-
Please see my previous post with the video. Do you refer to this type of comparison? I think that it is possible to differentiate the sound of a semi-hollow or solid body vs. the sound of a hollow body fairly easily. Or am I misreading your comment? Simply compare Gibson vs. Epi in the video. I believe based on my experience that it is not possible to replicate the sound of a hollow-body with a solid-body (without rolling down the tone control totally... a dull sound IMHO).
Originally Posted by medblues
-
10-09-2014 05:32 PM
-
My personal preference was the Gibson by far. I assume its the pickups. Originally Posted by JBGM
-
Same pickups on Epi and Gibson: Classic 57. Same pots. Comparable wiring. My favorite is the Epi in this case. But this is a matter of opinion. What is not an opinion is the fact that the same pickup type and comparable electronics produce different sounds. Originally Posted by tdearn
-
Awww... snapper doodle!!!! I changed pickups on the Epi, but I do not remember whether I did this video before or after the exchange. I will have access to that Epi in a month... I might repeat the experiment to be sure that I am not BS'ing about the pickups. Originally Posted by JBGM
-
I can't comment on those two models, but I will relate my personal experience going from a solid body to (2) hollowbodies.... Originally Posted by tdearn
My Gretsch, which is the Hot Rod model, has a laminate maple top. But I don't think the fact that it's laminate or maple matters much (more on this in a minute). My Epiphone Broadway has a laminate spruce top.
Plugged in, the sound different, but with identical pickups in them, they would sound closer. Still different.
Acoustically, the difference is night and day. The Grestch sound like a semi-hollow 335. The Broadway sound like a cross between a 335 and a flat top acoustic (it sounds more like an archtop, albeit an electric one, with mounted pickups.)
The REAL difference, the biggest thing that "matters" in making THESE TWO guitars sound so different? In my opinion, the bracing. The Grestch has trestle braces, and the Broadway is full hollow. HUGE acoustic difference. I'm not saying the maple vs spruce, or the 16" size vs 17" size, or the metal saddle and Bigsby vs the wood saddle and trapese tailpiece, aren't making a difference, they ARE. But the braces are making the biggest difference. I've heard Grestches (laminate maple tops, 16", Bigsby) w/o trestle bracing- some without even a tone post - just parallel braces- sound ALOT closer to my Broadway than to my trestle-braced Grestch.
But even that's not the point. Several people here have said you have to take the WHOLE GUITAR AS ONE. You can't isolate out things such as "solid vs laminate" or "spruce vs maple", because "all other things being equal".... never are. All other things are never equal. I was told this when I first came here, and had to beaten about the head with it, and I still didn't listen. Then I bought some, and played some other, guitars. Then I realized how true it is.
If you can't actually play the 2 models, if you can find any video demos, that will be the best you have to work with. Sometimes it's all we got to work with, especially in this world of the big-box mailorder catalogs putting small stores out of business, and Guitar Centers only carrying crap.
Given a CHOICE, I'd never again buy a guitar I couldn't play in person... especially an archtop or flat top.... but I know that's not reality. In reality, you try to play them, at least listen to them online, take a chance, and return or sell it if it's not your thing. Fortunately, you will be learning more about all this nonsense in the process.
Good luck!
-
I have not done any of the experiments myself and I have not seen any out there that is already done. Having recorded a comparison and having tried several guitars and pickups, you are way ahead of me. Originally Posted by JBGM
I listened to your recording, however, if someone said they were the all recorded from the same guitar and they just twiddled with the knobs on the guitar and/or amp, I would have believed them. Even you seem to agree that differences will diminish by rolling the tone down (which should not change sustain characteristics for instance).
I am not arguing that there are no differences. I am questioning the magnitude and the cost/benefit ratio of the differences. If spending $XXX and X hours on a certain feature will create a certain difference in tone but someone can get 90% of that by adjusting pickup height or tone/volume/gain on the guitar and/or amp circuit or by changing strings or picks, I would rather do one or a combination of the easy/cheap stuff and get to play more.
-
@medblues - +1. I had a similar thought listening to the examples. I can plug in my Eastman carved 905-7, my Peerless carved Imperial, my laminated Samick Greg Bennet JZ3 or my Epi Tele reissue (forgot what they called it) with a Jazzmaster neck and Jazzmaster pickup in the neck position (all with TI Jazz Flats, except for a wound 7th on the Eastman) and I feel confident I can get this range of tone by doing some fiddling at the amp. But maybe I am deluding myself.
I am not taking anything away from the original poster, I'm just saying that in my opinion, there just isn't a whole lot of difference in the sound I was hearing that a solid state amp couldn't make up for in settings. Of course, this is just my opinion, but I also have old ears, maybe I'm missing something.
-
I agree, if we start another thread and ask if one can generate a very wide variety of electric guitar sounds with a single guitar (solid or hollow bodied) by altering its strings, picks, pickups, pickup combinations and blends, pickup heights, string pick location, different amps/cabs, adjustments of the guitar's and amps' volume tone controls, people would not even bother to reply because obviously it can be done. Originally Posted by ah.clem
If we recorded these diverse sounds for example eight of them (of the same guitar) and added a few clips of different guitars (let's say two), how many people can identify correctly much more than by random guessing ? If only a few people could do that, that would indicate electronics can compensate for most of the change that can be achieved by body style or tonewood.
If we did acoustic recordings instead, the test results would be different, I think that's what people mean when they call certain tones 3D or organic. They feel the complexity introduced by multiple sources of vibration hitting the microphones. That's also why I think I like live performances better than recordings and acoustic live performances better than plugged in live performances.
-
As one who "magically" can play with little (if any unless wanted feedback) from a solid wood 18" archtop directly in front of a 100 plus watt amp, my opinion is useless in this discussion. I'd advise the original poster to try a few different archtops in his price range, pick one and make it work. Twist a few knobs...it will not harm you.
-
Then again ... maybe it takes a high quality amp or a high quality pickup to bring out the differences in how the wood affects the vibrations of the strings Originally Posted by medblues
That is one of the questions I have with one of the earlier papers mentioned ... perhaps some pickups will pickup the differences between ash or alder and other pickups won't ....
-
Good point, but then again...how much time and money are you willing to spend to try to figure it out with precise well-controlled experiments ? It is a lot easier to buy an ash tele and and an alder tele, play the heck out of them and call it a day :-) Originally Posted by Bluedawg
Then again ... maybe it takes a high quality amp or a high quality pickup to bring out the differences in how the wood affects the vibrations of the strings
That is one of the questions I have with one of the earlier papers mentioned ... perhaps some pickups will pickup the differences between ash or alder and other pickups won't ....
-
Originally Posted by medblues
I disagree. The three guitars sound very different, and even though I have tried methodically to recreate the sound of The Epi JP and Gibson 175 with a Gibson 335, a Les Paul, a Steinberger, a Gretsch, and an Epi Lu, I have never been able to come close. Perhaps others can. If you know some setting that would allow me to sound like I have a 175, PLEASE, post it... It would save me a few thousand. These experiments are something that is very worthwhile doing, so I invite you to try it and record yourself. I would be very interested in hearing proof of your guess.
The whole point of these video comparisons was to create an objective baseline. I have also done the spectral analysis and have hard proof of the differences.
-
Those guitars do sound different. So we agree on that. Originally Posted by JBGM
If you hear the recording of ten different guitars and only one is a 175, are you confident you can pick it out of the ten ? If you can do that a few times in a row consistently then you have hard proof. If you can't pick out the 175, you saved yourself a few thousand dollars, and I don't have to do a spectral analysis of a 175 to try to reverse engineer it using a cheap Squier Tele with thick flatwound strings, old microphonic PAF and a piezo blend-in :-)
-
I've got four teles! Love em for country. I tried them for jazz and have done jazz gigs with them but for me it wasn't the jazz sound I was looking for. Originally Posted by medblues
-
Originally Posted by medblues
Therein lies the rub ....
Who has the time and money to really document this ....
With that kind of money ... what dreams may come ..
It would be better spent looking for Bigfoot ... or finding a cure for cancer ... or buying a collection of archtops to enjoy
-
Try to "mod" one of them for jazz and see what happens. There are a few threads here that describe jazzifying a tele. And a few others saying just change the string and roll down the tone on the stock neck pickup. Originally Posted by tdearn
-
Well that has answered your own question. Originally Posted by medblues
You don't spend loads of time and money, you just buy an archtop that characteristically will work the way you know it should.
I have already argued against most of the points you've raised so I will just cut and past some of my previous comments.
"Someone in a blind-fold test, listening to a tele with a rosewood fb, will probably be unable to confirm through listening, whether the fretboard is indeed rosewood or maple. This is because he or she would not know if the body is Alder or Ash, what the pick-ups are and what the pick-up configuration is, what bridge material is used etc..
However, the player knows there is a difference in tone because they know that, if he/she had the exact same guitar, playing through the exact same amp, on the exact same settings but with any of the above variations mentioned, the guitar will sound and perform differently.
There is a point at high volumes, when the the of guitar becomes less and less important and jazz can often be played at those volumes but that doesn't mean you just buy a plank of wood, stating that for the other 75% when your not gigging "Who gives a sh*t what my guar sounds like"
"Most people go into a room to play everyday either alone or with a band, your rehearsal/practice room, or you do gigs in the same place regularly. Thats one set of parameters. You like a certain size of guitar because you feel most comfortable and effective playing it etc thats another set.
The materials and design of the guitar are the variables you can tweak, to maximise your tone and the guitars practicality."
To comment directly on your opinion, this idea that you can't tell the difference in a blindfolded test is frankly pointless. As you've mentioned already, thou could change the pick type, muting, tone etc. Well sure you can but what if you liked to play normally? lol
-
And you turn the tone down because ... ? because a solid body doesn't sound like a hollowbody Originally Posted by medblues
-
[quote name="medblues" post=466548]Good point, but then again...how much time and money are you willing to spend to try to figure it out with precise well-controlled experiments ? It is a lot easier to buy an ash tele and and an alder tele, play the heck out of them and call it a day :-)[/QUOTE]<br />
<br />
Well that has answered your own question.<br />
<br />
You don't spend loads of time and money, you just buy an archtop that characteristically will work the way you know it should. <br />
<br />
I have already argued against most of the points you've raised so I will just cut and past some of my previous comments.<br />
<br />
"Someone in a blind-fold test, listening to a tele with a rosewood fb, will probably be unable to confirm through listening, whether the fretboard is indeed rosewood or maple. This is because he or she would not know if the body is Alder or Ash, what the pick-ups are and what the pick-up configuration is, what bridge material is used etc.. <br />
<br />
However, the player knows there is a difference in tone because they know that, if he/she had the exact same guitar, playing through the exact same amp, on the exact same settings but with any of the above variations mentioned, the guitar will sound and perform differently. <br />
<br />
There is a point at high volumes, when the the of guitar becomes less and less important and jazz can often be played at those volumes but that doesn't mean you just buy a plank of wood, stating that for the other 75% when your not gigging "Who gives a sh*t what my guar sounds like"<br />
<br />
"Most people go into a room to play everyday either alone or with a band, your rehearsal/practice room, or you do gigs in the same place regularly. Thats one set of parameters. You like a certain size of guitar because you feel most comfortable and effective playing it etc thats another set.<br />
The materials and design of the guitar are the variables you can tweak, to maximise your tone and the guitars practicality."<br />
<br />
To comment directly on your opinion, this idea that you can't tell the difference in a blindfolded test is frankly pointless. As you've mentioned already, thou could change the pick type, muting, tone etc. Well sure you can but what if you liked to play normally? lol<br/>
Apologize for not being clear. First, most of my comments involve magnetic pickup output as heard by the nonplaying listener. These pickups are very limited and as a result players use other transduction systems. Magnetic pickups make instruments sound more alike because of their limitations. If I wanted listeners to really appreciate the tonal richness of my hollow bodied archtop, I would not use a magnetic pickup.
Second question came as an afterthought: modifying a cheap solid body to emulate a 175 whose acoustic qualities are secondary to most players but they are expensive regardless. I thought blending a piezo signal into a magnetic could help with that.
I have four primarily acoustic guitars and they sound different. I think someone like Tommy Tedesco can make it hard for me to discriminate my cedar top steel string from the spruce top one. In normal playing they would be different that is why I keep them. However even Tedesco can't make me confuse my archtop with my classical if he played them behind a screen.
I have about ten primarily electric guitars and anybody can fool me into thinking one is the other without difficulty.
Finally, do you believe that human auditory perception is inferior to visual perception (low res, small dynamic range, small freq spectrum) ? If so, would it not lead to exaggerated or erroneous claims ? What do you believe are overblown claims out there ?
Cheers.
-
<br /> Originally Posted by medblues
<br />
Well that has answered your own question.<br />
<br />
You don't spend loads of time and money, you just buy an archtop that characteristically will work the way you know it should. <br />
<br />
I have already argued against most of the points you've raised so I will just cut and past some of my previous comments.<br />
<br />
"Someone in a blind-fold test, listening to a tele with a rosewood fb, will probably be unable to confirm through listening, whether the fretboard is indeed rosewood or maple. This is because he or she would not know if the body is Alder or Ash, what the pick-ups are and what the pick-up configuration is, what bridge material is used etc.. <br />
<br />
However, the player knows there is a difference in tone because they know that, if he/she had the exact same guitar, playing through the exact same amp, on the exact same settings but with any of the above variations mentioned, the guitar will sound and perform differently. <br />
<br />
There is a point at high volumes, when the the of guitar becomes less and less important and jazz can often be played at those volumes but that doesn't mean you just buy a plank of wood, stating that for the other 75% when your not gigging "Who gives a sh*t what my guar sounds like"<br />
<br />
"Most people go into a room to play everyday either alone or with a band, your rehearsal/practice room, or you do gigs in the same place regularly. Thats one set of parameters. You like a certain size of guitar because you feel most comfortable and effective playing it etc thats another set.<br />
The materials and design of the guitar are the variables you can tweak, to maximise your tone and the guitars practicality."<br />
<br />
To comment directly on your opinion, this idea that you can't tell the difference in a blindfolded test is frankly pointless. As you've mentioned already, thou could change the pick type, muting, tone etc. Well sure you can but what if you liked to play normally? lol<br/>
Apologize for not being clear. First, most of my comments involve magnetic pickup output as heard by the nonplaying listener. These pickups are very limited and as a result players use other transduction systems. Magnetic pickups make instruments sound more alike because of their limitations. If I wanted listeners to really appreciate the tonal richness of my hollow bodied archtop, I would not use a magnetic pickup.
Second question came as an afterthought: modifying a cheap solid body to emulate a 175 whose acoustic qualities are secondary to most players but they are expensive regardless. I thought blending a piezo signal into a magnetic could help with that.
I have four primarily acoustic guitars and they sound different. I think someone like Tommy Tedesco can make it hard for me to discriminate my cedar top steel string from the spruce top one. In normal playing they would be different that is why I keep them. However even Tedesco can't make me confuse my archtop with my classical if he played them behind a screen.
I have about ten primarily electric guitars and anybody can fool me into thinking one is the other without difficulty.
Finally, do you believe that human auditory perception is inferior to visual perception (low res, small dynamic range, small freq spectrum) ? If so, would it not lead to exaggerated or erroneous claims ? What do you believe are overblown claims out there ?
Cheers.[/QUOTE]
I think its fair to say that observing can confuse hearing but if you agree with that, you must also agree that small changes in sound, cannot be made by changing a guitars parts.
I think they do so I cannot agree with that statement. There is a line of course that can be crossed were it makes no difference, so I can only go back to the idea that, if players in general are telling you they can hear a difference, then there must be one. They are the ones that know how their guitar responds and would sound with said parts changed.
It doesn't matter if the listener can't hear the difference, it matters that the player can. Its like the tree falling and no one hearing it, does it make a sound. In this case the people outside the woods, say NO but the trees that feel said YES :-)
I regards to pick-ups etc I don't know. You can get different sounds from different pups so again its one of those pointless debates. If you can get them all to sound the same, thats great but can you get them all to sound like each other, when they are being used as a player would?
I doubt it and thats why people like different guitars with different woods, construction etc..
-
No it doesn't, I keep telling they sound different but I cannot get it across, what am I doing wrong ? Let me try again: a solid body and a hollowbody sound different both acoustically and and as heard from an amplified magnetic pickup. Originally Posted by Bluedawg
The difference is much larger between acoustic sounds of the two types of guitars. The difference between the amplified electric sound is less. If you are the player and you listen to yourself with the electric volume down, you hear both the acoustic and electric and the feel the tactile vibrations of the guitar and the sensation of the strings which makes the "experience" very different obviously. However, if someone else is hearing only your amp and not the other sensory input, for that person the difference will be subtle (still not vanished though I believe).
-
@Archtop Heaven, your last post was hard for me to understand, I don't think we are discussing epistemology here. If you think it is a pointless debate and I have a pointless opinion(s), we don't need to continue.
Regards.
-
Keeping the spirit of the original question in this thread, I think it is very difficult to decide objectively between a maple top or a spruce top in a hollow body guitar with magnetic pickups. I would love to do that comparative test, but I do not have access to a laminate maple top. If someone wants that comparison done in a controlled environment as the test in the video I posted earlier, with a guitar having a classic 57 pickup, let me know. We can split round trip shipping costs. What is more controversial is the difference between a solid body and hollow body (there is a huge difference IMHO), but that departs from the original spirit of this thread. Time to start a new one? (just for indexation purposes)
Yes... with the following context: I think any mildly experienced jazz guitar player can differentiate solid body from hollow body, provided that frequencies are not filtered. That is, if you roll down the tone control, then high frequencies are damped or eliminated (and depending on the capacitors, the mid frequencies can increase; see this link). For an example of how can you make a solid body and a hollow body sound very similar by filtering frequencies, see: Originally Posted by medblues
Compare 1:40 vs. 2:00. Now, if you compare two hollow body guitars and try to differentiate them without filtering, that is much harder, but still you can tell when instruments are different (irrespective of price: some inexpensive guitars sound great, some expensive guitars sound plain).
Been there done that, repeatedly. Yes it is possible to identify "guitar personalities". I record in the same way all guitars I try, and have a collection of sounds under the same settings. In the video I posted earlier (post#100), you can differentiate the three sounds very clearly. In a blind tests, you would certainly tell these three guitars apart, and experienced players will identify the sonic signature of the semi-hollow. Originally Posted by medblues
If you think you can make me believe in a blind test that a Squier is a high quality hollow body, I'll buy it from you, no questions asked. I'll sell my Les Paul and give you $2,500. You can pocket $2,000 or more of profit. I'm serious.
BTW, I also have a Les Paul Traditional with a GK-3 hexaphonic pickup, and a Roland GR-55 synth, which allows me to emulate a Gibson L-5. It comes close, but lacks that final humpf. In a live gig, that final humpf is irrelevant, and the sound is very credible. But live gigs are only a small part of the time I spend playing, and I am at a point in life in which almost there is not close enough.
-
True but not significant or relevant. Acoustic sound and an amplified signal out of a magnetic pickup are essentially different. The point you are trying to make, I think, is that the difference coming out of an amp between solid bodies and hollow bodies is small, and it is hard to tell them apart... am I reading you correctly? Originally Posted by medblues
But that statement is just not true in my experience. If you filter frequencies, as in post #125, then yes, it is hard to tell the difference. I never play with the tone totally down. I like it in average around 3.5 out of 10 (different guitars require slightly different settings), and the difference in sound between my Les Paul and my Epi JP is gigantic. Perhaps for the style of music you play that difference is not significant; I know many players like to roll down tone totally... and that is just OK; just a matter of taste.Last edited by JBGM; 10-10-2014 at 11:42 AM. Reason: typo
-
Compare 1:40 vs. 2:00. Now, if you compare two hollow body guitars and try to differentiate them without filtering, that is much harder, but still you can tell when instruments are different (irrespective of price: some inexpensive guitars sound great, some expensive guitars sound plain).
I think the problem with this comparison is that the 175's sound isn't very good (no offense), just sounds like an electric guitar. And we all know how a 175 can sound for jazz. But as always, there are too many variables involved.
Reply With Quote
Ibanez AG75
Today, 03:52 PM in For Sale