-
Not much chat about the super 400 round here...
Any reason?
I'm 5ft 7inches....so I've always imagined it would dwarf me...I found a Martin d28 too big.
-
04-10-2015 05:26 PM
-
My old teacher played on his old Super 400 through an old Polytone. He picked both up in the 70's and I have never seen him play anything else.
-
I know someone who, for years, has been searching for one with the marbleized pickguard (if they haven't all rotted away by now). If anyone has such an axe for sale, please let me know.
-
I have a mid 90's Super 400CES.
It is...big...imagine that! I also have an L-5 Wes from the same era. The necks feel the same on both guitars, but the Super 400 does feel big in the lap (there is that "big" word again!). Tone wise, I do think the Super 400 has a bit more bass response and it a tiny bit fatter on the high E string. It is a very comfortable guitar played standing up. And it looks great. It is a comfortable guitar for me, but I am still about 6 feet tall in my late 50's (I used to be 6'1", but gravity is doing its thing).
I did have to buy an 18 inch gig bag for the Super 400 so I could use it on gigs. It barely fits in the gig bag because the headstock is so long (or should I say "big":-) ).
-
Ok . . so then it's settled!! The word of the day is . . . big. Except when referring to you. You used to be . . big. But, it's seems you've shrunk an inch.
Originally Posted by Stringswinger
I really didn't find the bass response in my 1970 Super 400CES to be fatter. But, it's quite possible we're talking about the same thing when you say more bass response and fatter high E string. I'm about your height and I too never felt that the Super 4 was an uncomfortable guitar to play. But, most of my playing is seated with the guitar being held in the classical position, between my two legs with the left leg elevated.
Now . . I've also given a Master 400 a test run. That was . . BIG!!
I've got my mind working on me a bit to get another Super 400CES. But, I've got five 18" arch tops currently. So, who knows??
-
Yeah, there are about 8,000 reasons why they don't get discussed. They are not exactly an every day purchase.
-
Well those dreads are much deeper than archtops, I think almost 5"(?) I find a 16" dread much more difficult to get my arm around than a 17" or 18" archtop. I'm 5-7 too, and mostly leg with a short trunk. Originally Posted by nickyboy
-
I love fatness in tone, even over "sweetness." So this makes me think this might be the guitar for me. Originally Posted by Patrick2
You chose a new mattress over a Super 400???
You really don't need to sit for an hour with each to determine where they sound different. The difference is depicted by the appearance of each, when viewed side by side. The Super 4 is a bigger looking guitar, because it's a bigger guitar. The Super 4 sounds bigger than the L5 . . because it's a bigger guitar.
I've owned a Super 400CES, a 1970. I've played quite a few others. The Super 400 looks, plays and sounds . . big! It's got a bigger voice than the L5CES. I didn't find it to be more boomy, more bass-y or any less evenly balanced than an L5CES. Only, bigger . . . and its "big-ness" is evenly spread out across all 6 strings. When you look at a Super 4 . . the first thought that comes to your mind (other than it's shear beauty) . . is . . "wow, that's a big guitar!!!". When you play it . . you'll have that same feelling.
Oh, and about the high-dollar mattress, it was the cure for some of the wife's ache's and pains due to aging and childbirth. She has never been the same since giving birth, God bless her, but she sleeps so much better now.
And, now I have more time to slip away and play the guitar
.
But I was stunned how these high-dollar mattresses can cost as much as a used Gibson Archtop in decent shop (around $5,000.00).
The descriptions you guys have of this guitar has got me lusting ever-so-more. The local guitar show is in 3 weeks so and I will go and drool some more. (If you here about a guy getting arrested running of with a Super 400 at the Dallas International Guitar Show....)
-
Here are some pictures of mine (It is a 1997)
-
Hey Bluedawg . . . yeah . . an acoustic with a floater. Preferably, a Dearmond RC 1100 . . .
Sorry for the repeated posting of this gem, but, here it is again . . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=LZX5zNiMcrg
-
That round hole super 400 looks really special (western sky, right?) . How did you like that ? How did it sound ?
-
My best friend father had one, he got it when he got out of the Marines after WW2. Always had it sitting on the couch, when I'd go over the house, which was practically every day, I would pick it up as soon as I'd walk in the door, wouldn't put it down till I left. He said it came with 2 floaters, he took off the pickguard, so I can't confirm this.
-
Danny's Gibsons never cease to amaze me. Originally Posted by Danny W.
-
I think a s400 is actually quite different from an L5. Its got a more acoustic and, so to say, 'effortless' tone than the L5. On the other hand it's less sweet, if that means anything. Of course I can only speak about the instruments I have, but there's a good sample.
Size is not an issue, since I am on the rather tall end - they seem very comfortable to me.
-
Tommy Emmanuel playing one:
Interesting, I only ever saw clips of him playing acoustics.
-
Haha, the arm on the Bigsby's as long as Emmanuel's!
-
Those Super 400s with P90s certainly do look purty! Even if I don't care for the Merle Travis length bigsby arm.
I do find the body width thickness a problem though personally.
-
Well thank you jasaco! It was mighty big of you to ask. Originally Posted by jasaco
Oh yes!! It's big! Not only is it big . . but it's got . . . "big-ness" . . in its big voice, as well as in its big price tag. Make no mistake . . it's definintly not a little guitar for little people whose main attributes are little-ness in physical stature as well as little-ness in their financial standing. It's a big boy guitar, for sure! Also, it was definitely a big deal when Gibson first introduced it in the '30s with the big price tag of $400. Definitely a big deal from a soon to be very big company know for its big successes as well as for its big blunders. Gibson was also instrumental in creating the aura of Kalamazoo as a . . big . . little town.
-
$400 in 1934 is $7,000 in 2015.
My guess is that, with a little effort, one can find a mint recent one, used, for $7,000
In that sense the price for buyers in the US hasn't changed in 80 years.
$400 was presumably the "list" price in '34.
I haven't checked the current "MSRP," but:
- Dave's has a new SB one advertised at $12,998
- The Zoo has new blonde one advertised at $15,299
- There's a mint (2013) blonde one on ebay with a BIN of #13,550
-
yeah, and it was introduced in '34 right in the middle of the depression.
the average yearly salary was around $1600 w/most folks making a lot less than that.
@ $400 it's amazing that many sold during those yrs.
-
always wondered why a super 400 ces costs so much more than an equivaent L5 ces ?
they must be similar build quality ?
-
a bigger guitar requires a bigger billet of spruce and maple which costs more.
there's more binding, more inlay work etc. that and tack on some more for the fact that it's the top of the line [Citation excluded] which adds more since it's a prestige piece.
-
Don't be confused by the narrative promoted by those in charge. Originally Posted by wintermoon
$1,600 in 1934 is the same as $28,000 in 2015.
Some things have not changed.
-
The Music Zoo sold a mint "used" 2013 Super 400CES ASB about a fortnight ago. Asking: $7995 with free shipping. It probably sold for a few hundreds lower, if the buyer paid cash. Originally Posted by Hammertone
I paid $7150 with packing and shipping for my used 2002 Super 400 Charlie Christian from a collector. Laurence Wexer asked $8750 for one of the same year, 2002. Steven Seagal's used chop-socky 2012 Super 400CES ASB sold for $6850 at Norm's Rare Guitars. Norm's had originally asked $7350 for it. I tried lowballing it and offered $6850, citing Steven Seagal's ownership as cause for a depressed market value. Norm's wouldn't budge. Well, I stopped following it and after about a few months, that was what it sold for on ebay: $6850.
$7000 is about right for a recent mint used one. And by recent, I would arbitrarily consider one from 1990 to present day. I recall reading in Guitar Player in 1989 or so that the Super 400CES would be discontinued by Gibson, never to be made again. That was in the dying throes of Norlin Gibson and Henry J. was just negotiating to buy the company. I was lusting after one of the "last" Super 400CESN. MSRP $10000.00. That was about 2 years' worth of college tuition fees for me back then. I was a state college pleb.
I was an avid collector of catalogues of things but strangely never ever wrote to Gibson for a catalogue.Last edited by Jabberwocky; 04-12-2015 at 02:18 PM.
-
I saw that Super 400 and wished I could have afforded it .... Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
I think that was another new Gibson listed as used .... so they could move it quickly for cash without breaking Gibson's rules against advertising below MAP ..
Just my guess, though
Reply With Quote
Repairing The Covering On a Vintage Guitar Case
Today, 05:21 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos