The Great "Playability" of Higher End Archtops

[AlsoRan]

I have got to tell you. As a home-playing guitarist, my man guitar for Jazz is an Epiphone Sheraton II with upgrade so the wiring harness and pickups. The guitar I practice on the most is a Traveler Speedster Guitar solid body.

The other day, I picked up my Gibson ES-175 and found that songs that I struggled to play at 192 beats per minute suddenly became so much easier. The guitar also exposed a weakness in muting, as the notes on a particular string seem to sing on long after left to go to another string.

Is this attribute present on all high-end archtops? I kid you not, the difference is very noticeable. The guitar literally wants to sing and notes up and down the fretboard all ring out without good muting on my part.

Note: I use very low string action, and play unplugged.

[2bornot2bop]

Welcome to my world bro!

When I arrived here I made the same request about muting unwanted notes after played. I'm still trying to come to grips with muting. Your experience was on a laminated ES175. Now, imagine playing a responsive carved top archtop like an L5C or a thin carved Golden Eagle

[Greentone]

There's a pronounced bump in playability when you jump up to instruments of the ES-335, ES-175, Ibanez GB-10, JP-20, etc., class. These guitars, as they say, practically want to play themselves.

I wish it weren't so, but when you move up, again, to the L-5CES class there is _another_ bump in playability. The L-5, Super 400, Heritage Golden Eagle, Super Eagle, Guild Artist Award, Benedetto Fratello, etc., are supremely well set up guitars with exceptional necks. IME these guitars are profoundly easy to play and reward good technique. The Gibson Kalamazoo Award and some of the old New York Epiphones were like this, too.

And, then, in a class by itself there are the old D'Angelicos. You could play "Three Blind Mice" on one and it's as good as "Three Blind Mice" is ever going to sound...and it will be effortless to play it. Unfortunately, all I ever played on a D'Angelico, IIRC, was "Six Five Jive" and "Lightly Row" from the old blue, Grade One Mel Bay Method Book. (My first instructor's guitar was a D'Angelico.)

[Jim Soloway]

In my experience, good playablility mostly comes from a good setup that's well suited to the needs of the player. Great playability comes from a great setup. Other than functional stability, the quality of the guitar doesn't have much to do with it.

[jazzbow]

In my experience, good playablility mostly comes from a good setup that's well suited to the needs of the player. Great playability comes from a great setup. Other than functional stability, the quality of the guitar doesn't have much to do with it.

Yup, totally agree with that Jim.

Also (dare I say it...) neck wood quality, specifically the grain, helps notes ring out.

Y'know when you strike a note or chord and you can feel it in the neck and it feels and sounds glorious.

Solid bodied guitars especially benefit from good neck wood. The body could be any old cut or type but the neck makes the difference.

[jazz.fred]

In my experience, good playablility mostly comes from a good setup that's well suited to the needs of the player. Great playability comes from a great setup. Other than functional stability, the quality of the guitar doesn't have much to do with it.

Agreed. My 3 archtops (Ibanez AF125 {$1000 new}, Peerless Monarch 16 {$1395 new} and Heritage H575 Custom {$3000 new}) all play superbly due to the excellent setups done by my highly skilled guitar tech. Price has very little to do with it.

[AlsoRan]

I am confused now.

I have around 10 guitars, Fender Stratocasters, Gibson Explorers, Les Pauls, ESP M Series, Epiphones, etc...

All have been set up professionally because I don't know how and don't want to know how at this time. Only the Gibson ES-175 delivered this playability and ringing tone to such a great degree.

I can definitely hear and feel the difference in guitars, and none of my $300.00 - $400.00 guitars deliver that feeling of being ringing live animal in my hands the way that the ones that were over 1,200.00 and above do. And none like that ES-175.

[AlsoRan]

For example, when I go from my Gibson Flying V to my Epiphone Flying V, I can unequivocally say that the Epiphone feels like it is made out of plastic.

[Cunamara]

I think the confusion may stem from "playability" and "tonal response" getting separated. Playability is often thought about in terms of action at the nut and down the neck, relief, fretboard width, etc., etc. A good luthier or tech can set that up and may even an inexpensive instrument feel great. But tonal response is also part of playability- a great sounding instrument is inspiring, feels more alive and connected to you, and thus easier to play.

[Jim Soloway]

I think the confusion may stem from "playability" and "tonal response" getting separated. Playability is often thought about in terms of action at the nut and down the neck, relief, fretboard width, etc., etc. A good luthier or tech can set that up and may even an inexpensive instrument feel great. But tonal response is also part of playability- a great sounding instrument is inspiring, feels more alive and connected to you, and thus easier to play.

As someone who has some very specific needs, I really don't agree with this. I've played some obviously great instruments that I could never get a decent sound out to because the setup was wrong for my specific needs. It really didn't matter what tonal responses the guitar was capable of, those sounds weren't going to be coming from my hands. Give me a choice between a mediocre guitar that's really well set up for my needs and a great guitar that's not, and ask me which one I want to make music on and I'll take the mediocre guitar every time.

[Woody Sound]

In my experience, good playablility mostly comes from a good setup that's well suited to the needs of the player. Great playability comes from a great setup. Other than functional stability, the quality of the guitar doesn't have much to do with it.

But SOOO many archtops, even high end models, get that nasty fretboard hump around the body. IMO that is one of the WORST things for playability.

[Jim Soloway]

But SOOO many archtops, even high end models, get that nasty fretboard hump around the body. IMO that is one of the WORST things for playability.

Yes. As I noted "Other than functional stability". That fretboard hump is definitely not functional stability. BTW, I wonder if Godin has conquered that with their suspended fingerboard? I suspect so.

[jazzbow]

I know what you're saying there.

I had two identical mid range thinline hollow bodied jazzers. The second one I got was a revelation as it sounded better but the first one had worn in and felt really comfortable to play!

I have found that on the mid and low price guitars the better quality wood of the neck the better it plays and sounds.

But then again IMHO

Guitars are the sum total of their parts. If you can tick all the boxes with one irrespective of price then you are very lucky indeed

[Greentone]

Sound (where the "ringing out" comes in) is a function of lots of things, but chiefly design, construction, materials, and state of repair of the guitar...and setup. When the stars are aligned and the guitar is a good one--think D'Angelico--the sound is stupendous.

Playability is a function of setup, design, state of repair, etc. When the stars are aligned a guitar is effortlessly playable.

As you can see from above there are some of the same variables in both instances. A systems engineer would say that there exists endogeneity here--sound affects playability and playability affects sound.

I know that I can make a very playable guitar sound better than a poorly playable one. AND, a guitar that sounds good makes ME play better than I do on a guitar that sounds not as good, making the guitar seem more playable--all other things being equal.

So, I can see where some confusion would creep into this discussion. But I have a way out: get a L-5CES.

[AlsoRan]

Sound (where the "ringing out" comes in) is a function of lots of things, but chiefly design, construction, materials, and state of repair of the guitar...and setup. When the stars are aligned and the guitar is a good one--think D'Angelico--the sound is stupendous.

Playability is a function of setup, design, state of repair, etc. When the stars are aligned a guitar is effortlessly playable.

As you can see from above there are some of the same variables in both instances. A systems engineer would say that there exists endogeneity here--sound affects playability and playability affects sound.

I know that I can make a very playable guitar sound better than a poorly playable one. AND, a guitar that sounds good makes ME play better than I do on a guitar that sounds not as good, making the guitar seem more playable--all other things being equal.

So, I can see where some confusion would creep into this discussion. But I have a way out: get a L-5CES.

I have got to tell you. This little conversation has reignited my lust for one. I am going to play one one day. I have always been shy about it, but no more.

[vintagelove]

I have got to tell you. As a home-playing guitarist, my man guitar for Jazz is an Epiphone Sheraton II with upgrade so the wiring harness and pickups. The guitar I practice on the most is a Traveler Speedster Guitar solid body.

The other day, I picked up my Gibson ES-175 and found that songs that I struggled to play at 192 beats per minute suddenly became so much easier. The guitar also exposed a weakness in muting, as the notes on a particular string seem to sing on long after left to go to another string.

Is this attribute present on all high-end archtops? I kid you not, the difference is very noticeable. The guitar literally wants to sing and notes up and down the fretboard all ring out without good muting on my part.

Note: I use very low string action, and play unplugged.

First thing to consider is the the construction factors, scale length, break angle, etc.

if all that is equal, it comes down to great fretwork. The fretwork needs to be as level as humanly possible.

That being said, the more acoustic the instrument, the more other factors come into play.

[AlsoRan]

First thing to consider is the the construction factors, scale length, break angle, etc.

if all that is equal, it comes down to great fretwork. The fretwork needs to be as level as humanly possible.

That being said, the more acoustic the instrument, the more other factors come into play.

So are you saying that a big part of a good guitar's sound is fretwork? And, so maybe on a higher end guitar, more care and expense is spent on the frets?

[Doctor Jeff]

I had an ES-175 that I never bonded with, but that was 30 years ago when I was not as experienced or knowledgeable about setup. (I have since played some that I really coveted after.)

The guitar that has felt best to me recently is the Peerless Sunset. I have an ES-135, which is a great guitar and in some ways superior to the Sunset, but playing is not as effortless as with the Sunset. (My plan was to sell the Sunset after I got the 135, but I just can't get rid of it...it's too nice a player.)

I agree expensive guitars should be set up well and more playable, but don't discount mid-priced guitars like Peerless and Godin.

[vinlander]

Setup is primordial but don't underestimate construction and quality of the laminate or carving and that can't be changed on a cheapo. I realized that on my NGD in july last year...
My Regent feel like a toy compared to my Tal...
A reason why most import never sound like a Gibson even if they try to look like one, provided you want the Gibson tone. There are quality import guitars that is not in question, but they have their own sound.

[citizenk74]

The Gibson ES-175 (IMO) is a highly evolved, very practical musical instrument. As it is produced in some numbers, individual examples may vary within a range. It sounds to me like you have found one that suits you to a "T"; i.e., 'a good 'un." That makes, to my certain knowledge, at least two of us. I suspect there are thousands of us, as well as countless others who feel the same way about particular instruments. It's a blessing. Enjoy!

[Stringswinger]

I do my own setups (and can do them very well to my particular taste). I have owned some "decent" Asian archtops that I setup as well as I would like, and used them on gigs. They play well and sound "decent". But they are nowhere near as inspiring as playing a gig on a great guitar.

The extra money it takes to get a great guitar may not produce a guitar that plays any better than the lesser cost guitars, and the sound improvement may not be proportional to the extra cost, but when a guitar inspires your playing, well that is priceless.

[Max405]

SS, that was on the money. The unwritten set of rules called, "inspire my playing" really make a huge difference.
The other difference I've found that is an attribute of high end guitars is the ability to play them on the lower strings above the 10th fret. I've played some cheapo's in my life where I wonder they even wasted the fret material up there..

[vintagelove]

So are you saying that a big part of a good guitar's sound is fretwork? And, so maybe on a higher end guitar, more care and expense is spent on the frets?

The fretwork is critical for a good setup and playability. Two important factors in a good sounding instrument.

[nopedals]

A 175 is not really a high end guitar (even if priced like one). I am not sure that playability is one of its strengths, although it is a fine professional grade instrument.

It has been a while since I have owned an entry level archtop, but my recollection is that the string spacing is different in newer guitars vs. the way they were made in the 40s 50s 60s. On older guitars, the E strings are pretty close to the edge of the fingerboards. My *theory* has been that guitar design was altered in the 1960s when the market became teen string benders instead of adult jazz players. So somebody going from, say, a korean epiphone to something made to 50s specs will definitely notice a change in playability.

Actually, much of the modern gains in playability have been pushed by folks crafting fender style necks, e.g., compound radius, multiple choices of neck profile and taper, etc.

My personal test is grabbing a stretch chord up high on the neck like the C6 at the start of Moonlight in Vermont
(x 15 14 12 10 x -- I don't have a guitar handy, but I think that's right). That one is a real challenge for me on my archtops, but is pretty easy on the USACG neck (made to my specs) on my Esquire.

[Max405]

No Pedals
I respectfully disagree. Although not solid carved or particularly blinged out, To me the Gibson ES175 is a high end guitar by virtue of its near perfection. I think they stumbled upon a design that has worked beautifully. Its unique sound and its outstanding playability have always been great attributes which sets it apart from ordinary instruments. It is a guitar that was made to endure the rigors of the road. Its one of the most copied archtops of all time for good reason.. To me its a benchmark guitar. To many, its the pinnacle. I remember after taking a break from high end archtops during the 80's and much of the 90's, and was fortunate to pickup a 175 in 1997. I remember how easy it was to play the Feels So Good Solo on that guitar, live with a band. It was seminal moment for me that I'll never forget.
However, I DO love your test chord there.. I am guessing that if Johnny played a 175, he would have fretted the chord like you suggested, grown another finger and placed it on 17th fret on the high E string to end the song..

Joe D.

A 175 is not really a high end guitar (even if priced like one). I am not sure that playability is one of its strengths, although it is a fine professional grade instrument.

It has been a while since I have owned an entry level archtop, but my recollection is that the string spacing is different in newer guitars vs. the way they were made in the 40s 50s 60s. On older guitars, the E strings are pretty close to the edge of the fingerboards. My *theory* has been that guitar design was altered in the 1960s when the market became teen string benders instead of adult jazz players. So somebody going from, say, a korean epiphone to something made to 50s specs will definitely notice a change in playability.

Actually, much of the modern gains in playability have been pushed by folks crafting fender style necks, e.g., compound radius, multiple choices of neck profile and taper, etc.

My personal test is grabbing a stretch chord up high on the neck like the C6 at the start of Moonlight in Vermont
(x 15 14 12 10 x -- I don't have a guitar handy, but I think that's right). That one is a real challenge for me on my archtops, but is pretty easy on the USACG neck (made to my specs) on my Esquire.