-
Originally Posted by Drifter
The 575 is a hollowbody electric guitar. It doesn't sound as acoustically pleasing to me as an L-4. However the Sadowsky Jim Hall is built more like the 575, and gets a surprisingly good acoustic tone for an all laminate.
-
03-11-2010 12:37 PM
-
Originally Posted by derek
-
Absolutely. It is clear that Roger was very intentionally going for a nice acoustic sound from his JH model, something that probably wasn't a high priority at the beginning for laminate models like the 175, which were meant to be electric guitars. So get the feedback resistance and stability lamination provides, and get a decent acoustic sound in a guitar that is just wonderfully made. Win win.
-
William Moll, who makes John Pizarelli's guitars, says something similar -- that he worked to come up with an approach that combined the benefits of using laminates with a good acoustic tone. His guitars, however, seem to have a more "traditional" design, including a 17" lower bout and floating pickup.
-
Yeah but, have you spent much time listening to Piz? He sounds like he could be playing his old man's Benedetto. The woody tones he gets from his sig model Moll belie its ply construction.
-
Well, yeah, that's what I was trying to say. If you didn't know it was a "plywood" guitar, you'd never think it was from the sound. Another example of how current luthiers are getting much better acoustic tone from laminates by rethinking the design.
-
But you have to consider the difference between high end laminates and low end laminates. I've never really heard a great, cheap laminate. And, honestly, I prefer the tone of cheaper, solid top guitars than expensive laminates (ie, Eastman vs. Sadowsky. Hell, give me the Eastman.) The Sadowskys sound phenomenal for laminates, but why pay more when I can get a better tone from the Eastman acoustically (my opinion) and an equal one amplified?
-
IMO, at the end of the day this just comes down to personal preference. I prefer the acoustic and electric sound of the Sadowsky JH over a more expensive carved top guitar I used to own, but I can see how others would have preferred the carved top. Laminates potentially have the advantage in structural stability and feedback resistance but I'd be surprised if this were universally true!
-
03-21-2010, 11:55 AM #34CC323 GuestOriginally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
-
Normally a pressed top means that a piece of wood is forced into a certain shape. Laminated means one uses several thin layers that are glued together in a mould. So there is a difference between both.
I would say that a pressed top of massive wood comes closer to a carved top.
A carved top is carved from 2 solid matched pieces of wood.
Of course a carved top guitar will be more expensive up to an unlimted price range. But a carved top is not nessecary better for everyone. And there are many bad carved top archtops on the market that sound too nasal. This problem you mostly do not find with laminated tops. This kind of guitar is mostly more a semi acoustic electric guitar. Therefore the sound is merely produced by the woods and not by the "air" inside the instrument. This is coupled with the movement of the wood.
It takes long experience to build a high end carved archtop. And in that case prices are comparable with prices for chello and other simular constructed instruments.
-
Well, one thing's for sure, if you ever whack that solid top, it sure does split a lot easier than laminate. That plywood is some rugged stuff.
-
Well that is one way of looking at it!
But if you play a lot in clubs it may be also an argument
Scharpachguitars
-
Watch out for the marketing behind those pressed tops, though. They often don't specify, and hearing "solid spruce top" causes one to associate the price with a solid top and its just not the same.
-
I am alos loking at a peerless...either a Imperial or Cremona...17" with carved maple top..anyone played either of these? I have a 1977 ES-175 w/lam than sounds great...pretty woody, but nice. Also have a 1991 Gretsch G400 Syncromatic ( see avatar). Solid Spruce top with a Humbucker set PU..more acoustic sound when plugged in and does not really project acoustically without an amp, probably due to the set PU.
I am looking for a more modern Wes sound...I use D'Addario Chrom Flats 12's...the 175 sounds exectly like Herb Ellis/Joe Pass.
I am leaning to teh Cremona but any thoughts would be appreciated.
BTW, I live in Florida so humidity is always 80% or more..never had a problem with cracks or anything on guitars..just need to have the boxes settle in for 10 min. out of the case before final tuning when taking from car to AC..
-
03-25-2010, 11:45 PM #40TommyD GuestOriginally Posted by cosmic gumbo
Well, Bill asked if he could borrow my Guild until he could replace his guitar. Fine, I had another guitar, not as good but playable.
About a month later, Louise the bass player, got drunk on the job and in stepping down off the stand at the end of a set (Remember those "musical bars" where the bar surrounded the stand?), she knocked MY Guild off its stand and down onto the floor behind the bar, about 30 inches lower than the stand, then lost her balance, such as it was, with her being drunk and all, and STEPPED DOWN THROUGH MY GUILD GUITAR with a spike-heeled shoe. Needless to say, her foot went right through the guitar, the strings, the pickups, and the pick guard. So as tough as laminated archtop guitars are, there are some things they can't weather.
P.S. In exchange, I got a Gibson ES 125 from Bill which I still have and play.
Tommy/
-
I heard Jimmy Bruno say that he could never get a good sound out of a solid top jazz guitar. This blew me away as I am a hobby guitar builder and its all about the wood. I used to own a Tacoma archtop guitar that had a solid spruce top, and I never got it to sound right. I recently found an Ibanez AFS75 on Craigslist for under $300 and I bought it. Laminated top, but unbelievable tone. I now own another Ibanez, an AF105. It is a more expensive guitar, but still cheap as these things go. I personally think there is something to this. If you want that dark fat tone, a laminated top guitar is the deal. Anyone ever experience this?
Socalbill
-
It's all about application.
Jimmy's playing amplified most of the time--when you think about many of the great amplified jazz tones of the world, laminates, being stiffer and less prone to feedback, are gonna be pretty popular.
Jimmy's playing pluged in a bunch--and he's known to play with organ players--who are always loud--so you know he's gonna need some volume.
That said, Wes seemed to do fine with that L5...
-
I have 2 laminated topped guitars, a 175 and a Sadowsky Jimmy Bruno. Both are much warmer and fatter sounding than my solid top semi-hollow. How much of that is the semi versus hollow thing, I can't tell. I also think there are a lot of variables to guitar tone... Strings, fingerboard, scale, pickups, pick, etc.
My understanding is that the laminated vs. solid top has much more to do with feedback when amplified. That laminated tops aren't as acoustically sonic compared to the solid top, but amplified sound great-- assuming all else being equal.
(edited-- just saw Mr. B's response. What he said...)
-
Thats interesting. I was thinking of it more from a builders point of view. A solid top I associate with building for acoustic tone. My Tacoma was light and sounded incredible acoustically. My Ibanez(s) are heavy, and they are not very loud acoustically, but you hear the sustain even then. I don't know what it is, but I used the same strings (SIT Silencer 11s), same picks (Dulop 207) and the same amp (Cube 60) and the Ibanez blew the Tacoma away. Now if someone wants to send me a L5 to check out, I'd give it a go
Socalbill
-
Hmm...this sort of question gets brought up alot, but my observation of the history of jazz guitar usage leads me to these conclusions: acoustic archtops were designed to be rhythm instruments that had reduced dynamics compared to a flat top guitar, but a tone that cut through better as a rhythm instrument, oh and by the way, archtops were 4 string tenor guitars before they became 6 strings, coming from the 4 string dixie rhythm banjo family, not the guitar family.
When it comes to solo single line melody playing, when done acoustically, you didn't see archtops, you had Django playing a flat top with a sound hole, in a small string group, without drums. Then you finally had Charlie Christian put a pickup on his guitar and everything changed. Now, you had guys soloing on archtops that were electric guitars, plugged into amps.
I guess what I'm getting at, is that the archtop was never intended originally to have the sweet tone or the volume for soloing. The jazz tone we all talk about is from an electric guitar. The properties of the best acoustic archtops don't necessarily make them great electric guitars. It's more about the pickups and the amp, and why you can get a pretty sweet jazz tone from a solidbody. I know lots of folks won't agree with me, but that how I see and hear it.
-
Masterful reply CG. That makes sense. Solid top archtops were designed to operate acoustically and cut through in a band setting. They are really acoustic guitars. Laminated top archtops were designed with pickups in mind. They are electric guitars. This makes a lot of sense. Thanks,
Socalbill
-
Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
-
I thought that the very first archtops made by Orville Gibson & Loyd Loar were all 6 strings.
-
Once plugged in, solid spruce tops are bright sounding to my ears.
Each guitar design is working with a range of frequencies. An L5 has a certain singing quality to it, especially around the 12th fret and above, right where many laminated guitars are beginning to lose sustain and tone.
Each instrument style sits great in a certain volume range too. I've spent lots of money for guitars that had a great sound at a volume that I could never use and be heard. And as soon as I exceeded that volume, all nuance was lost. Sometimes in big places a Telecaster on the front pickup was GREAT!
-
Originally Posted by SamBooka
Eddie Condon (pretty famous early swing player) used a tenor guitar.
Lots of swing band rhythm players with archtops were converted banjo players.
I took lessons from just such a fellow: the late "Adirondak Bill" (Banden) of Scotia, NY was just such a convert. He played tenor banjo, then when the popularity of banjo was eclipsed by guitar he started on tenor guitar, but then further converted to six-string pretty quickly. A very common tale.
Later in life he even developed his chops on nylon string guitar, and finally developed a unique finger style for tenor banjo. I guess he went back to his first love, in a way.
Peter Sprague & Leonard Patton "Can't Find My Way...
Today, 07:47 PM in The Songs