-
There's a later sunburst JS floating around with a factory-installed CC pickup.
I played it ten years ago or so in Toronto but could not buy it at the time.
It was a very nice guitar.
-
11-23-2015 01:50 AM
-
Cunamara, I think you have misread Tag101's post. He was not referring to a built in pickup. He was describing the floating neck of the LeGrand (which is typical of an archtop) as opposed to the Johnny Smith Neck that made contact with the top to its end (a particular design that Johnny Smith required on his signature guitars).
-
Originally Posted by Cunamara
Yes, I know that!
Its the neck I am talking about, not the pup. Necks on Johnny Smiths are built into the Spruce top, they do not float above the top like on an L5 or most arch/carvetops. Odd how many people do not notice this. The Legrands neck also floats above the top, unlike the Johnny Smiths. My Johnny Smith has the neck floating above the top, leaving the entire top free to vibrate. (Like an L5 or Legrand.) It was specially ordered like that, and the only one I have ever seen. I have been lucky enough to have owned several, and played and seen lots of them. I can post a pic to show what I mean if you like. If you look right behind the floating pup on a L5 or Legrand, you will see the neck does not touch the top, it floats over it. If you look at Johnny Smiths, you will see the neck is built right into the top and does not float above it. JS thought this would add sustain to the notes of those upper frets, while obviously giving away that section of the top for vibration. Side by side I do not hear any additional sustain up there, but I can clearly hear the floating neck adds acoustic volume, while the built in neck adds slightly more punch. When I bought mine,(My current one), Lark street music had another "normal" one, and I also had one of my own.(A blond) I traded mine in for the one with the floating neck because I really liked the tone. Still have it. (68-69 Sunburst)
-
This is correct, thanks! I did not see your post until after my long winded answer! Originally Posted by Stringswinger
-
I have heard that as well from a few different builders. Supposedly non figured woods can seem to move or breath more, or be less rigid. Maybe better for a top and back??? No idea if its true or not. Many guitars with zero or little figure do seem to sound REALLY good, so who knows. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
-
I've owned both. I own a Johnny Smith now. 1970 plain wood norlin era guitar. The best sounding guitar I've ever owned!
-
I am pretty sure that the Johnny Smith guitars from the Norlin era didn't have volutes. I think they escaped that Norlin design change as far as I know. Maybe some other experts on the forum can chime in and confirm if this is true. Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
Keith
-
[QUOTE=fumblefingers;586749]figure isn't supposed to be related to tone, they always say that.
any explanation why less figured would sound "better"?[/QUOTE]
I've always understood that figuration is a result of more "grain lines"...more grain lines will dissipate vibration more than an evenly grained piece of wood.
Carpenters and woodworkers always prefer clear, straight pieces of wood to work with. Standard 2 x 4's are anything but standard...some are warped...some have knots...I can remember going to the lumberyard with a 78 yr. old guy who built a porch extension for us....the guys at the lumber yd. thought he was a pain in the you know what when he would go through a pile of lumber and discard maybe a quarter of the pieces.
Conversely, highly figured woods, I believe, were kept for exterior cover sheetings (i.e. veneer). The finest examples of furniture woodworking (e.g. real Chippendale and Heppelwhite) used a lot of veneers...nice to look at, and not really structural.
For musical instruments, there may well be a trade-off in performance between figuration and functionality.
-
[QUOTE=goldenwave77;586824]
sounds reasonable, just don't know if it's true. of course we not talking about carpentry here. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
i remain highly skeptical of this claim (about sound). the finest guitars in the world have been using figured woods since the 1930s. and the finest violins and other stringed instruments? since the Renaissance.
https://www.google.com/search?q=stra...YWGFv7jzXrg%3D
-
Probably the answer is that the difference, if any, is negligible.
Still, tighter grain is supposed to be better for vibrating tops...and every time I make the drive from NY to Michigan, I look around and see newer growth trees, and very few, if any colonial-era trees around. (We still have a few older era trees around in the Hudson River town I live in....big, big trunks....these are protected and really rare.)
Some people think older wood is better....maybe...seems to me if it is dried properly, there should be little or no difference.
I think a Cremona or Strad or Giannini (or whoever made top-flight instruments in the old days) were luxury items, so a "lux" look, ie. figuration, helped the mojo factor for any potential purchaser. (I have a friend who knows a high-end violin dealer in Zurich---he told him that the actual sound and playing difference for older "name" instruments is hugely overrated, and that most of the market is driven by collectors, not players.)Last edited by goldenwave77; 11-27-2015 at 10:33 AM.
-
Shhh!! Dont tell the deaf collectors! I agree most (not all) Gibsons of the 70s were sub par, but the Johnny Smiths of that era ALL seemed to sound fantastic! (Less figured woods???) Originally Posted by skiboyny
-
Instruments are built for sound AND for beauty, so the preponderance of attractive woods in fine guitars is more for looks. In fact it is the rather plain spruce top of the acoustic guitar that really defines the sound. Back and sides are leveraged for the ornamentation woods with quilt, flame, or wildly grained rosewood. If looks mattered most AND sounded better, we'd be playing guitars with quilted maple TOPS... but we don't. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Classical and flamenco guitars have sound boards made of plain looking spruce and cedar. Flamenco blancas have cypress back and sides - a plain but lovely sounding wood.
In short, who the hell knows if there's a correlation... But I think the pretty woods are on the nice guitars because they are pretty, and anything else gleaned from them is just a happy extra.Last edited by rpguitar; 11-23-2015 at 05:38 PM.
-
As near as I can tell, the main thing--when we are talking about acoustic tone--is for the spruce top to have very close-grained (small as heck) annular rings towards the middle of the soundboard, fanning out to a wider pattern toward the edges. This is most true with classical guitar soundboards, but it is also true for archtops.
I have two archtops for which you'd have to squint to see the grain near the middle of the board. These guitars sound especially fine. Same thing with my two fully acoustic classical guitars. (The Ibanez electro classic has a less impressive board.)
The sides and back on my Heritage and my Unity are all about bling--really flamey maple. I don't know if plainer maple would be more resonant. I suspect, though, that most of the tone is coming from the action of the strings forcing the spruce top to resonate through the bridge.
The carved maple on my '38 L-50 is very plain, but the top is very fine-grained spruce at the middle. Had the maple not been plain it would have been used on a L-4 or L-7. The guitar sure sounds beautiful, though. Again, I suspect that this is largely a function of the top. The body is all-carved, however.
-
Has anyone found a good pickup that gave their Le Grand a little more life?
I'm getting good electric sounds out of my Le Grand now
at first I was a little disappointed , but after experimenting I found that if you get the pickup a little closer to the strings it sounds much better ....
for the longest time I had a little piece of felt under it to give it a boost, but a couple of years ago the techs at Rainbow in Tucson gave it a great all around set up
now it not only sounds great it plays like a dream
-
Originally Posted by Bluedawg
I put a DeArmond 1100 on mine. Used the little bar that screws into the neck to mount it. I knew it was never coming off. It was like a totally different guitar. Those BJBs are awful. Thin, brittle and bright. I sold the guitar with it still on, and thats my biggest regret.(Although it was a great guitar) I should have kept the DeArmond, but I do have another one. Those 1100s are coming on some of the new Guilds, so I think they may have re-issued them. No idea if they sound like the vintage ones though.
-
Originally Posted by Tag101
I put a DeArmond 1100 on mine. Used the little bar that screws into the neck to mount it. I knew it was never coming off. It was like a totally different guitar. Those BJBs are awful. Thin, brittle and bright. I sold the guitar with it still on, and thats my biggest regret.(Although it was a great guitar) I should have kept the DeArmond, but I do have another one. Those 1100s are coming on some of the new Guilds, so I think they may have re-issued them. No idea if they sound like the vintage ones though.
Is anyone building decent new replicas of the Dearmond 1100
I see some shiny new looking ones on ebay, but Archtop.com says they haven't been made in a while and recommends an Armstrong pickup
The Armstrong is tempting, too.
-
The new Guild Artist awards have them so they must have re issued them. I have a new Guild M 75, and the P 90s that came with it sound killer, and I am not usually a P 90 fan. Case in point, the new 1100s may sound great! I would shoot Guild or DeArmond an email and see if you can grab one. I would love to know how they sound as well. The stock JS pup is pretty cool, but I have always dug the 1100s a lot more. The one I have now is silver. If it were gold it would be on my JS. IMO, the 1100s are the best floating pups ever made. They just sound like wood.
-
The new 1100 is a great pickup and is comparable to the vintage version. Best of all is that one can be had for $130.
https://shop.guildguitars.com/produc...0-pickup-gold/
I have the new Artist Award and it is an incredible guitar, both plugged in and unplugged.Last edited by snoskier63; 11-26-2015 at 07:22 PM.
-
Never a volute on a Gibson Johnny Smith. Plenty of headstock breaks! I hate them so I'll take my chances...
Originally Posted by floatingpickup
-
I appreciate that info. I am going to grab one! I always loved the Artist awards. Great guitars! Originally Posted by snoskier63
-
That's what I thought. I have never seen a Johnny Smith with a volute. Originally Posted by skiboyny
Keith
-
Looks good ..... Originally Posted by snoskier63
Also looks like I'd have to drill or screw some holes in the guitar for that
-
You can't get one of the new ones since only a few were made, and all have been spoken for. It's easy to find an older version with or without an 1100. At $130 that is easy to replace. Originally Posted by Tag101
-
Originally Posted by Bluedawg
I've been using a commercial stock Kent Armstrong mini humbucker which sounds okay. I exchanged it because i wanted adjustable polepieces to reduce the volume of the low strings at the source and felt they the BJB sounded harsh. I also installed a tone control. If i'd find a pickup which i would trust to sound better than the Kent Armstrong, i certainly would replace once more. However i wouldn't like to drill holes into the neck.
-
Are you saying we can't get the new AA guitars or the new 1100 pickups? or both? Originally Posted by snoskier63
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions