Advantage of Carved Top vs Laminate

[jasonc]

Klatu, I meant to reply in my first post. The savings are a lot of man-hours and a whole lot of material. Tom can speak to the time it takes to make a laminate. To make a solid top you need a joined billet that is at least an inch thick and the individual laminates are in the neighborhood of a 1/16" thick.

[entresz]

I have a 1958 Hofner Senator that is a laminated guitar, but the laminates are very light and thin. It's got a big rich sound, and is extremely loud for a 16" guitar. I would describe the sound as being half way between a carved archtop and Selmer Macaferri. I think laminates have the potential to sound great as acoustic instruments - that being said, I love the sound of a nice carved top.

[Greentone]

I have a 64 year old Gretsch Synchromatic that is laminated. It is LOUD. It is not as refined sounding as my other archtops, but it definitely kicks up a fuss. It will hold its own volume-wise with any of my other guitars. I have never thought about whether the plates are thick or thin. The top has a good arch, though, and the bridge is carved to fit the contour of the top pretty well.

[oldane]

I have a 64 year old Gretsch Synchromatic that is laminated. It is LOUD. It is not as refined sounding as my other archtops, but it definitely kicks up a fuss. It will hold its own volume-wise with any of my other guitars. I have never thought about whether the plates are thick or thin.

Exactly that can be said about my 1961 Gretsch New Yorker. Not terribly refined but loud and with great cutting power.

[Andy fetzer]

I am playing archtops since i was 10 years old. My first expensive guitar was a gibson es 335, when i was 15. Then I dreamed of a big L 5 or Super 400.Later on I had a Guild Artist Award. I found out , that top and loud acoustic solid archtop are made to sound great in a 5 meter radius. The heavier laminated Guitars with top mounted Pickups are good for loud bands with amps. 335 's with block for big arenas . Took me a long time and lot of money to accept.

[guildmann]

I own a Tacoma Archtop and love the sound over my laminate Archtops. I plug it into a Bose PA at low volumes mostly for rhythym & singing. i find i can get a fat tone out of it when i want. i guess it depends on the sound you're looking for. My Guild X-500 gets muddied and lost when i play with a Bass & Sax player. go figure! i definately prefer solid wood!

[Doctor Jeff]

The only solid tops I've ever owned are flattops and a pressed-top archie. I certainly wouldn't mind a high-quality carved top, but it's not the be-all and end-all for me. It isn't really practical for what I use it for, and it's not really the sound I'm going for.

The pressed-top has a louder, more acousticky sound, but it's not the same as a fine carved top.

[FZ2017]

Question guys. I thought that the Wes Montgomery l-5 ces was a carved top, but according to the info on the one I'm looking at on Amazon it's a laminated top. Could this be wrong or are some of them laminated?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[rio]

Wes L5s are all carved, solid wood. If it is laminate then it is not the same thing or it is a knockoff (which is not common - I have never seen a knock off Wes). Could just be mislabeled...certainly wouldn't be the first time someone messed up laminate vs carved in a description.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Greentone]

The Gibson L-5CES Wes Montgomery is _not_ a laminate body guitar. It is all carved. It sounds and plays GREAT, like a carved-body guitar should. It doesn't sound the same as the two-pickup CES version does. Some (many) players prefer the sound of the two-pickup model (myself included), but prefer the look of the Wes.

For about 35 years, I actually preferred the sound of laminate-body archtops--e.g., the Tal Farlow, the ES-350, ES-175, etc. They get a "thunky" bop sound that I associate with Tal Farlow, Jimmy Raney, and others. However, for the last ten years I have been a confirmed enthusiast of carved-body archtops. I always knew what they sounded like, but until I gravitated full-time to the 25-1/2" scale neck and sold my ES-175 and ES-335, I just didn't make the complete commitment to the carved-body guitar--even though I have owned one since I was 18.

Now, however, there is no turning back. The woody, "Wes" sound is so darned good.

[FZ2017]

Yeah the laminates sound good plugged in but not so much acoustically/unplugged.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[ingeneri]

There's multiple options for high end arch tops, they're all viable and have been used by many many famous and genre defining players. Lots of musicians have multiple types of archtops, just like Rock guys have different solid bodies. It's a matter of tastes, needs, and means.

1) Vintage carved top with floating pickup and parallel bracing: these are generally either highly resonant vintage instruments originally intended for big bands but with a floating pickup added (1930s-40s Epiphones, Gibson L7s). These guitars were meant to be loud and cut through a big band, they're known for having a bit of a bark to their voice. Feedback can be an issue when played electrically and some folks find the acoustic voice off putting. On the other hand, Kenny Burrell, Johnny Smith, and Billy Bauer all played vintage Epis, and Grant Green played both an Epi Emperor and a Gibson L7 in his later years.

2) Vintage and carved top with floating pickup and X-bracing: Like the early L5s, these guitars have X-bracing which hampers their acoustic volume but generally is viewed as producing a mellower sweeter tone. To me, the Gibson and Heritage Johnny Smith guitars are the perfect example of these type of instrument. The Guild Artist Award (also originally a Johnny Smith model) had parallel bracing but, IMHO, is closer to this category tone wise. I haven't had the pleasure of playing a vintage D'angelico, but they also have this sweet sound on records. The Heritage Golden Eagle, Sweet 16, and (most) acoustic Super Eagles also fall in this category. Everyone describes the Gibson ES-175 and L5 CES as the quintessential Jazz boxes, but in the 1950s it seems like any guitarist who had "made it" had a D'angelico (Johnny Smith, Mundell Lowe, John Pisano, Kenny Burrell). Benson played Guilds in the early 70s, a Gibson Johnny Smith on his pop breakthrough Breezin', and reportedly still records with his D'angelico.

3) Boutique carved top with floating pickup and X bracing: Benedetto and his progeny (who all bought the book). These are similarly constructed as category 2, but, to me, have a tighter and brighter more cutting tone. More detailed and nuanced than the vintage big band guitars, and therefore good for single note and solo guitar "chord melody" playing. The Eastmans are based on Benedetto's book and are intended as factory produced copies his designs. Bucky Pizzarelli, Jimmy Bruno, Andreas Oberg, and (I think) Howard Alden and Frank Vignola all played Benedettos at one time or another.

4) Vintage CES style carved top: My personal favorite. Pretty dead as an acoustic instrument, but IMO a smoother and more detailed tone than a laminate. Somehow you get this smooth buttery goodness without losing the top end, it's neither shrill nor muffled. This is the sound of Wes, post-1960s Kenny Burrell, early Pat Martino, early George Benson, etc... The tops are carved thicker to support the mounted pickups, and either by design or happy accident this makes these guitars great for loud quartets and even organ groups (albeit with some f-hole tape or stuffing in the old days). The Hard Bop and Soul Jazz machines. In addition to the Gibson l5 and Super 400, there's the Heritage Eagle, Super Eagle, and Super Kenny Burrell that are more affordable but with no sacrifice in quality.

5) Laminates: If D'angelicos with Dearmond 11000s are the sound of the 1950s studio musician, than the Es-175, Es-350, and Tal Farlow are the sound of the working BeBopper road king. As has already been said, this is the sound of Barney Kessell, Tal Farlow, Herb Ellis, and Joe Pass. The most impervious to feed back of the archtops with a lack of sustain helping produce a "thunk" that is uniquely suited to long complex Bop lines.

Realize I left off some great instruments like vintage Hofners and D'aquistos, Guild X-175s and X-500s, Campellones, etc... Not intended as a slight, I just haven't played them or heard enough of them on record to offer an unlearned opinion like the others.

[Greentone]

+1 ingeneri,

Great, comprehensive analysis. I agree with all points, right down the line. Like ingeneri, I really like the CES overall. The "bebop road king" type of guitars are great, too. I could be very happy with a great ES-350. Gotta have a carved archtop with a floater around, too, though.

[medblues]

How about a hybrid ? Hofner New President and Hofner Jazzica have carved tops and laminate back and sides. Best of both worlds !

[Bluedawg]

I'm a fan of option number 4 ... I love the L5 CES, L5 WES and Super 400 CES ... but an original Gibson is expensive .. even more so in Europe .... Other options like Heritage and Campellone can be had for significantly less and are great guitars in the same vein as the classic Gibsons .... but can be hard to find in Europa ...

there are some interesting Euro makers .. even some less expensive ones in eastern Europe if you are ready to take a chance

Eastman is the most readily available substitute for option 3 with a Benedetto flavor. Wu is also an option, but means a wait time and dealing long distance

Option number 5 is also very good .... laminates are less expensive and can deliver great tones ... if you're on a budget this is the better choice IMHO

[Cunamara]

I was wondering why many of pricely jazz guitars are now crafted using laminate like Sadowsky semi-hollow many Gibson models?????? and still the are guitars like eastman which are solid carved and arent so expensive????

Labor costs and exchange rates, largely. Eastman guitars are built in China where labor costs are notoriously low (I don't know if that applies to Eastman compared to, say, Foxconn where iPhones and other smartphones are built). The Chinese yuan has typically a favorable exchange rate with the US dollar and the Euro. Sadowsky's archtop and semi-hollowbody guitars are made in Japan to his specs, which has notoriously high labor costs. The Japanese yen has tended to have unfavorable exchange rates with the dollar and the Euro. Gibsons are built in the US which has high labor costs, etc. The exchange rate with the Euro hasn't been great for the dollar most of the time although not terrible.

This does not take into account the issues of profit margin, wholesale versus retail markup, etc., all of which add another layer of cost to the customer's bill of sale.

When produced within the same country, carved top guitars will almost always cost more than laminated instruments from the same manufacturer. Look at the price difference between Epiphone and Gibson guitars, the former being made in Asia with low overhead costs and the latter being made in the US with high overhead costs. The fit and finish is not remarkably different, although the Epis have much less expensive electronics.

[CamillusUSA]

I had the Herb Ellis for maybe 5 years and it was alright (it would feedback but I could control it). I picked up a new (at the time) D'Angelico Excel and that played better, sounded better and was just a better ax (for me).but eventually I sold that and got an Eastman PG1 which I prefer to both the previous two.

The 165 was a bit heavy and a bit more work to play. IMHO.

[jumpnblues]

Anyone here prefer the sound of laminated over carved tops? Does the carved top generally sound better or just different?

[mr. beaumont]

Depends on what I'm doing. For plugged in stuff, generally yes, though my 575 is carved, but behaves much more like a laminate guitar.

[RobbieAG]

Guitars with laminated tops are better playing electrically. Solid top guitars are more likely to feedback. When I had my L5 CES, it would feedback fairly easily. Both ES-175s I've owned rarely feedback. Solid top guitars will usually sound better acoustically (especially if it has a floating pickup with no holes drilled), so it does depend on how you plan to use the guitar.

[skiboyny]

I think that a carved top responds much better than laminate. That said I believe that a carved top is easier for someone with less skill to make sound better. I know I'll probably take heat for that comment. They each have their strong points and depending on the setting each has the potential to "sound better"

Anyone here prefer the sound of laminated over carved tops? Does the carved top generally sound better or just different?

[lukmanohnz]

I play 90% unplugged. I like the acoustic tone of my carved top AR503CE. I played an all-solid version (can’t recall specific model but was an 800 series with solid mahogany back and sides). It had a really nice acoustic tone - warmer than my 503. I have read that feedback was a big issue with all-solid guitars. Maybe carved top and laminate back/sides is a decent compromise. But I also play very modest volumes when plugged in using a DV Mark LJ so feedback probably won’t ever be an issue for me. I haven’t played a laminated top that had as good an acoustic tone as my 503, but I am certain they exist (and probably cost more ;-).

[ThatRhythmMan]

It really, really, really depends on the individual guitar. There are lots of carved top guitars out there made by luthiers with good woodworking skills, but not the talent to consistently make a great sounding archtop guitar. Some of these builders are very well known and even they can get lucky and hit one out of the park every now and then. There is one in particular that jumps to mind from whom I have played several guitars and only two have really been any good as acoustic guitars and the one with the best acoustic tone had two P90s mounted in the top.

I could easily show you laminate guitars that are better than many carved top guitars and some solid pressed top guitars that are better than most carved top guitars. That being said, there are some luthiers who have the skill set to consistently make a guitar with desired characteristics whatever they may be.

This is another discussion point altogether, but many archtops definitely need vibrations to get them to open up and one cannot know how they will ultimately sound unless someone has been playing them regularly. Believe it or not, it’s possible to develop a pretty good ear for the sound of a “tight” guitar.

My bottom line after playing hundreds of archtops is that there are no absolutes and I’ve been both pleasantly surprised by guitars and truly disappointed.

I say all of that as someone who sells archtops primarily online to people who don’t get to play them ahead of time. Playing a guitar first hand is the best way to know if it has the feel and sound you want. Short of that, try to talk to a seller who really knows what they are talking about and can match you with the right guitar. Also, look for a no-hassle return policy when buying at a distance.

[sgosnell]

As a general stereotype, laminate guitars are less likely to feed back, and less likely to have much of an acoustic voice. Fighting feedback is one of the primary reasons for using them. But as pointed out, that's not always the case. I have an old low-end Epiphone, thick laminate, which is fairly loud acoustically, and feeds back rather easily. Not a great acoustic sound, but there is decent volume. I also have some newer laminates that aren't all that much louder than some solid-bodies I've played. I prefer a well-made carved top because I don't often play at volumes where feedback will be an issue. But if I did, I would probably use a laminate model.

[Tal_175]

Laminate maple is not just a compromise for feedback resistance and affordability. It's a tonal preference for amplified playing by many jazz guitarists (over carved spruce guitars). Including Jim Hall.