know anything about his laminates but i'll bet they're great as well.

you should have a firm opinion - do you want a 24.75", 25.0", or 25.5" scale length? you should also know how 1 11/16" nut width feels vs. 1 12/16". whatever you do DON'T buy the guitar first and then discover that you like it the other way!!! that is a financially impactful discovery if you are on a budget, and can frustrate your playing comfort as well.

as for playing the blues, i think you would be happiest with a Wes or Johnny Smith - plus - a blues/rock guitar. in other words, use the right tools for the right job. as has been stated a million times before, if you want a crossover guitar, get a semi-hollow. it may leave you wanting though...

Sound advice, but the problem is that I don't live in an city that offers very much variety in terms of guitars. If you're not a blues, folk, country, metal, or buttrock kind of guy--its either Artcores, Gretcsh, Epis, or bust, really.
Those Benedettos look nice, but I still could not bring myself to spend that kind of money on any type of laminate instrument. I'm sure they sound good for what they are and i'm aware of the Benedetto name, but the specs scream, "entry-level" for me and I don't believe any guitar should be "entry-level" at that price point.
My current guitar is a semi-hollow Washburn HB-35. Decent guitar, but shoddy craftsmanship. The neck is too thin compared to an 335 I tried later on, and the nut is could be a touch wider (its 1 5/8"). It sounds good for what I do with it, but it wouldn't kill me if I replaced it with a better guitar. Spec-wise, the L-4 seems to be right up my alley in terms of what I want from an instrument. I've had the opportunity to play a 175 and I really like the feel of it, so if the L-4 is nearly identical in spec to a 175, there shouldn't be too many issues that would turn me off, right?

[2bornot2bop]

New vs. used.

Your suggested $4k budget will obviously stretch much much further buying used vs. buying new. I don't need a "new" guitar, for just like buying that shiny new car, as soon as you drive it off the dealer's lot it's USED.

I don't need a guitar to say X on the label to feel good about owning a brand X, nor do I desire to spend over twice the price to acquire a certain brand name. Even with my limited knowledge having bought some 30+ guitars the past 2 years I've learned that there are some absolute killer values out there in the used marketplace, and I currently own 5 of those archtops.

Heck, the acoustic projection, if that's your thing, of a used $1500 Imperial will blow the majority of inventory in the market place out of the water. A what? Yes, I know...99.9% of the folks on these forums have never sampled one, and that's a pity for you don't know what you're missing...neither had I until I took the plunge to bring one in.

My point is, I long ago got beyond buying a label, and doing so allowed me to discover some very select used guitars at costs that weren't superficially inflated. Spending even $4k on any guitar isn't necessary, imho.

I recently passed on buying a used late 80's L4 that was in 9 out of 10 original condition that had been a closet guitar. The dealer was asking $1900 for that guitar. It wasn't my bag so why bother at any price. If I was a L4 style guitar fan I'd go for the Heritage Sweet 16 used from $2200-$2800, although the '16 has a spruce top, which correct me if I'm wrong, so does the L4, which too is my preference. If you didn't like the Heritage 575 based upon its scaled down look there are custom 575's everywhere, some with spruce tops, some with ebony trim and trimmed out with upscale hardware. However by the time you customize a 575 you're in the price range of a maxed out used Sweet 16, so what's the point.

In the used market being what it is today it's senseless, in my personal buying decisions, to spend over $2500 for even a carved spurce archtop, for I've only spent that amount on one of the 5 archtops I own...and any archtop player on this forum would be delighted with any one of these guitars...but of course none of them say brand X on the label. What's that label sound like again?

[Flyin' Brian]

Thanks, PTChristopher.

I am strongly considering perhaps bumping my budget up and going for an L-4, which according to the specs, seems to be everything the 175 should be for maybe $1k more. I'm also considering Heritage's line of instruments, its just hard to pin down any consistent prices with them, and the 575 models they offer look a bit plain-jane compared to that wine-cherry red 175 beauty Gibson offers.
I wonder if I could get an L-4 in wine-cherry red similar to its 175 counterpart? I'm afraid that doing so might put me in L-5 territory (which I would love to own, but i'm perfectly fine with the L-4 being the stopgap-after all, this is going to be a keeper guitar)
I've looked at the other brands out there, I was even stuck on a VERY pretty Eastman for awhile, but experience has taught me that if you want something, its simpler and cheaper to just get it straight away. 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.

Heritage will make a 575 in any color you want. However you're talking about laminate guitars and 575s are solid.

[Broyale]

Where did I say I was opposed to buying used?
Furthermore, I haven't limited my search to only the Gibson, but simply that the Gibson L-4 is at the top of my list based on specs. Like I said before, i'd love to be able to live in a city where shops carry Benedettos, Eastman's, Heritage's, and other brands so I could at least make a much more informed decision, but I don't.

[Broyale]

Heritage will make a 575 in any color you want. However you're talking about laminate guitars and 575s are solid.

Gorgeous guitars. I've had a poke around Heritage's site and I like their lineup but I hate the tailpieces in the 2nd and 3rd photo--too plain for such sexy instruments. Thanks for sharing!