my thoughts on the popular 16x2.5" body size

[vinlander]

I wonder if the depth (2.5, 2.75, 3, 3.5) or the body size (15,16,17...) have more influence on the tone and comfort also.
I find the 2.9 deep Tal very comfortable to play at 17 inches, I don't need to move forward my shoulder that much.
The tone is also superb despite the body being a bit thinner.

[jzucker]

I wonder if the depth (2.5, 2.75, 3, 3.5) or the body size (15,16,17...) have more influence on the tone and comfort also.
I find the 2.9 deep Tal very comfortable to play at 17 inches, I don't need to move forward my shoulder that much.
The tone is also superb despite the body being a bit thinner.

I'm thinking it may be overall volume of air .

[jzucker]

Isn't the function of a pickup to pick up the magnetic field of a vibrating string and create current? If this is a pickup's sole objective, how does the dimensions of the body affect the tone?

Or, is what I described not the sole function of a pickup?

Of course, if a guitar is amplified using a mic, it's a whole different story.

no, if this were true, we'd have a 335 and a strat. There would be no difference or need for anything else.

[kkfan]

My profane understanding is that the body construction, depth, wood density and variety will affect the way the string vibrate; it is that vibration affecting the magnetic field (pickup) that is being amplified not the wood sound.

Thanks for that!

So what you're saying is that there's a "feedback" on the strings that in turn gets picked up by the pickup?

That is, when a string is "plucked," the vibrations are transferred via the bridge to the body. Here, the body construction, depth, wood density, etc., would affect the way the sound board vibrate creating the acoustic sound of the guitar. The bridge, in turn, transfers those sound board vibrations back on to the strings?

Is that roughly what happens?

[neatomic]

check this vid about archtop body resonance..very interesting

incidentally, the luthier- grez- has just joined this forum

cheers

[kkfan]

check this vid about archtop body resonance..very interesting

incidentally, the luthier- grez- has just joined this forum

cheers

Nice video. Thanks for sharing.

[mad dog]

Very interesting discussion. Seems I'm starting out in this archtop size category. First with a 50s Silvertone 1427 (ES-175 size generally, but a slightly shallower body, 25" scale), just lately with a Heritage H575 custom. They certainly are agreeing with me ergonomically. Tonally too, in very different ways.

I hope to try a thinline hollowbody, an old ES-330 or Heritage H525. And an ES-175 too. Thinking that the best way to figure out what works best for me is just to keep trying stuff. I know a 330 would work. Haven't yet found the ES-175 that speaks to me, but for sure it's out there somewhere.

MD

[entresz]

I actually find my 17" x 3.5" Gretsch considerably more comfortable to play than my Godin 5th Avenue, that's barely 16" and not even 3" deep. It's strange, I would have thought it would be the opposite way round. I think the geometry of the instrument (neck angle in relation to the body for example) can have a fairly profound effect on how comfortable an instrument is to play.

[kid335]

Since Grez was mentioned, here is an iPhone video I shot this weekend of my teacher Tim Lerch playing his new 16"-2.25" Grez Archtop through my rig.

[Cunamara]

Isn't the function of a pickup to pick up the magnetic field of a vibrating string and create current? If this is a pickup's sole objective, how does the dimensions of the body affect the tone?

My personal belief is that the when the pickup is mounted on the top plate of an archtop, the pickup itself is vibrating with the top under the vibrating string. This results in much more complexity in the signal sent to the amp. With a plank guitar like a Les Paul or a Tele or Strat, the body vibrates less and contributes less to the sound (but still vibrates some and does contribute to the sound- hence why people hear a difference in solidbody guitars made from different woods).

I also think this is what makes archtops with floaters tend to sound different. The pickup is less coupled to the guitar which is IMHO why the sound is thinner and brighter. I think that mounting design makes a big difference- mounted to the pickguard versus mounted to a bracket on the end of the neck, for example. The latter is more strongly coupled to the vibrations of the guitar, the former is more weakly coupled.

[Engine Swap]

Does this me I shouldn't accept my brother-in-law's offer of a free (!!!!) Xaviere xv-950 (stripped of most of the bits)?

[Grez]

So many possible things to say on this topic, but I’ll throw this out. The thing I like about bigger bodies, 17 or 18” bouts even when the depth is as little as 2.75” is that there is what might be called a sub-harmonic supporting the lower notes. The fundamental might be the same on a 16 or 17” but there is something nice and big and fulfilling about the really low stuff under it. If you're playing through a PA, the sound man will likely cut that right out….. and in a big band, you don’t need it. It's covered by many other instruments. So it’s usefulness is limited.

You can coax good solid bass and warmth out of smaller bodies, it’s just hard to get that subharmonic. That said, I like smaller instruments very much also.

[pingu]

I have cartilage damage in my right shoulder. I can play a thinline for an unlimited amount of time without discomfort, but not a full depth guitar. It's not a position or technique issue. All of us old guys are damaged in our unique, individual ways. Variety is the spice of life.

John

indeed john
I find a 335 quite uncomfortable
but a a 16" or 17" full depth archtop is fine

[kkfan]

My personal belief is that the when the pickup is mounted on the top plate of an archtop, the pickup itself is vibrating with the top under the vibrating string. This results in much more complexity in the signal sent to the amp. With a plank guitar like a Les Paul or a Tele or Strat, the body vibrates less and contributes less to the sound (but still vibrates some and does contribute to the sound- hence why people hear a difference in solidbody guitars made from different woods).

I also think this is what makes archtops with floaters tend to sound different. The pickup is less coupled to the guitar which is IMHO why the sound is thinner and brighter. I think that mounting design makes a big difference- mounted to the pickguard versus mounted to a bracket on the end of the neck, for example. The latter is more strongly coupled to the vibrations of the guitar, the former is more weakly coupled.

Hmmm...

So, that's a totally different take from my "string feedback" speculation a few posts above. Very interesting.

Is there no scientific theory out there that explains definitively what exactly happens that makes the same pickup sound different on different guitars?

[Woody Sound]

It seems that the 16"x2.5" archtops have become very popular. There are a number of reasons for the popularity but comfort seems to be the main one. Lots of people who previously played solidbodies or 335s seem to gravitate toward these. I personally think the comfort factor is overrated. I have found that given some diligence, you can get used to a bigger guitar. I am 5'7 and have small hands but after a couple weeks, have no problem playing an L5. A super 400 is a bit tough though!

Of all of the 16x2.5 guitars, the PRS JA-15 would be the only one I'd consider purchasing (again) and only in a situation where I had to play very loud or something in which I was playing electric / fusion as well as traditional jazz although the string selection is usually a compromise in those cases.

Well I'm in a little late to this thread, but I want to point out that your right hand picking makes a big difference too. I play "underhanded." Similar, but not the same as GB style. I need a smaller guitar just to be in a comfortable right hand position. 16" is absolute max, 15" is what I prefer.

ps - I think the JA-15 is a 15 incher, not 16.

[Grez]

kkfan, You pluck a string, the pickup senses that. At the same time, the body steels away some energy through the bridge. As it resonates, it slowly puts some of that energy back into the string through the bridge, but what frequencies, at what amplitudes over what time all factor into the sound the pickup captures. And, as Cunamara mentions, the top is moving causing the pickups position relative to the string to change, so there is modulation distortion happening (that's good for guitars, bad for most other things). Probably a lot of other things happening too, but that generally how I see it anyway.

[newsense]

Hmmm...

So, that's a totally different take from my "string feedback" speculation a few posts above. Very interesting.

Is there no scientific theory out there that explains definitively what exactly happens that makes the same pickup sound different on different guitars?

No you are not wrong. All parts of the guitar vibrate and add or take away harmonics from the string vibration. The relative movement of the pickup wrt the strings also plays a role. The theory would say everything contributes, but as guitar structures are so complicated it would be nigh on impossible to produce an anlytical solution (or "theory") to show what is happening precisely. To understand how each part of a guitar is contributing to the acoustic and amplified sounds one has to do extensive experimentation (in this respect the JGF is a crowd-sourced experiment), or one could resort to mathematical modelling using finite element approaches with programs such as Comsol, Ansys or PZFLex. I would be very interested to know whether any manufacturers have ever tried this, if I had the time and funding I would love to give it a go.

[jzucker]

Well I'm in a little late to this thread, but I want to point out that your right hand picking makes a big difference too. I play "underhanded." Similar, but not the same as GB style. I need a smaller guitar just to be in a comfortable right hand position. 16" is absolute max, 15" is what I prefer.

ps - I think the JA-15 is a 15 incher, not 16.

why is that though? Benson is short and has very small hands and we've all seen him play the big bodies. Is there a difference in the way you hold the guitar? Do you keep it up high like he does?

[Bluedawg]

So those of you who have issues with big bodies.

Are the big bodies still uncomfortable if you are playing in a "classical" guitar position?


I've gotten to where I just don't like playing with the guitar on my right leg ....

I need a strap or a foot stool to keep my guitars in the classical position over my left leg while I play right handed .... or sit on the couch with the guitar body resting on the couch and the neck at a "classical" angle while I play

[Doctor Jeff]

I think each person has to decide for himself what works best. I can certainly play the larger boxes but have gravitated towards smaller bodies in part for the ergonomics, also because the sound works for me. The Peerless Sunset gets a surprisingly full-bodied sound IMO (and is surprisingly loud acoustic). It also fits for what I play (kind of Kenny Burrell/Grant Greenish stuff).

Playing with a group in small places the lower end is taken up by the base, and the nuances get lost with the amplification and sound mix. I can't imagine any guitar sounding better in that environment than the Sunset.

That said, I'm looking forward to putting a Rhythm Chief on my 17" full-depth Harmony for a different sound. Not sure it will work as well in the gig setting, but we'll see.

[Top of the Arch!]

So those of you who have issues with big bodies.

Are the big bodies still uncomfortable if you are playing in a "classical" guitar position?


I've gotten to where I just don't like playing with the guitar on my right leg ....

I need a strap or a foot stool to keep my guitars in the classical position over my left leg while I play right handed .... or sit on the couch with the guitar body resting on the couch and the neck at a "classical" angle while I play

I can play my L5 Wes for a while as long as Im sitting and have my left leg elevated on a stool. Resting the guitar on my left leg lets me play for an extended amount of time but not long enough that I wouldnt need to take another guitar for gigs . So the L5 has become something I enjoy every once in a while. Like a nice aged scotch! Bob

[jzucker]

So those of you who have issues with big bodies.

Are the big bodies still uncomfortable if you are playing in a "classical" guitar position?


I've gotten to where I just don't like playing with the guitar on my right leg ....

I need a strap or a foot stool to keep my guitars in the classical position over my left leg while I play right handed .... or sit on the couch with the guitar body resting on the couch and the neck at a "classical" angle while I play

I can only play a big archtop when standing or sitting with it between my legs. No issues when doing that but if I sit with it on my right leg, my neck hurts.

[sgcim]

So many possible things to say on this topic, but I’ll throw this out. The thing I like about bigger bodies, 17 or 18” bouts even when the depth is as little as 2.75” is that there is what might be called a sub-harmonic supporting the lower notes. The fundamental might be the same on a 16 or 17” but there is something nice and big and fulfilling about the really low stuff under it. If you're playing through a PA, the sound man will likely cut that right out….. and in a big band, you don’t need it. It's covered by many other instruments. So it’s usefulness is limited.

You can coax good solid bass and warmth out of smaller bodies, it’s just hard to get that subharmonic. That said, I like smaller instruments very much also.

Hey Grez, I visited your website and found your guitars very interesting. Could you give us some idea about the prices on the jazz oriented guitars?
Thanks.

[GNAPPI]

"It seems that the 16"x2.5" archtops have become very popular. There are a number of reasons for the popularity but comfort seems to be the main one."

Maybe, maybe not. I think I have more 2 1/2" (and smaller like the 330 and Casino) guitars than anything else. Maybe subconsciously I choose them because of my physical size, but I've never done that with anything else like trucks, rifles, mortorcycles and handguns and tools so I seriously doubt it. I have no problem with wide bodies, I just think I look better with a 2 1/2" guitar wrapped around me :-) Add to that I'm not able to fault their sound I'm solidly in the thinner body camp.

"For a traditional jazz tone, I think this particular body size falls short. There is a lack of dynamics and projection when amplified. The tone is not as full and the bottom end
lacks the traditional jazz guitar tone"

Dunno there... my ES195, Epi Joe Pass and Gretsch Anniversary don't fall short anywhere. They all have a substantial acoustic influence on the sound, and I use 10's or 11's.

"On the other hand, the 16x2.5 guitars have some other attributes. The tone is brighter, less muddy and less prone to feedback. They are also more modern sounding any many younger jazz musicians are blurring the lines between the archtop masters of yesteryear and the fusion artists of today. "

I can get my smaller bodies to feedback NP :-) Where / how I stand in relation to the amp and how far away I am minimizes it. As a matter of fact, I also agree that they ARE less muddy on the low end than many deeper bodies.

I think you are quite right about younger folks getting into them probably because of their experiences with 335's as well as the Ibanez and scores of other 335 like bodies out there, and while they "may" be brighter, that's what EQ and tone controls are for.

[Grez]

Hi sgcim, At this moment (2015), roughly $2,800 plus or minus a little depending on options/ornamentation. This tends to go up a bit each year because of material cost increases and general demand.