The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 150
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by teleboli

    Here's AB making a Tal sound about as good as I've heard (for my taste)



    He also plays an older/modern 175 if you search Andy Brown.
    this is *the* sound .... just lovely! Great player too.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=Dutchbopper;733127]
    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis D
    That is exactly my point about how 175's sound. That's what they all have in common. And that is all you'll ever get out of every one of them. A standard 175 with tone set anywhere, is a ' muffled ' L-4 or L-5 =QUOTE]

    Man o man, you are dead wrong there. There's people that actually prefer the 175 to an L4 or L5 because of the nature of the sound. And I am one of them.

    You must have missed about 1000 discussions on this particular subject here.

    DB

    Sorry DB, I didn't miss the 1000 or so discussions here.....(( all the 'woody tones' and 'laminated maple vs. laminated spruce' etc etc )) .....I just especially liked your choice of the word ' muffled ', in describing someone toning down an
    L-4 & L-5, and think it fits when describing a 175......

    If you, or anyone else, prefer the 175 , God love you, have at it.....From new, I owned one of those vintage '60s 175's , and like I said, the only sound it had is the one sound and tone it had....I didn't buy it because it was some kind of Holy Grail, it was just Gibson's entry level jazz box.........Then I learned about & bought an '89 L-4 and found I could still get that 175 sound, if I'd ever want it, but it was also capable of other sounds.....And then I also found out all the gigging guitarists had always been on the lookout for used L-4's, and never 175's, because they were just a better buy - -and still are, IMO....

    I'm pretty sure anyone with an L-4 can get close to a 175 sound if he has to have it, but you don't have that multi-sound & tone luxury with any model or year 175, in my opinion. All you get with a 175 is that particular instruments' sound.

    If you prefer it, more power to you.



    MHO

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Can you get the "thunk" out of an L4? or is more like for an L5 a "Plunk"?

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    I have a TF and haven't found a better guitar when playing jazz with others. It always responds with exactly what I want when I want it and sits just right in the mix. Especially playing in a lively room, I would pick the Tal first every time.

    The funny thing about it though is that I don't really care for the sound of it when playing alone. If I'm sitting down by myself, I would pick a 175 over the Tal every time.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Tone is so personal. I have found with L4CES's people either love them to death or don't like them at all.
    Mine is one of the best archtops I have ever owned in my life. I love it.
    I have had a lot of dud 175's in my life but when you get a good one....they are spectacular.
    I have owned 3 TF's in my life. 1 with the famous broken headstock that JD now owns. They all sounded wonderful IMO.
    25.5 or 24.75 should be a big factor in your decision. Personally I like both depending on what I am playing. I believe you can't make a wrong choice. All great guitars IMO. LOL

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinlander
    Can you get the "thunk" out of an L4? or is more like for an L5 a "Plunk"?
    L4's are not thunkers. Well maybe the ones with maple back and sides ? Mine is carved mahogany back and sides. Mine is the most balanced guitar I have ever owned. Every string on every fret has the exact same volume.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
    Tal Farlow is my hero.
    Well that makes at least 2 of us here


  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    Regarding the difference between the 175 and the L4, besides the carved spruce / plywood top difference, on the L4 the neck PU is placed closer to the neck whereas on the 175 it's placed closer towards the bridge. That means a sound difference. The L4 will have a more spread and lush tone whereas the 175 will have a more compact and midrangy tone. BTW, Joe Pass' last custom 175 had the PU placed as on the L4.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=vinlander;733157]Can you get the "thunk" out of an L4? or is more like for an L5 a "Plunk"?[/QUOTE]

    It's kind of in-between, TBH. It does have that thunk...when you dig in to play a note, it's almost like you can hear it resonating toward the neck join underneath the front pu.

    But it's also got a lot of the richness of the L5...a Baby Grand, not a Concert Grand, which is what the L5 is.

    The back pu is more twangy, I think, than an L5, so I think you can get a lot of tones out of it.

    And I love an ebony bd. To me, the notes sound clearer and more defined.

    I have the maple-back version. Maple and spruce, a combination that works well on the L5. I don't know why people assume the maple-backed version is inferior. I love mine, and honestly when I bought it, I didn't know the difference. Picked it up at a REAL good price, and it's my flagship. I'll never sell mine.

    These are all good guitars, but they are all slightly different tonally.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    so full of misinformation. The gigging guitarists were using 175s (and still are in many cases) because of all of its wonderful attributes. I recently went through a dozen L5s looking for one I liked and in the end, I kept my '89 175 over the L5 because I liked it's tone and playability better. Pat Metheny, Jim Hall, Joe Pass, Jonathan Kreisberg, Randy Johnston all loved their 175s and any of them could have played an L5. And if you think all of those guys sound alike - because after all, a 175 has just one sound - i don't know what to say?!?

    And sorry, an L4 or L5 CAN NOT get anywhere close to the tone of a good 175. A statement like that is like saying you can get a strat to sound like a Les Paul or a martin d28 to sound like a nylon string guitar.

    Point me to any L4 or L5 that sounds like this 175 tone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis D

    Sorry DB, I didn't miss the 1000 or so discussions here.....(( all the 'woody tones' and 'laminated maple vs. laminated spruce' etc etc )) .....I just especially liked your choice of the word ' muffled ', in describing someone toning down an
    L-4 & L-5, and think it fits when describing a 175......

    If you, or anyone else, prefer the 175 , God love you, have at it.....From new, I owned one of those vintage '60s 175's , and like I said, the only sound it had is the one sound and tone it had....I didn't buy it because it was some kind of Holy Grail, it was just Gibson's entry level jazz box.........Then I learned about & bought an '89 L-4 and found I could still get that 175 sound, if I'd ever want it, but it was also capable of other sounds.....And then I also found out all the gigging guitarists had always been on the lookout for used L-4's, and never 175's, because they were just a better buy - -and still are, IMO....

    I'm pretty sure anyone with an L-4 can get close to a 175 sound if he has to have it, but you don't have that multi-sound & tone luxury with any model or year 175, in my opinion. All you get with a 175 is that particular instruments' sound.

    If you prefer it, more power to you.



    MHO
    Last edited by agentsmith; 01-21-2017 at 04:51 PM.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinlander
    Well that makes at least 2 of us here

    Amen brother !

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by agentsmith
    so full of misinformation. The gigging guitarists were using 175s (and still are in many cases) because of all of its wonderful attributes.

    And sorry, an L4 or L5 CAN NOT get anywhere close to the tone of a good 175.

    Sure they can -- just start the L-4 with the tone knob at zero, then turn it clockwise 'til the sound is barely audible, then back it down 1/16 of an inch. And while I didn't say an L-5 could sound like a 175, I'm guessing using this method, you could probably get close, but who'd want to ?

    .....and Jim Hall's 175 which was either a 175 or was at times a 175 with an ebony f/b, or maybe an L-4, with something maybe done at Gibson............but he liked that sound and that's all he wanted, so ok...... I'm just saying if that's all the sound you'll ever want, then that's the one to buy.......but an L-4 gives you more options --again for basically the same money......


    ...but to call Pat Metheny's as an example of a 175- -with all his on-stage gear, etc etc ?

    ......talk about misinformation......

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    To be accurate, there is a pretty large list of guitarists who never/rarely played a 175:

    Charlie Christian, Oscar Moore, Remo Palmieri, Barney Kessel, Tal Farlow, Hank Garland, Benson (not sure, might have played it some, but not most of his career), Martino---same deal as Benson I think; Johnny Smith, Mundell Lowe, Louis Stewart, Joe Diorio, Bruce Forman, Wes M. (a few times, I think), Sal Salvador, George Van Eps, Kenny Burrell, Ed Bickert; Django; Freddie Green; Grant Green; Andy Brown; Roni Ben-Hur; George Barnes; Irving Ashby; Tuck Andress; Howard Alden; Abercrombie; Scofield; Russell Malone; Billy Bean; Billy Bauer; Chuck Wayne; Henry Johnson; Howard Roberts; Les Paul; Bucky Pizzarelli; John Pizzarelli, Frank Vignola; Joe Puma; Jimmy Raney; Emily Remler; Randy Vincent; Mark Whitfield; Jimmy Wyble; Attila Zoller; Ted Greene; Peter Mazza; Jesse Van Ruler.

    What these people played is all over the lot. The 175 is a great sound, but it is far from the ONLY sound in the jazz world.

    The L5-CES is probably overrevered, IMO, based on how many people actually used them. It's obviously a huge part of the Wes M. sound.

    PS: Joe Diorio did play a 175, and then later it appears, switched to an L4. My bad.
    Last edited by goldenwave77; 01-22-2017 at 10:02 AM. Reason: correct Joe Diorio statement

  15. #39
    Dutchbopper Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by goldenwave77
    The L5-CES is probably overrevered, IMO, based on how many people actually used them. It's obviously a huge part of the Wes M. sound.
    Indeed it is.

    Jack never said the 175 is the ONLY guitar sound by the way. He only said that the sound on that recording cannot be obtained from an L4 or L5.

    DB

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    True enough, although the L4 sound is pret-ty close. The 175 that Joe P. played at the end of his career (Jazz Baltica live clips) is really pretty close to an L4, due to its pu placement, and ebony bd. The mahog. body L4's really are different. Listen to Joe Diorio's clip on his L4 where he demonstrates pentatonic minors...a little "creamier sounding" than a 175, which is probably mostly the ebony fingerbd., I think, but the general character is quite close.

    I agree that Joe P's "Joy Spring" tone is great, but he didn't even sound like that all the time. This makes me think that it is as much an artifact of the sound engineering, and mixing, as anything else.

    And Jim Hall loved his 175 so much that he swapped out the pu's and put Guild pu's in it, to get rid of some of the mid-range thunk, probably, as Guilds to me sound a little more upper-range treble-y. And he later switched to a Sadowski (though I think he sounded better on the 175).

    And Metheny loved his 175 so much that he cut an extra hole in it by mistake, and continued to use it, probably out of inertia. His sound is SO processed, though, that I think it almost doesn't matter what he plays.


    All the debates/points of view maybe need to be divided up into how does the guitar sound (i) by itself, (ii) in a mix of other instruments, and (iii) in a live setting, with feedback, etc.

    A Tal Farlow is less rich, to my ear, than an L5 or boutique-y archtop floaters, in (i) above, but for (ii) and (iii) it is probably every bit as good, and maybe better. It's got that snappy, well-defined tone that cuts through. Same deal, I suspect with a 175.

    (I had a 347 that I played in a student band when I took lessons with Peter Mazza. I always thought it sounded kind of dark, and not that great, but boy did it ever cut through....everyone commented on it when I set aside a Strat, and substituted the 347. (Should have never sold that guitar...Norlin-era be damned.)
    Last edited by goldenwave77; 01-21-2017 at 06:41 PM. Reason: correct Joe Diorio cite

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    I have two 175's and an L-5. I rarely gig with the L-5. I like the short scale and...the tone. I also own 3 genuine D'Angelicos. And at the end of the day, my favorite gigging guitar in my 97 ES-175.

    There are two components to this debate, tone and feel. If you like the tone of an L-5, but the feel of the 175, get a L-4CES. If you like the tone of the 175, but the feel of an L-5, get the Tal. There are no "right" answers here. Get the guitar that suits you for both tone and feel.

    The 175 suits me for tone and feel. YMMV

    And I heartily agree that 175's vary in both tone and feel. The search for the right guitar is damn near as hard as the search for the right woman!

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Stringswinger
    ...

    There are two components to this debate, tone and feel. If you like the tone of an L-5, but the feel of the 175, get a L-4CES. If you like the tone of the 175, but the feel of an L-5, get the Tal. There are no "right" answers here. Get the guitar that suits you for both tone and feel.

    ...
    Wow. That's just utterly incredible. You just put into a few words something I've been trying to figure out for years now. My question is actually "Why do I love my MiK/Peerless Epihphone Broadway just as much as my Epi Elitist Broadway?" The latter does the L5ces thing pretty well... but the cheaper Epi gets more of the 175 sound from the big body and longer scale, which is what I always associated with the Tal Farlow: laminate body, but bigger (though not as deep) and with a longer scale.

    Did anybody also observe just how utterly drop-dead gorgeous your typical L4ces is? All those L5 appointments on that smaller body just make it so... how you say it... sexy?

    Obviously there are differences in degree... we're talking Epiphones vs. Gibsons, but still...

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    No they can't but if you can't hear the diff that's fine. Dutchbopper and I can though.

    It's all subjective. And let's hear that clip of your L4 sounding like Joe Pass' 175!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis D
    Sure they can -- just start the L-4 with the tone knob at zero, then turn it clockwise 'til the sound is barely audible, then back it down 1/16 of an inch. And while I didn't say an L-5 could sound like a 175, I'm guessing using this method, you could probably get close, but who'd want to ?

    .....and Jim Hall's 175 which was either a 175 or was at times a 175 with an ebony f/b, or maybe an L-4, with something maybe done at Gibson............but he liked that sound and that's all he wanted, so ok...... I'm just saying if that's all the sound you'll ever want, then that's the one to buy.......but an L-4 gives you more options --again for basically the same money......


    ...but to call Pat Metheny's as an example of a 175- -with all his on-stage gear, etc etc ?

    ......talk about misinformation......
    Last edited by agentsmith; 01-21-2017 at 07:55 PM.

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Joy Spring is a wonderful tone but the amp he used and the setting he was in probably had more to do with the tone.
    Listen to his 1973 Concord live recordings with Herb Ellis on his same 175 and his sound was not all that great.
    I saw JP at least 30 times live and his sound was always all over the map.

    Now for great L5 tone.....Listen to Mark Whitfield on his True Blue and 7th Ave.Stroll recordings.
    Frankly I love the tone of all Gibson archtops. L5, L4, S400, TF, 175, Byrdland, JS, LeGrand, all winners to me.
    I don't think our new member can make a wrong call on the 4 Gibson models he is considering.
    Best of luck with whatever Gibson you decide to get.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
    Joy Spring is a wonderful tone but the amp he used and the setting he was in probably had more to do with the tone.
    Listen to his 1973 Concord live recordings with Herb Ellis on his same 175 and his sound was not all that great.
    I saw JP at least 30 times live and his sound was always all over the map.

    Now for great L5 tone.....Listen to Mark Whitfield on his True Blue and 7th Ave.Stroll recordings.
    Frankly I love the tone of all Gibson archtops. L5, L4, S400, TF, 175, Byrdland, JS, LeGrand, all winners to me.
    I don't think our new member can make a wrong call on the 4 Gibson models he is considering.
    Best of luck with whatever Gibson you decide to get.

    " And now for something a helluva lot more important - - "

    How are you Vinny ? Are you home ?

    Hope you're doing a lot better !!

    Take care and don't let it get you !

    All the best !

    Dennis

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
    Joy Spring is a wonderful tone but the amp he used and the setting he was in probably had more to do with the tone.
    Listen to his 1973 Concord live recordings with Herb Ellis on his same 175 and his sound was not all that great.
    I saw JP at least 30 times live and his sound was always all over the map.

    Now for great L5 tone.....Listen to Mark Whitfield on his True Blue and 7th Ave.Stroll recordings.
    Frankly I love the tone of all Gibson archtops. L5, L4, S400, TF, 175, Byrdland, JS, LeGrand, all winners to me.
    I don't think our new member can make a wrong call on the 4 Gibson models he is considering.
    Best of luck with whatever Gibson you decide to get.
    Yup ... it's hard to go wrong with any of those choices .....

    Someday maybe I'll add a Tal to complete my Gibson collection ...

    I'm not that interested in the 775 ... but they are nice guitars and you may find it the best of the lot if you can compare the actual individual guitars before you buy

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    It is best to play as many of them as you can get your hands on but if you can't, consider what feels comfortable to you.

    I like the 15" to 16" size as I grow older. So, that leaves the TF out. Much as I like Joe Pass and Jim Hall and Herb Ellis and Kenny Burrell and some of Pat Metheny and the other cool cats who played the ES-175 I don't like the ES-175 tone all that much. It is the classic jazz sound heard on many records but it is not a sound I like. It lacks a certain complexity. But it is the jazz sound. My goal: I want to play like Joe Pass, not sound like Joe Pass. The sound I like is that of a carved solid wood top, be it spruce, cedar or redwood. I found out that I am not really into laminate maple tops and looking at my little collection I find only 3 laminate Gibsons; a '53-'54 ES-150, a 2006 ES-175SP P90, a 2002 ES-5N.

    That really leaves the L-4CES, in mahogany, preferably. I betcha that if someone had given Joe Pass an L-4CES when he walked out of Synanon, that would be the jazz guitar today. Way back when, the L4CES was a true custom order. Few were made and only to order; it was brought back to the catalogue in 1986.

    That said, a good ES-175 has that unmistakeable dry rotund thunk with little sustain to the attack of the notes that is the classic jazz tone. Hearing a good ES-175 brings instant relief; it is like going back to mom's cooking after a lifetime of eating out at the city's best restaurants. It is the familiar old flannel shirt. It is the voice of one's first real girlfriend.

    Caveat: I am not too sure if it is the laminate construction or the material. I have found laminated spruce tops somewhat more pleasing to me auld ears than laminated maple. Never heard a solid carved maple top that I liked; they are worse than laminated maple tops.

    George Benson has played spruce top guitars much of the time. His fave git was the Gibson Johnny Smith, I believe.
    Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-22-2017 at 02:02 AM.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Hi Vinny, glad you're back. Hope all is well. I disagree that joy spring has more to do with the tone. I have owned dozens of amps, about a dozen L5s and probably a dozen 175s. I have run the guitars through the same amps in many cases and no way does an L5 ever sound like a 175. The amp shapes the basic tone but the basic tone of those 2 "devices" is so different that no amount of rolling off the tone control will get you that sound. A 175 just has a characteristic thunk that is not present on a carved top instrument. The closest I have heard is my '63 kessel but none of the other dozens of carved top instruments I've owned can come close to the 175 tone.

    And yes, don't forget I studied with Joe Pass so I know something about his tone. His tone with herb ellis was poor, agreed. But it was because he (and herb) struck a deal with Polytone and both were tired of schlepping around heavy amps. Joe told me in the late '70s that he'd rather sit in his living room drinking wine than shedding jazz guitar so that was where his head was at at that particular point in time. However, in the Joy Spring days, he was getting "the tone" in spades.

    And most good 175s are in that same ballpark. By the way, the polytone was capable of getting a really sweet jazz tone. It was plagued by a very inexpensive and light speaker. If you run a polytone through a JBL , you will get a delicious sound but you'll lose volume due to the speaker impedance difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
    Joy Spring is a wonderful tone but the amp he used and the setting he was in probably had more to do with the tone.
    Listen to his 1973 Concord live recordings with Herb Ellis on his same 175 and his sound was not all that great.
    I saw JP at least 30 times live and his sound was always all over the map.

    Now for great L5 tone.....Listen to Mark Whitfield on his True Blue and 7th Ave.Stroll recordings.
    Frankly I love the tone of all Gibson archtops. L5, L4, S400, TF, 175, Byrdland, JS, LeGrand, all winners to me.
    I don't think our new member can make a wrong call on the 4 Gibson models he is considering.
    Best of luck with whatever Gibson you decide to get.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    The OP asked 'which to buy', and an L-5 was not mentioned.....

    ..my intent was just to help someone......I'm pretty sure an L-5 prospect / buyer is not even considering a 175....

    ....so again, if a 175 is on your radar and the L-4 is also one you're going to consider, good !...I just believe the L-4 will give you more sound and tone options down the road, in case you ever tire of however that particular 175 sounds.....and will give it to you for the same money.....

    ...and unlike comments here about 175's, I'm real sure I've never heard anyone say about an L-4 : " I've played a lot of them, and a lot of them are duds ", or " It took me years and trying out dozens to find a good one . "



    ...MHO.....

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Maybe the fact an L4 like a Tal is a custom shop instrument might help in being more consistent, however not that it prevents QC from dropping the ball once in while with cases of tail raise/overpleking, badly cut nut and so on.