Questions for Yunzhi guitar players

[spiral]

Dear Yunzhi players, some advice please. If I were to order a completely acoustic 17" archtop, what is the likely quality going to be - what should I expect? How might it compare to, say, the Loar LH700, or a more expensive Eastman?

I wouldn't buy a Yunzhi as a discount Eastman. Eastmans are much more refined in sound and build. Acoustically they compete with, or surpass, some private luthiers. Used, they aren't that much more money and are often cheaper when you factor in shipping and a full set up, fret level, and crown (which you will have to do) for the Yunzhi.

If you want a unique / custom instrument and don't have an affordable local option, Yunzhi is the way to go. I own two and the more recent one is better carved / sounding than the first one.

I've owned a Loar (700), 3 Eastmans, 2 Yunzhis and a few US made archtops. For an acoustic archtop I would put Eastman and Loar above the Yunzhi. I'm still happy with the Yunzhis because I was able to try out a unique design without the $5k risk that goes with a private maker.

[Rob MacKillop]

Thanks, spiral. That's exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I'll pass.

[ooglybong]

Good overview and advice to be sure. Thanks, spiral.

Loves me my Eastmans!

[Chuck]

Spiral wrote, "Eastmans are much more refined in sound and build. Acoustically they compete with, or surpass, some private luthiers."

Good to hear that, Spiral! Thing is, I would love to have an affordable acoustic archtop, with satisfying volume for home use and a warm, woody tone (i.e., NOT overly bright; nor brittle or nasal-sounding). And ideally, with nice playability; and not larger than 16" (or at least a comfortable width-to-depth proportions, and a slim-C neck). It's difficult to judge, on the basis of YT videos and any given player's "touch," whether a particular guitar just might be "the best one."

That said, would you think any of the Eastmans warrant consideration? And do they tend to be of predictable and consistent quality?

[IanBart]

Sorry for not getting back with an update sooner, I do not have a lot of access to Internet so don't pass by too often. Also no worries on thread jacking as all Yunzhi info is worth discussing so long as its in the title

So my guitar has been here around 4/5 weeks with a set up done new strings etc and all is well. No structural or sound issues at all. Not put a PU in yet as bit strapped for cash at the moment but will get round to it as soon as.
Acoustically this thing is loud!! even with fingers it has a nice bark in the mids and no it doesn't rumble like a jumbo but you dig in and get a lot punch in the bass when you have to.
I'm not great at describing tone as you can tell all I can say is it's ideal for what I wanted... I play many styles not just Jazz and it's very versatile, more so than my other go to guitar a Gibson J185. As for people unsure... I'd say hands down for the price, totally worth it.

I will try and sort out a sound/video clip at the weekend if anyone is interested.

[2bornot2bop]

Dear Yunzhi players, some advice please. If I were to order a completely acoustic 17" archtop, what is the likely quality going to be - what should I expect? How might it compare to, say, the Loar LH700, or a more expensive Eastman?

My Yunzhi Benedetto copy is:

Acoustically louder than the 3 Eastman 880 John Pisano models I owned, which were 16"'s.

Acoustically equal to the 2 Eastman 810's and the single Eastman 910 I owned.

Acoustically louder than the Loar LH-650 I own.

Fit and finish is, surprisingly, equal to any of the 70 archtops I've owned over the last 3 years.

This guitar, a Yunzhi, is an unbranded 910, both in style, and substance. Being the 2nd owner, I've done nothing but string it and play it. I understand it had a fret leveling, and that is all.

[Rob MacKillop]

Well, it looks fantastic, I must say!

[2bornot2bop]

I wouldn't buy a Yunzhi as a discount Eastman. Eastmans are much more refined in sound and build.

Until this Yunzhi arrived, I naturally anticipated "refinement" issues...to my surprise, there's not a single blem on the guitar...during the build process, someone got after it, as it could easily be a 910, which we both know are very nice.

I applaud your open-mindedness to sample so many archtops!

[ooglybong]

Spiral wrote, "Eastmans are much more refined in sound and build. Acoustically they compete with, or surpass, some private luthiers."

Good to hear that, Spiral! Thing is, I would love to have an affordable acoustic archtop, with satisfying volume for home use and a warm, woody tone (i.e., NOT overly bright; nor brittle or nasal-sounding). And ideally, with nice playability; and not larger than 16" (or at least a comfortable width-to-depth proportions, and a slim-C neck). It's difficult to judge, on the basis of YT videos and any given player's "touch," whether a particular guitar just might be "the best one."

That said, would you think any of the Eastmans warrant consideration? And do they tend to be of predictable and consistent quality?

I'm not spiral, but I do have a few Eastman archtops. Especially considering your stated needs (every one of them, as far as I can tell), in my opinion they are definitely worthy of consideration—no, make that worth actively searching out.

Good luck.

[Spook410]

Spirial: Did you get a Yunzhi archtop? Thought you had something totally different. What did you get?
--------------

My experience has been more like 2b's though I certainly have not had my hands on the number of great guitars he has.

I've never played an Eastman that sounds better than a Yunzhi though I have played many Eastmans that don't sound as good. Hard to compare given how music stores set up guitars.

Yunzhi and Eastman are both Benedetto copies built using the same techniques. From what I've seen they are very similar.

None of mine have needed fret work.

All guitars need to be set up.

Shipping is included in the $1100-$1200 figures you see thrown around here. They used to be $800-$900.

A used Yunzhi appears to be around $600-$700.

A Yunzhi could be an inexpensive Eastman I suppose. They are quite similar and cost 1/3 as much.

Yunzhi allows you to specify everything. Scale length, nut width, any color, inlays, binding, port, acoustic/non-acoustic, et al. On any model. In this regard they are unique and exceed Eastman (or anyone else).

The downside is the lack of warranty so any flaws you fix. Electronics and tuning peg buttons have required fixes on mine. Had a problem with a bridge leg on one. Not a functional issue but bugged me. They sent me a replacement with my next guitar. Other flaws you live with. There's a tool mark on one. And a couple of finish flaws on others.

How often do things like a neck fail happen? Sometimes probably. I remember we saw this on an Eastman awhile back from a member here. Wish we could get more real information. People allude to these but without something tangible, it's tough to get a feel for it. There is certainly some risk and I recommend well established brands with broad support and distributor networks for those who find the risk is intolerable.

Yunzhi does work hard to make you happy. Don't like the 'burst? Strip and do over. Want to pick out your wood? Here are some photos.

My incoming is a unique design and it was purchased with the understanding there would be no case. It's about to ship and I encouraged them to pack extra well. They informed me that there had been a change and they had a case custom fitted. No charge. It will be included.

Believe what you want. There are no guarantees. Just data points. Like investments, rewards are to be balanced against your goals, the type person you are, and your appetite for risk. IMHO their current business model of selling hand made archtops to customer spec's for just over $1K USD is non-sustainable so I will acquire as many as I want (need is another matter entirely) before the music stops.

[BigMikeinNJ]

I want to see Trivial Post-It get satisfaction, but I agree with everything Spook said. I've been fooling around with Yunzhis 3 years now, I've had 3 Eastmans and 2 Yunzhis. Loved the easy playing necks on them all. Had no problems with bridges, Tuners or tailpieces. Electronics had been upgraded on 2 Eastmans when I got them already, the Yunzhis were ready to play and need no fretwork. The 910 copy I got was full acoustic witha KK Pure Western pickup, I got it used on eBay for $600.00 and survived UPS losing it for 45 days without a scratch. Gorgeous Benedetto copy with their violin finish. A real stunner.
and I love both my Pusano and the Yunzhi copy of it. No, no lesser tone in the Yunzhis, any of them.

I've had countless guys see my posts here and at Ibanez Collectors World and they've gone thru the whole process just fine. Trivial Post-It's the first guy who really got hurt. And a lot of guys are really freaked out by the risk they're taking. I say don't worry, buy locally. And yeah there are lots of really fine Eastman guitars on the used market, have a look around. Yunzhis too. Have a look.

But if you want one of their Benedetto style guitars get it, change the electronics and have your tech set it up and smile every time you open the case to play it. I do.

now I want Trivial Post-It to have a happy ending , where are ya kid ???

[BigMikeinNJ]

wish my iMac wasn't down, very keen to show off the Eastman T146smd with Seth Lover 4wires I got used for $900.00


Backside shot of the YZ23

[ooglybong]

A Yunzhi could be an inexpensive Eastman I suppose. They are quite similar and cost 1/3 as much. Yunzhi allows you to specify everything. Scale length, nut width, any color, inlays, binding, port, acoustic/non-acoustic, et al. On any model. In this regard they are unique and exceed Eastman (or anyone else).

Heheh. I've almost pulled the trigger on a Yunzhi once already but ended up finding something else locally. GAS dissolved.

Price aside, the entire custom-build aspect of these guitars is probably the most exciting part, IMO, and (ha) it's probably only a matter of time before I do decide to get one. However, at this point, I certainly have enough archtops and getting a Yunzhi would just end up with me acquiring yet another great guitar that I don't really "need" (ha). But one day...

[xuoham]

It is clear that the more generic model one orders, the more chances are that it is a flawless guitar.
But i think i will go a more custom way.

Starting from a natural finish version of their generic 7 string , which looks pretty much like an Eastman AR810-7, i am considering:

make sure it is X-bracing
17" lower bout
3,5" or 4" if they can body depth
no f-holes but a round 10cm hole
simple side port
select woods (+100 usd)

I think a round hole on an archtop is pretty ugly but it has multiple advantages:
easy to put a plug hole for feedback, and easy access to glue transducers in the best spot.

aiming at the fullest possible acoustic sound, bass and sparkle

any thoughts ?

too far off ?

[BigMikeinNJ]

you might be asking too much of them.
look over all the pre-made models for sale on their website. Do they make an archtop with an oval sound hole ?? You may be adding a lot of things they may not have made, increasing risk to you. I like to gamble, but with less pressure on the builders. Good luck, keep us posted.

i have a friend who really likes the band Phish, and the guitar Trey uses, a Langeudoc, very nice but quite expensive. He did everything he could to obtain precise specs and photos of the guitar, he drafted really precise mechanical drawings and went back and forth with Ms Lora for ages before het gave them the go ahead. Considering it was really different than anything they ever made they did a truly great job copying it. It had some flaws, but it was no because Yunzhi made mistakes, it was more because his plans weren't quite complete. It Looked great, and once he figured out where his drawings were wrong he gave up. He sort of ran out of gas on the idea. Yunzhi and Ms Lora really went all out for him.

remember this story when you come up with what you ask them to do

[xuoham]

you might be asking too much of them.
look over all the pre-made models for sale on their website. Do they make an archtop with an oval sound hole ?? You may be adding a lot of things they may not have made, increasing risk to you. I like to gamble, but with less pressure on the builders. Good luck, keep us posted......
....remember this story when you come up with what you ask them to do

Thanks a lot for your help.
I understand.
I'm already in contact with Ms Lora, taking their generic 7 string as a base.
She already said ok for 3,5 " depth, i just asked how about 4".
They do have an oval soundhole guitar in their list so i asked it it's ok if the hole
is a standard 10cm round hole.
Otherwise it's gonna be pretty standard, natural finish, some simple inlays, oval side hole, which they do.

I have one question:

-I read somewhere in the forum (or the Ibanez one) that you used to have an Eastman with a K&K western.
Where were the transducer disks glued ? Really wondering ... How did the K&K sound ?



Would you guys go for a one piece neck or a five piece maple/ebony? I love the look of the five piece neck and i have a feeling it would be a bit stronger. But i read here and there that one piece neck is the best for sound.
Isn't the difference very, very subtle ?
Also, did anyone order and get a 7 strings from Yunzhi ?

Thanks for the precious help !

Will keep posted.

Meanwhile i keep on coming back to this, what a beauty

[spiral]

-I read somewhere in the forum (or the Ibanez one) that you used to have an Eastman with a K&K western.
Where were the transducer disks glued ? Really wondering ... How did the K&K sound ?

That's me with the oval hole Yunzhi and K&K pure archtop. It sounds like this:

[BigMikeinNJ]

I got a Yunzhi that was like an Eastman 910ce in their violin finish, I got it used on eBay with case for $600.00 shipped. It had a KK Pure a Western under the bridge. I believe each pickup is fastened to the inside of the top with double stick tape, making it easy to remove. I only tried it once and it was real nice.

id go with strength and stability, in other words 5puece neck, it's what they make most, must be doing something right

[ninjasan]

Hi everybody, I'm new here.

First of all, thank you for this thread and the huge info gathered here.

I'm also interrested in buying a Yunzhi achtop.


Did anybody of Yunzhi owners here played with the stock electronics,
What do you think about the stock Wilkinson pickup
that is factory mounted with their archtops ?

I understand that there is a lot of better pickups of course,
but I can't afford both one new guitar and electronics upgrade at the same time,
it will be a two step move,

so what about the stock pickup ?


thanks a lot,

Christophe

[spiral]

Thing is, I would love to have an affordable acoustic archtop, with satisfying volume for home use and a warm, woody tone (i.e., NOT overly bright; nor brittle or nasal-sounding). And ideally, with nice playability; and not larger than 16" (or at least a comfortable width-to-depth proportions, and a slim-C neck). It's difficult to judge, on the basis of YT videos and any given player's "touch," whether a particular guitar just might be "the best one."

That said, would you think any of the Eastmans warrant consideration? And do they tend to be of predictable and consistent quality?

An acoustic, non-cutaway archtop will deliver that. There are many options, Yunzhi being one of them. I've never tried one of their 16" non-cutaways so I can't comment. I have owned an Eastman and Loar 16" non-cut. If you want to have a old-timey big-band, or Maybelle Carter vibe, check out any of the Loars. They are more "classic Gibson" with the parallel bracing and 24 3/4" scale. They are really loud, and can bark. They sound very throaty ... a sound I love. If you want a more balanced, "sweeter" sound, check out the Eastman. They are x-braced, with a smaller C neck, 25" scale, have a more modern sound, but still are distinctively archtop.

You may have to let go of the slim-c neck though, unless you go custom. The neck is a good deal of where the sound and power come from on an archtop and is one of the reasons the Loar is so loud. This is a case where you have to play them. Can you buy and return? It's worth the investment. Each guitar sounds so different. It totally depends on what you want to play, how you play, and what sound you like. It could warrant its own thread.

If this is your first archtop, or you haven't played many, Eastman is absolutely worth considering especially if you can play one first. The Loars are great too.

Until this Yunzhi arrived, I naturally anticipated "refinement" issues...to my surprise, there's not a single blem on the guitar...during the build process, someone got after it, as it could easily be a 910, which we both know are very nice.

I applaud your open-mindedness to sample so many archtops!

That's good. I got an even better guitar this time around, but more things that need fixing. I think the major point is they are currently inconsistent (at least for me). I have some fretboard dings, a screwed up nut, finish blems, and I can see wood filler on the top (1 spot). None of it bothers me, I just need to address what I can. It helped that someone sorted out all the setup stuff on yours beforehand. I would love to hear clips of your guitar at some point.

If by open-mindeness you mean tone-quest-obsession then you should be groaning, not applauding. It's never ending.

Spirial: Did you get a Yunzhi archtop? Thought you had something totally different. What did you get?

I posted the vintage blonde oval hole cutaway earlier in this thread and I just received one of those D'Aquisto Solo-alikes (I believe we have PM'd about it). It sounds so so nice but needs some work that I can't do on my own (fretwork and nut). It's going to be top of my list when it gets sorted out and the wood settles in over the coming year.

It is clear that the more generic model one orders, the more chances are that it is a flawless guitar. But I think I will go a more custom way.

I couldn't agree more. From a previous Yunzhi discussion we learned (allegedly) that Yunzhi was formed by ex-Eastman employees so it makes sense that they offer essentially exact replicas of those guitars, and you could argue they are exactly the same. This is great if you want an Eastman type guitar in a unique color, scale, size, etc. Where it starts to be more of a gamble is with custom shapes, unique sound holes etc. They can create it but I don't think they have an R&D department run by musicians to prototype the new designs or assess what is / is not working Like Music Link and Eastman can. It's one thing to ask: "make it this shape" it is another to adjust the design and carving to that new parameter and maximize the acoustic sound. I would love to be wrong about that. So yes: if you are just buying a "standard" design, it is likely smooth sailing.

I think a round hole on an archtop is pretty ugly but it has multiple advantages:
easy to put a plug hole for feedback, and easy access to glue transducers in the best spot.
aiming at the fullest possible acoustic sound, bass and sparkle
any thoughts ?

Drawings, measurements, and drawings. If possible use Photoshop to mock it up visually so there is no question about what you want (I can even send you my PSD of the oval hole if that helps). The size of the hole affects how much bass you get and how balanced the sound is.

I asked K&K where to put the transducers on an oval hole and they told me near the outer edges of the bridge base. The Pure Archtop is no longer made though.

[BigMikeinNJ]

I've got the Wilkinson floater on my YZ23' have an a Ibanez floater for a GB10' I but he string spacing wasn't right. So I still have the Zwilkinson on it! plugged in its ok, but the weak link in the signal chain are the less than good volume and tone pots. Get yor dream guitar now and swap the electric later. Frankly I play unplugged most of the time anyway. How about you. Gotta remember these are carved top/back guitars and are plenty loud for practicing at home. Someone in one of these threads here said the Zwilkinson was pretty good but confirmed the volume/tone pots were less than great

[ninjasan]

Thank you Bigmike,

volume & tone pots swap will be affordable :-)

You're right, I practice at home,
fortunately, I live in my house with no direct neighbourhood and except my family none or few
people have to suffer of my attemps on classical guitar,
on folk dreadnought guitar, then to dreadnought cutaway plugged guitar,
then on altoguitar (11 string classical with theorbish bass strings very cathedral sounding)
then more recently on Gibson LP guitar
and now on a pure "soap-crate-wood, buzz sounding archtop"
not good but funny, so that I'd like to go for a better guitar

All the best from France

Christophe

PS: introduced myself here:
Are You New?

[xuoham]

That's me with the oval hole Yunzhi and K&K pure archtop. It sounds like this:

Ah yes, great, thank you !

Obviously no nasty resonance peaks. I guess the transducers were placed as K&K recommends.

I guess my Ibanez AF105, which is a great electric archtop with parallel bracing, gave me a wrong
impression about placing transducers near the bridge through the f-holes.
The guitar has way too thick a finish and is poor acoustically, no bass at all. Maple top didn't help either,
nasty 2kHz resonance. Also, near the bridge meant near the bracings, not soo good.

Very helpful !

[Spook410]

<snip>
... more things that need fixing. I think the major point is they are currently inconsistent (at least for me). I have some fretboard dings, a screwed up nut, finish blems, and I can see wood filler on the top (1 spot).

I posted the vintage blonde oval hole cutaway earlier in this thread and I just received one of those D'Aquisto Solo-alikes (I believe we have PM'd about it). It sounds so so nice but needs some work that I can't do on my own (fretwork and nut). It's going to be top of my list when it gets sorted out and the wood settles in over the coming year.

<snip>

Sorry for not keeping up better.. been busy around here with retiring and all and I think my brain re-booted. That's the one with the D'Aquisto looking f holes? Didn't register that you had it in hand for some reason.

I think the stuff to fix you cited is actually a pretty common list. Nut is often cut high and tight, finish blems (particularly around where the neck meets the body), and then there is that wood filler. Do you mean a cat eye looking piece of wood insert thingy? I have 2 of those on my 18". My tech (Bill Richardson.. many years at Gryphon) told me not to worry about it claiming it to be strong no impact sound. That's all fine and good and it doesn't bother me all that much, but it isn't something I was expecting. I'm adding that to my spec list (as in 'none of those').

Fortunately, I can deal with the nut myself though I've gotten lazy and have started having setups done. The finish blems, tool marks, I live with. I've avoided fretwork thus far. Did yours need leveling?

So, I get the impression you like the sound of your Solo-alike but not quite that of Eastman? You have good insights and would like to hear more of what you think.

[Spook410]

so what about the stock pickup ?

Hello and welcome.

They offer a floater, built in humbucker, and a P90. The floater, attached to the pickguard and wired, often improperly, to a crude vol/tone thumbwheel unit doesn't sound that great to me. I replaced it. It might be OK until you can swap it but you may have to do away with the thumbwheel (Schatten makes nice stuff).

The built in Humbucker is OK. Better than the floater and the vol/tone pots are better than the thumbwheels. Still, the pots do not compare to quality units (CTS or Alpha) and since I got used to an Armstrong 12 pole swapping the floater, now I have to have one for the built in.

Haven't tried the P90's.