$2500 Archtop Question

**omphalopsychos** · 02-07-2017, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

Sounds nice.

Is there an issue with the sustain on the upper notes, though, or is the player just not paying enough attention to the melody so he can do his little chord moves?

I can confirm it's the poor playing.

**mr. beaumont** · 02-07-2017, 11:03 AM

I don't think it's poor playing, he just needs to milk that melody a little more and not be so eager to get into (the very cool) chord voicings. Overall, the tone is quite nice, and well balanced. Probably the most I've liked a plugged in Eastman. Usually they sound very "brittle" to my ears, the models with the floating pickups especially.

**Bluedawg** · 02-07-2017, 11:08 AM

I doubt that I could get more than $2K US for my Sweet 16 ... I beat it up pretty good playing rhythm guitar in a swing band LOL ... it has a floating pickup and a wonderful acoustic sound

I picked up an 18 inch acoustic Campellone non cut away archtop for $3300 ....and it is a lovely thing to hear

So you can get decent archtop acoustic in that range

**jads57** · 02-07-2017, 04:16 PM

I'll get flamed but here goes........... I never found any Heritage 17" Eagle Archtop that sounded as good as my Eastman 810CE acoustiacally speaking. I did however found a Sweet 16" that did sound excellent! Again it's all personal choice, but I've tried out plenty of Heritage Eagles over the last 25 years.

**Gabor** · 02-07-2017, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by GNAPPI

Good luck in your search. I don't know about the hanging angle of that 175, I would think it may cause a problem long term.

That was my first exact first thought when I saw the picture...

**DaveLeeNC** · 02-07-2017, 04:37 PM

Re: Jads57 "I will probably get flamed for ..."

Sorry - couldn't resist. dave

**2bornot2bop** · 02-07-2017, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by dconeill

If you're looking for a guitar to be played acoustically, skip the archtop. Particularly for only $2500, you won't get much of an acoustic archtop. But more to the point, archtops were developed to play rhythm accompaniment to a big band - they're sound cannons, not delicate sensitive flowers. You'd be better off with a flattop, and there are lots of nice ones available for $2500.

At the risk of sounding contrarian - You can't be serious!

There are many used "archtops" available at or near $2500, that are carved spruce with maple backs, and made in America. But maybe you don't get out much....it's kewl.

**Woody Sound** · 02-07-2017, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by jads57

I'll get flamed but here goes........... I never found any Heritage 17" Eagle Archtop that sounded as good as my Eastman 810CE acoustiacally speaking. I did however found a Sweet 16" that did sound excellent! Again it's all personal choice, but I've tried out plenty of Heritage Eagles over the last 25 years.

No flame here, agreed. As an acoustic archtop the Eastmans sound fabulous, especially at the price point.

**Longways to Go** · 02-07-2017, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by DaveLeeNC

Yeah - the choices at that used price point in flat top land are immense. I just don't care for the flattop sound and it is probably my classical guitar bias as the archtop (to my ear) attacks and sustains more like a classical. I have a tough time damping bass notes while doing anything else at the same time (getting better). And I find that flattops shove all kinds of 'additional damping situations' at me where archtops and my classical are similar.

dave

I vote +1 on the flat top idea.

Totally true about the damping situations, but I must admit I was thinking about this thread as I was playing my old L7 this evening, and found myself damping like crazy! that old guitar was ringing out -- and sounding great BTW. A different voice from a flat top, but a lively archtop still can have lots of resonance. Just food for thought. . .

**medblues** · 02-07-2017, 10:48 PM

Somehow we forgot to mention the Loar LH-700. $1500 new all solid carved

**2bornot2bop** · 02-08-2017, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by medblues

Somehow we forgot to mention the Loar LH-700. $1500 new all solid carved

I recently acquired a Loar LH700. The guitar is perfect in every way. A fabulous guitar and acoustically loud! I also own an LH650. I'm very high on the upper end Loar guitars, in spite of some issues of Loar guitars with poor neck angles.

**Woody Sound** · 02-09-2017, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop

I recently acquired a Loar LH700. The guitar is perfect in every way. A fabulous guitar and acoustically loud! I also own an LH650. I'm very high on the upper end Loar guitars, in spite of some issues of Loar guitars with poor neck angles.

Do they still have the very thick V-neck like the original Loar Gibsons?

**DaveLeeNC** · 02-09-2017, 02:14 PM

Well, this is frustrating. One element of finding the right instrument in my case (given my constraints) is the question "can I deal with a 17 inch body guitar". An answer of 'no' certainly narrows the field a good bit. My ES-175D is 16 inches where my classical is right at 14.75. This difference is not a problem for me, but 17???

I like living in a small town but it does have its disadvantages. For example there is not (from all I can tell) a single 17 inch lower bout guitar anywhere in the county. So it is an hour drive (one way) to test this out. OTOH around here we think that having to wait a single extra stoplight cycle is something to complain about :-)

Another thing that has occurred to me is the question "when I want to play a guitar through my amp (which will be more often than not) do I really want to get up, walk across the house, take the guitar out of its bottom and top holding stuff, walk back, and then repeat when I am done? I probably don't want to do that, so this changes things a bit. Before I felt like 'a different form of amplification like piezo or ...)' might be a plus as it would give me variety. Not so sure about that now.

Being a naturally over-analytical and cautious guy, this slow pace works for me :-). And I really do need to try out a 17 inch body before I accept or reject that. My 'size doesn't matter' short list is all 17's, but ...

dave

**Woody Sound** · 02-09-2017, 02:29 PM

There are a LOT of great 16" acoustic archtops..

**Bluedawg** · 02-09-2017, 02:48 PM

FWIW

I find that using a strap even while sitting and holding my guitar in the classical position (over your left leg for a right handed person) helps me to easily adjust to even an 18 inch bout

**DaveLeeNC** · 02-09-2017, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by Woody Sound

There are a LOT of great 16" acoustic archtops..

I didn't want to imply otherwise. It just so happens that what I have found of interest that is available now (all on the used market) is 17 inches.

dave

**DaveLeeNC** · 02-09-2017, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Bluedawg

FWIW

I find that using a strap even while sitting and holding my guitar in the classical position (over your left leg for a right handed person) helps me to easily adjust to even an 18 inch bout

That is interesting. I would have guessed that 18 inches would be out of the question. Do you actually play an instrument that large in a traditional classical guitar position without being excessively uncomfortable? Maybe there is some price flexibility on this one:

Gibson Super 400 CESN 1959 Blonde | Reverb

I see primarily three parameters of interest here

1) Where the strings are which is relatively adjustable with the left leg height and neck angle

2) The pivot point for your right arm (where it rests on the guitar relative to the strings and your body). This to me seems the most important.

3) How the guitar sits between your legs. I notice this with my 16" ES-175D (but it isn't a big deal) and really would wonder about this with a (for example) Super 400. Or the one shown below :-).

Thanks.

dave

**Groyniad** · 02-09-2017, 04:21 PM

i just had a modern (post 75?) es 175 d

i then got a '59 reissue

it made me realize that at least in the fifties (and if you got a good one) the 175 sure as hec IS an acoustic instrument - an acoustic instrument with amazing pickups that only get the sound they do because of the strength of the acoustic signal going into them

if i was you (and i am speaking from current experience here) - i would hunt until i found a '59 reissue at a great price and go for that.

i'm going to do a review of this thing soon so i can really spell out clearly why its so amazing.

(its not just that its lighter - its that it totally sings acoustically)

**Bluedawg** · 02-09-2017, 06:01 PM

I picked up a used Super 400 last year .... no Bigsby LOL

With a strap it is quite comfortable and my hands are in a good classical position .... helps me with big stretch Johnny Smith chords

Maybe I'm big enough to handle it or my arms are long enough ... YMMV

I studied classical for a few years and that's the way I prefer to hold my guitars

I'll be dreaming of that '59 Super 400 ... even the Bigsby is cool on that one

**Bluedawg** · 02-09-2017, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by Bluedawg

I picked up a used Super 400 last year .... no Bigsby LOL

With a strap it is quite comfortable and my hands are in a good classical position .... helps me with big stretch Johnny Smith chords

Maybe I'm big enough to handle it or my arms are long enough ... YMMV

I studied classical for a few years and that's the way I prefer to hold my guitars

I'll be dreaming of that '59 Super 400 ... even the Bigsby is cool on that one

and with the strap .. I don't need a footstool ...

I have an 18 inch Campellone acoustic as well ... it doesn't have a strap button on the bottom (yet) .. it works well on my left leg with the foot elevated, usually on a guitar case

**ThatRhythmMan** · 02-09-2017, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Groyniad

i just had a modern (post 75?) es 175 d

i then got a '59 reissue

it made me realize that at least in the fifties (and if you got a good one) the 175 sure as hec IS an acoustic instrument - an acoustic instrument with amazing pickups that only get the sound they do because of the strength of the acoustic signal going into them

if i was you (and i am speaking from current experience here) - i would hunt until i found a '59 reissue at a great price and go for that.

i'm going to do a review of this thing soon so i can really spell out clearly why its so amazing.

(its not just that its lighter - its that it totally sings acoustically)

I have a Historic '59 Reissue and it's a really good acoustic instrument, but it doesn't compare to my actual 1952 ES-175 in that regard. Of course the '52 has feedback issues as bad as my floating pickup spruce top guitars.

The main easily noticeable differences between the two are two humbuckers in the reissue vs one P90 in the '52, thinner lacquer on the '52, and a weight of only about 5 lb 2 oz vs about 6 1/2 lbs for the reissue.

**2bornot2bop** · 02-09-2017, 09:35 PM

Originally Posted by Woody Sound

Do they still have the very thick V-neck like the original Loar Gibsons?

Thicker than usual that I'm accustomed too, yes. But I've adjusted to the neck, as I would a piano's action. Maybe coming from piano and not knowing any better is bliss?

The point I'm making about this particular guitar is, the action is fully adjustable. Note the photo depicting how low the action is and yet there's lots of saddle adjustment left to raise or lower the action. The knock on Loar's is they've got suspect necks...but the percentage of guitars with poor neck angles, I believe, could be overblown do to internet criticism.

This guitars volume is loud, and yet the guitar has lots of finesse, and overall is built to a standard I've seen in made in America archtops. I've seen enough guitars to tell if it's the real deal. Here's a few quickies of the neck, etc.

**SierraTango** · 02-10-2017, 04:02 PM

I still think this would be a great fit for what you are looking for:

Eastman AR910CE Natural | Reverb

How far are you from Richmond? That's a LOT of guitar for the money!

After years of gigging with both 16" and 17" archtops-it's easy for me to get through a 3 hour gig with either one. I use a strap whether sitting or standing. Always.

**DaveLeeNC** · 02-10-2017, 05:19 PM

Sierra - I am still undecided WRT 16 vs. 17 inches and 1 11/16 vs 1 3/4. But that is a decent deal I would judge (4.5 hours one way).

Nice bike - I think I own /ride its grandfather :-)

dave

**SierraTango** · 02-10-2017, 05:53 PM

IDK, however since that 910 is located and being sold by Sam Ash, a major retailer, they may have a return policy. That would save you a 9 hour drive I guess. A quick survey of other 910's on Reverb certainly shows that price to be outstanding.
I watched Eastman go from a total joke to one of the best carved archtop options in the span of about 17 years. I would think if you are coming from a classical background the 1 3/4" nut would be more comfortable.

I lived in Oriental, NC for 12 years from 1989-2001. Not a stoplight in town-population 800. I enjoyed getting away on a road trip to Richmond-it's a cool town. Well...I have some family connections there too.

Love your Bianchi-think I see the Columbus tubing decal on the seat tube. My last steel frame was a Pogliaghi.

Quite frankly, though-I'd rather be on my Ducati.