thunk and Gibson Archtop Guitars

**jzucker** · 07-23-2015, 09:57 PM

Thunk is the middy, percussive, midrange quack or bark as characterized by Joe Pass' Joy Spring recording.

For the longest time, I thought that thunk required a maple plywood top. All 3 of my gibson archtops have a huge amount of thunk. The '96 L5 is solid spruce, the '63 Barney Kessel is spruce ply and of course the '89 175 is maple ply. Additionally, all 3 guitars have different thickness tops. The L5 and 175 have very stout and thick tops, the barney kessel's is a bit thinner. Yet all 3 guitars get that thunky Joy Spring sound although the L5 imparts a velvety top end (ala Wes) which is not present on the other 2 guitars.

This has nothing to do with pickups. You can hear it in the acoustic signature of the instruments. What I have now concluded, is that it has more to do with the way gibson carves the tops, arches the instruments and braces the instruments. My heritage eagle sounds great but has *NO* thunk. My X-500 sounds great but has no thunk.

Gibson has a formula and their archtops have this quality to them. I have played benedettos, triggs, eastmans, Parkers, buscarinos, holsts, painters, and *NONE* of them have that thunk to them. They may have many other attributes that are sweet but none of them has that gibson quality to them and surprisingly, *NONE* of them have "the thunk".

The heritage H550 does and probably some of their other plywood guitars do there is something about the way gibson makes their archtops that give them this unique quality.

I'm going to do a demo video in the future demonstrating this and I think it'll be more clear what I'm talking about then....

**vinnyv1k** · 07-23-2015, 10:01 PM

I believe that you are 100% correct Jack.

**jasaco** · 07-23-2015, 10:10 PM

Now you got me thinkin' about thunk...

**Stringswinger** · 07-23-2015, 10:15 PM

Hard to beat an electric Gibson archtop for great jazz sound.....

**xuoham** · 07-23-2015, 11:27 PM

Very interesting, thank you for taking the time and energy to share all those experiences, this is precious.

**kenbennett** · 07-23-2015, 11:59 PM

Having built only one archtop to date (which happened to turn out pretty thunky), I can't say with any statistical certainty. But, intuitively, I think thunk is possibly attributable more to bracing than anything else. (Hell, it could be neck stiffness, weight of the headstock, even the thickness of the sides, who knows.)

Jack, have you noticed whether parallel or X bracing has more thunk than the other?

**drbhrb** · 07-23-2015, 11:59 PM

Sounds more like amp, eq, and recording technique to me. I've never heard a guitar sound like that live.

**Bluedawg** · 07-24-2015, 12:02 AM

Get thee down and be thou thunky!

**entresz** · 07-24-2015, 01:41 AM

My Gretsch Synchromatic G400 with a floating CC pickup made by Pete Biltoft has loads of thunk, only when it has flatwounds on it though.

**vinlander** · 07-24-2015, 05:58 AM

Gotta love the "Thunk", can't wait your demo

**pingu** · 07-24-2015, 07:56 AM

ok thats interesting , i thought thunk was
solely a laminate thing ....

**Woody Sound** · 07-24-2015, 08:26 AM

This surprises me about Heritage, because I always thought they were supposed to be carrying on the Gibson way. Maybe Patrick can chime in.

**jzucker** · 07-24-2015, 09:01 AM

Originally Posted by Woody Sound

This surprises me about Heritage, because I always thought they supposed to be carrying on on the Gibson way. Maybe Patrick can chime in.

IMO, they are carrying on the gibson way but their guitars seem to have the feel of a carved '50s gibson archtop. At least my eagle does.

This video by jeff matz demonstrates some thunk out of a 575. Not as much as my gibsons but it's there.

**ecj** · 07-24-2015, 09:16 AM

I've always thought that "thunk" was sort of on the same continuum as the sound of an upright bass but with higher pitches. So, heavy flat wounds are a must.

I agree that my heritage never had it. I've also found that certain amps that have too much "sparkle" or treble response kill your thunk.

I feel like a lighter thickness pick is important to thunk, too. Maybe rest strokes are part of the formula. Something about how it snaps over the strings.

Benson gets great "thunk" here on a non-Gibson guitar (I guess looking at it, it's a copy though), imo:

Do you think that sound is in the ballpark, Jack? Maybe you're listening for a different sound than me.

**ESCC** · 07-24-2015, 11:07 AM

I love thunk, to me you feel thunk as much as you hear thunk.

I have a 1979 ES175CC that has wonderful thunk, however I do think that thunk is a bit more easily achieved with a humbucker than a single coil.

I also have an Eastman AR910CE, I purchased this guitar for it's acoustic properties and other differences from the 175. I string it with flats, either 12 s or 13s, with the latter and the appropriate eq settings it achieves a modest degree of thunk, not to be compared to a plywood Gibson, but I do feel thunky at times playing it.

**Archie** · 07-24-2015, 11:22 AM

Im not sure I know what 'thunk' is. To me its the sound associated with a cheap laminate Archtop. It can appear in many jazz recordings but I wouldn't label it a quintessential part of Jazz tone.

I also think too much thunk makes for a darker muddy tone, hence why a realty thunk es-175 with that short scale would be too flay for my taste. I also think the recordings with too much 'thunk' dont sound very good.

I like thunk but I also like Japanese guitars that dont have thunk, they have more clarity. A combination of the two is good. My X700 has quite a bit of thunk mind you.

(that Guitar Benson plays will sound kinda thunk, it has a laminate spruce top)

**jads57** · 07-24-2015, 11:32 AM

On carved tops I wonder if it has to do w/ Gibson carving their tops thicker than others. Also I've noticed aside from Mark Campellone most other boutique makers guitars are extremely light in weight compared to Gibsons.

**Max405** · 07-24-2015, 11:35 AM

I think you get major thunk even you put flatwound 13's on a Les Paul.
And the sustain you get makes it better for us softer touch players. When I am playing with a band or just playing along with backing tracks I take my Lester on occasion because it sounds great and is SO MUCH easier to stay above the band levels.

**vinlander** · 07-24-2015, 11:39 AM

I never heard a cheap laminate guitar that has any thunk...well according to my perception of thunk.
I don't hear much thunk in the Benson video (his guitar is not cheap however just not thunking for me)
I do in that one however

**Patrick2** · 07-24-2015, 11:49 AM

Some responses here to Zuck, kenbennett and woodysound;

Jack; I believe that you're correct in your assessment of Heritage's arch top design and build. Heritage clearly has a greater focus on capturing the acoustic qualities of their arch tops, including those with inset pups. They do this by taking more mass out of the top carve than Gibson does . . as well as keeping their bracing as none restrictive as possible, without sacrificing support to the top. With Gibson, focus is different, in that they are more interested in having and electric arch top sound more like an electric arch top, than an acoustic arch top. My 1994 GE has parallel bracing and the top is slightly thicker than Heritage normally carves their tops. It has more thunk than any of my other Heritage arch tops . . and more than almost all others that I've played to date . . which is quite a few. I'm not sure why the top on this guitar is thicker. I certainly didn't request it to be. I didn't request the parallel bracing either. Heck, in 1994, I didn't even know the difference between X and parallel. But, to this day, it remains my favorite Heritage guitar . . . and share its place as my number 1 only with my 1994 L5CES.

kenbennet; I agree that the bracing has much to do with it. Most especially on the L5, which has very unique bracing. I've commented on that in the past. But, it's also the thickness of the top carve (or pressed laminate) that helps to provide the thunk.

woody; Heritage is indeed carryiong on the with the Gibson tradition. As Jim Deurloo like to say . . It's their "Heritage". But, to Jack's point . . they have chosen to focus more on the heritage of Gibson's pre 1970 history and design. They have implemented their own specific refinements, which they consider improvements over what Gibso did then and does today. But, with both key principals, Marv and Jim being non guitar playing builders . . many of their design changes were more theoretical and based upon what they learned from the masters who trained them . . . than it is based upon their own observations form playing their own guitars extensively. Builders like D'Aquisto, Benedetto . . etc . . .were/are competent players. Jimmy could have, and did sit down with one of his guitars, play it for 30 minutes and determine what if anything he'd like to do differently and better. Same with Benedetto. There's no one at Heritage who can do that. There are some players there. But, none are what we'd consider jazzers, whose input could affect change. That's why they relied so heavily upon Aaron Cowles when he was alive, to further refine the tops and backs of guitars like their Johnny Smith and customer spec'd tuned tops and backs on GEs and SEs. Heritage arch tops are as different as they are similar . . . if that makes any sense at all.

**rwmol** · 07-24-2015, 11:57 AM

IMHO no one played "thunk" like Warren Nunes. Here's an extreme example: I'll Find A Better Way
Playing I'll Find A Better Way by Warren Nunes - picosong

destinytot · 07-24-2015, 12:15 PM

Thunk-a-thon...

**barrymclark** · 07-24-2015, 12:28 PM

I totally agree with the Heritage sound. It is VERY acoustic. Even my 575 is very acoustic sounding. Some of that thunk... but what stands out is that acoustic sound to me.

**pingu** · 07-24-2015, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by ecj

I've always thought that "thunk" was sort of on the same continuum as the sound of an upright bass but with higher pitches. So, heavy flat wounds are a must..

yes thats the thunk i'm after ....
like a stand up bass thunks

the low fz thump on the begining of the notes
(this happens on the plain strings too)

like a kick-drum is playing along with you

i associate it with archtops with
thicker acoutically deader tops ...
(thinner livelier tops don't seem to thunk
as much)
and fatter strings ... absolutely yes

**Woody Sound** · 07-24-2015, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Patrick2

But, with both key principals, Marv and Jim being non guitar playing builders . . many of their design changes were more theoretical and based upon what they learned from the masters who trained them . . . than it is based upon their own observations form playing their own guitars extensively. Builders like D'Aquisto, Benedetto . . etc . . .were/are competent players. Jimmy could have, and did sit down with one of his guitars, play it for 30 minutes and determine what if anything he'd like to do differently and better. Same with Benedetto. There's no one at Heritage who can do that. There are some players there. But, none are what we'd consider jazzers, whose input could affect change. That's why they relied so heavily upon Aaron Cowles when he was alive, to further refine the tops and backs of guitars like their Johnny Smith and customer spec'd tuned tops and backs on GEs and SEs. Heritage arch tops are as different as they are similar . . . if that makes any sense at all.

Thanks. Who'da thunk it.