-
Originally Posted by Bluedawg
Well, I'll be......I kept thinking ' what am I missing - am I hearing this correctly ? ....but my L-5 R/I is a '95, and I'm guessing it's done all the opening it's going to do, and sounds just like these, which for me is good !!....
Interesting.......
Thanks !!
-
11-12-2015 07:37 PM
-
Sorry to go back to a post way up in this thread, but that 1947 instrument is very strange. It is such a shame about the finish as the colour and woods are gorgeous. However looking at it I can't help thinking that it must have been kept somewhere really damp and that the wood has expanded causing those ugly looking cracks. The bloom on the headstock is another suggestion that is has been kept in a damp place. I'm not in the USA but if I was a gambler, I would buy that guitar and then just leave it somewhere to dry out slowly, an upstairs room perhaps that isn't heated as much as the downstairs ones. I would bet that in a few weeks or months those cracks would close up and it would just have feint hairlines like many old guitars do, and not those huge white stripes on there at the moment. Perhaps the shop selling it will be able to charge more in a few weeks if nobody snaps it up!!!!
-
Originally Posted by Bluedawg
Now, maybe my only question would be for anyone who owns an L-5 R/I and a recent L-5 WesMo - -are they equal volume w/ Wes unplugged ?
Thanks !!
-
I own or have owned the following L-5 models:
1928 L-5
1934 L-5 Reissue
1947 L-5
1975 L-5C
1980 L-5C
1999 L-5CES
I have never owned a WesMo. However, there is no way it's as loud as any of the purpose-built acoustic guitars. Of the guitars above, the 1947 is probably the outright loudest - but it's not the best sounding. The 1928 is the best sounding. And it's plenty loud.
The 1934 RI and 1975 L-5C are next on the loudness scale. The L-5CES is way dead last - it's not a useful acoustic guitar at all. I imagine the WesMo is louder than the CES but is not going to produce the same acoustic experience as an L-5C, and certainly not like your '34 RI.
Keep in mind that my L-5C is forty years old and weighs in the low 6 lb range. If you are looking at a modern L-5P in the high 7 lb range (and they are!), it's a different beast acoustically due to that extra weight.
Put flatwounds on these and all bets are off.
-
That's really helpful, Roger, thanks ! Originally Posted by rpguitar
I own or have owned the following L-5 models:
1928 L-5
1934 L-5 Reissue
1947 L-5
1975 L-5C
1980 L-5C
1999 L-5CES
I have never owned a WesMo. However, there is no way it's as loud as any of the purpose-built acoustic guitars. Of the guitars above, the 1947 is probably the outright loudest - but it's not the best sounding. The 1928 is the best sounding. And it's plenty loud.
The 1934 RI and 1975 L-5C are next on the loudness scale. The L-5CES is way dead last - it's not a useful acoustic guitar at all. I imagine the WesMo is louder than the CES but is not going to produce the same acoustic experience as an L-5C, and certainly not like your '34 RI.
Keep in mind that my L-5C is forty years old and weighs in the low 6 lb range. If you are looking at a modern L-5P in the high 7 lb range (and they are!), it's a different beast acoustically due to that extra weight.
Put flatwounds on these and all bets are off.
Now, any guess why the '47 isn't it the best sounding ?
My list:
1937 L-7 Even though strung w/ 12-52 Chromes, my 'Holy Grail' ....non-cut x-braced.....
1954 L-7C Still scratching my head re: string gauge & string type - flat vs rounds.....not there yet.....driving me nuts...
.......so far, can't get a bass response I like......love the cutaway, but parallel braced......
1995 L-5 R/I Also strung w/ 12-52 Chromes and really good !
..So, that's what started this L-5 trip.......how to somehow make that L-7C closer to the others, or trade it for something that is.
Thanks again.
Dennis
-
PS Originally Posted by Dennis D
The '54 L-7C was a collector piece - basically unplayed.
The first set of strings were 12-52 Chromes.....too bright.....
Next ( 6 months ) I tried 13/56 Chromes and a little of the playability went away and so did some highs, but not much bass improvement.
Then it was a set of 13/54 Pyramids --also flatwounds, and maybe better early but when those go, ( 6 months ) they are dead.
So, that's where I sit and now it's due for the next set.
Thx again !
-
Yep ... I'm talking about the new L5Ps that I've played ... I still want one, though Originally Posted by rpguitar
If you are looking at a modern L-5P in the high 7 lb range (and they are!), it's a different beast acoustically due to that extra weight.
Put flatwounds on these and all bets are off.
But I will probably try to save for a Super 400 first
-
The '47 isn't the best sounding acoustically to me, with my tastes, because:
1) The 1928 L-5 is one of the best acoustic archtops ever made so it has no chance; and
2) It is a midrangey, punchy, swing band machine - and I prefer a bit more sustain and warmth.
The '75 L-5C is actually a warm, modern sounding archtop - much like the Johnny Smith. I prefer that to the classic chunk-chunk tone for most of my playing.
My '47 is probably exemplary for what it was designed to be, however. I didn't say I don't like it!Last edited by rpguitar; 11-13-2015 at 11:38 AM.
-
What's a BJB pickup and how does it differ from the Johnny Smith?
-
The BJB (designer Bruce J. Bolen) has no adjustable polepieces, and is generally hotter sounding - thicker but also "toppier" if you will - than a JS floater. It typically attaches to the pickguard via a heavy, integrated flange, whereas the JS attaches via a U-bracket to the end of the neck. The JS has a clearer, somewhat less overtone-rich sound (to my ears) with less chime/compression.
BJB was installed on the Super V BJB, Kalamazoo Award, Citation, Le Grand, and some L-5Cs. Now of course you're seeing modern ones on the L-5P.
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos