Why Not More Gibson L-4C Players

**AlohaJoe** · 04-20-2016, 10:13 PM

I recently acquired an early 50's uncut L4 and it's a great acoustic, but the fingerboard is not elevated over the body like the L4C, which means a floater or a DeArmond doesn't have the clearance to get very close to the neck. That said, I've used the DeA on it and it works fine but a little awkward. If I planned on using it plugged in very often I'd put the KA Slimbucker floater on it and it would sit about halfway between the saddle and the neck. For now, it's a really nice acoustic.

**powerwagonjohn** · 04-20-2016, 10:25 PM

My 1952 L-4 is a non-cutaway and I have to raise the action to get the deArmond 1000 anywhere close to the neck. As Joe says it's just super as an acoustic and I hardly ever install the pick up. The non cut L-4 guitar feels thinner and smaller without the raised fingerboard as on my L-4CES. very different guitars for sure.
Thanks John

**helios** · 04-21-2016, 12:25 AM

Mr. John Dalton elaborates a bit on the L4CES & ES-175 (and gets some nice tone on the L4CES):

**Hammertone** · 04-21-2016, 05:09 AM

Bah, humbug! This thread is useless without pictures. IMO, the post-war L-4 (as well as the less fabulously-appointed post-war L-50 and entry-level L-48) is a funny guitar, that really tips its hat to the pre-war acoustic archtop era. It's an intimate, personal archtop, great for playing solo, much quieter than its larger acoustic archtop brethren but with a really sweet, uniquely Gibson acoustic voice. I've equipped mine on occasion with a Dearmond that can slide as far as halfway between the bridge and the end of the fingerboard, which actually sounds pretty damned good as well. Here's a 1950 L-4:

**AlohaJoe** · 04-21-2016, 06:17 AM

And a '51 uncut. But to the OP, the cutaway L4C will cost more than a comparable uncut L4, but might be worth it if you're primarily going to be playing electric. Acoustically, I prefer the uncut.

Why Not More Gibson L-4C Players-img_3045-jpg

Why Not More Gibson L-4C Players-img_3045-jpg

**teleboli** · 04-23-2016, 09:00 AM

Thanks to all for the thoughts, pics, opinions. Appreciated.

Being one who only plays solo chord melody I was always less than thrilled with the tubbiness in the low end of all the '50's 175 examples I've had. Love them for other things though. Of course my '51 ES350 has certainly fixed that issue.

I was mostly curious if the solid top on a '50's L4C would eliminate that low end lack of clarity even with the 24.75 scale. Whether the solid top would change the sound enough to make it a viable 'solo' instrument. I know many enjoy their thunk, but I don't for solo applications. Great for other things though IMO.

Thanks again

**Dennis D** · 04-23-2016, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by teleboli

Thanks to all for the thoughts, pics, opinions. Appreciated.

Being one who only plays solo chord melody I was always less than thrilled with the tubbiness in the low end of all the '50's 175 examples I've had. Love them for other things though. Of course my '51 ES350 has certainly fixed that issue.

I was mostly curious if the solid top on a '50's L4C would eliminate that low end lack of clarity even with the 24.75 scale. Whether the solid top would change the sound enough to make it a viable 'solo' instrument. I know many enjoy their thunk, but I don't for solo applications. Great for other things though IMO.

Thanks again

If you have a 175 - -you can have that sound and that's all. If you have an L-4 you can dial in that 175 sound, but then a lot of others too.

**teleboli** · 04-23-2016, 01:15 PM

Thanks Dennis. That's just the kind of thing I like to hear. That they are quite different despite the appearance and specs, solid top not withstanding.

**mfourte** · 05-04-2016, 05:32 PM

I've never owned an L4, but I believe one key element to its difference from the L5 is specifically the 24.75 scale length. The dimensions are totally different from the L5 because it is constructed like an ES-175, but I believe things such as the body shape and size affect the lower and higher frequencies. Both have spruce tops and therefore the timbre is quite similar. Then there is sort of a difference in sound there altogether that centers around the scale length for me.

A great part of what separates the ES-175 from the L5 is size, but also scale length. I think this difference can be heard on the "Stolen Moments" album or "Duets" album where Doug Raney uses his L7 and Jimmy Raney uses his ES-175. You can clearly hear the difference between the two and part of that difference is string attack which correlates heavily with the scale length.

I am completely with John Dalton on that earlier clip. But also, I believe, scale length out of the equation (because the L4 and ES-175 share the same scale length and often the same rosewood fingerboard), you can get down to the differences in woods between the laminate and the carved spruce top with set pickup. I would much rather prefer to own a Gibson L4 than a Gibson L5 because that body and scale length give all the magic of L5 a more focused sound. I've had to do many adjustments to get my Gibson L5's sound more focused.

Although one thing's for certain, the spruce top on that L4 is going to give a much more clearer sound than the ES-175, at least from my experience. Unfortunately, they don't make L4's in lefty very often.

**Dennis D** · 05-04-2016, 06:10 PM

Some interesting points.

I just think for most players it never gets down to a 175 vs L-5 comparison. It's the budget.

For me, a 175 was entry level, and back in 1962, I couldn't in my wildest dreams think of buying an L-5. But had I known about L-4's I'd have sure tried to find one.

And really, a player looking at L-5's pretty much knows the sound he wants, and isn't really considering a 175 at all, and probably wouldn't take one if you gave it to him.

MHO

**mfourte** · 05-04-2016, 06:52 PM

I can't argue with that. I have an L5 because it was readily available in lefty or else I would have bought an ES-175.

**powerwagonjohn** · 05-04-2016, 07:21 PM

Here is a photo of my 1952 L-4, a very inspiring player to be sure. By the way this could be my first photo.
Thanks John
Why Not More Gibson L-4C Players-img_5017-jpg

Why Not More Gibson L-4C Players-img_5017-jpg

**lawson-stone** · 05-04-2016, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by Dennis D

If you have a 175 - -you can have that sound and that's all. If you have an L-4 you can dial in that 175 sound, but then a lot of others too.

I'm not sure this is accurate. I have a 175, had a different model of the 175 about 20 years ago, and currently have a Loar LH650 which is almost entirely based on the L4c specs.

I find the laminate guitars are much more easily "dialed in" to different tone qualities and the carved top guitars more set on a particular sound. I love my carved top 16" LH650, but it has basically one sound, a wonderful, rich sound. But the 165 and 175 have markedly different tones, and each one has a wide range of adjustment.

It could just be the limits of my experience, but for a lot of reasons I don't think it's fair to the 175 to say it has just one sound. My current 175 can go from Jim Hall dark and gauzy all the way up to something very clear and clean, not to mention kicking in the bridge pickup. My 165 can be dialed in to be very hard to distinguish from a solid-top guitar with a floater except for having the punch that the routed in pickup provides.

I consider the 175 type much more versatile, but my Loar has made me think if I could find an L4c for a reasonable price, I'd likely pounce on it in a heartbeat.

**Franz 1997** · 05-05-2016, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by Dennis D

If you have a 175 - -you can have that sound and that's all. If you have an L-4 you can dial in that 175 sound, but then a lot of others too.

I have owned a '50s L4C electric conversion for around 40 years, and have owned several 175sin 60s, 70s and 90s versions. I'd say that neither guitar can get the sound of the other - which isn't surprising, bearing in mind the respective top materials.

The L4C has a surprisingly punchy electric sound, but with the characteristic spruce top tone, with less solidity but more complexity than a laminate.

The 175...well, most of us know know what a 175 sounds like. The definitive laminate tone.

**Greentone** · 05-05-2016, 09:20 AM

teliboli,

You already have the supreme jazz guitar--1951 ES-350. With that guitar you can get it done. I know that grass is always greener...but look and listen to all the output from Barney Kessel and Tal Farlow. With that guitar (Farlow's prototype signature guitar was a 350 with some gewgaws) they tore up the jazz world.

It the 25-1/2" scale is not to your liking, or if the 17" body is uncomfortable for you, that is another matter.