Archtop vs Semihollow/solid body

**steves3972** · 10-06-2014, 10:40 PM

I think everything is ok with the Bendetto, I think I just had a silly moment there. I think it actually plays really well. I think with the extra tension of the strings (which is normal with archtop guitars) and the lack of sustain compared with a solid bolid guitar I was expecting a bit much of the Benedetto. I played a gig with it the other day and loved it.
I'm just gonna shut up now and play my guitar!
Still gonna get a semi hollow of some kind though....

**Gitterbug** · 10-07-2014, 05:36 AM

Strange. Yours has a narrow gap between the fretboard/neck extension and the top from apx. the 18th fret onwards. Mine (s/n S1054) doesn't, the neck is glued all the way to the top. This difference might allow for a slight change in your neck angle, calling for a lower position of the bridge. My bridge has a space of just under 4 mm. between the lower and upper parts. Any comments out there?

**boatheelmusic** · 10-07-2014, 06:42 AM

Sounds like you really want a 175. And for good reason, IMO!

**m_a** · 10-07-2014, 08:43 AM

Figuring out the best way to hold the guitar is something worth spending time on IMO. I wonder if an archtop is inherently a less comfortable instrument? I'm very happy with both my semi-hollow and my archtop. The basic way I hold them is the same. Before I got the semi-hollow I could only "get comfortable" with the archtop using a classical guitar footrest (under the right foot). But then I found even the AM93 Ibanez, which is supposed to be a very easy guitar, felt uncomfortable (at least sitting), yet using a footrest was impossible due to the small body (I didn't want to play standing all the time). It all clicked viewing Morten Faerestrand's YT videos where he holds archtops and semihollows in basically the same way, i.e. supported by a fairly short strap and tilted (>> better projection, + excellent view of the neck). James Chirillo holds his archtop in the same way. I spent a couple of hours observing, testing and adjusting and then it was ok. I retired the footrest, too. Observe and test. I know I tend to complicate things when it comes to guitars, when in reality, on a - some would say - secondary but important level it's a physical activity just like any other. For instance if you play tennis the couple of hours you will spend learning about grips and how to hold a racquet is one of the best investments you can make for your game.

**West LA Jazz** · 10-14-2014, 05:32 PM

I had a luthier install one of those Schaller straps on my archtop and semi hollow. He turned the front of the strap (front end) facing the back of the guitar so when standing in front of the guitarist, you don't see any part of the rear part of the strap. Fits perfectly., even when sitting with the hollowbody. I always did it (hooking up the strap) the opposite way. You live you learn.

**Greentone** · 10-14-2014, 06:58 PM

I don't think there is anything wrong with your Benny. It is certainly true that archtops are--by design--not sustain-oriented guitars. Jazz/Bebop, etc., is a hit it/quit it kind of music. Play the note and move on. The Gibson ES-175 and ES-350 guitars were sort of the pinnacle of punchy/no sustain guitars in the 50s.

If you are interested in archtop-style guitars that have more of the geometry and at least some of the sound of semi-acoustic guitars, look for archtops with tune-o-matic bridges and maple or spruce blocks glued under the top. The Heritage H550 is such a guitar--big archtop with TOM and block. It has some of the brightness and sustain that a 335 has (_some_) yet it plays like a regular archtop.

Gibson ES-135 guitars are an inexpensive variation on the theme that gets the TOM going on an archtop.

**Archie** · 10-14-2014, 08:07 PM

Originally Posted by steves3972

i was looking at the bridge on the Benedetto and noticed that even though it's down as low as it can go it has a gap of about 2-3mm between the saddle/bridge and the bridge base created by the thumb wheels. So I took the bridge off of the guitar and removed the thumb wheels completely. This made no difference to the bridge height because the poles on the bridge base are too high/long. (see photos). If I can cut the poles height down and leave the thumb wheels off that would do the trick. Or drill the holes right through the bridge but then the poles would protrude out of the top. Then there is the fact that the action might be too low. This does not seem right. Why should I have to do this on a $6500 guitar?
I have also included photos of the end of the finger board/neck suspended over the top of the body. The gap between the top of the body and the neck is not consistent the all the way along, there is more of gap on the left side than on the right. No idea if it should be like this or not? (photos were taken with the bridge off, so that's why it appears that the string action is low). So does the guitar need a neck reset?

Attachment 14930 Attachment 14931 Attachment 14932 Attachment 14933

Its fine that you ask these questions. As a guitar collector I see them all the time, as I'm sure many others do.

I'm not entirely sure on the Benedetto range but if yours is made by bob, then the differing gaps under the fingerboard extension, is normal for his style of construction. If you watch his DVD box set definitely worth it), you will see him talking about why its important for him to be able to this. If however it was made by Fender, then it could just be sloppy work.

You want to know if your neck needs resting? Look down the neck, from the headstock end or look at the neck side on, does it still have an pitch to it? if not, your probably right, hit probably will, especially if you can't get the bridge low enough.
Guild have very shallow neck angles compared to say Gibson. Flat-tops have none at all. So if it is parallel with the body, thats not a major problem but it could lead to one and it should have some angle on it.