Any Modern Archtops Sound Similar to Vintage Archtops?

[ArchiMark]

Hi,

Just joined this illustrious group this week. Great resource, lots of interesting threads with excellent info.

Have a question for you all....don't know if it can be easily answered, but would like to hear any thoughts you might have on this. So, hear goes....

I have nice old '51 Epiphone Triumph Regent blonde with one floating Armstrong pickup.

Usually play it at home without an amp, just acoustically. It warms up after a few minutes of playing and then it puts out a lovely warm, mellow, sound that I really like. Although if strummed hard, it will really bark as they say.

When I listen to various jazz guitar videos online, many sound a bit too bright to my ears.

My question is whether any of the 'modern archtops' would have a somewhat similar (wouldn't expect exactly the same...) sound as my ol' Epi to them?

Specifically, curious about some of the nice looking modern archtops I read about here or see online such as Heritage Golden Eagle, Ibanez (L5 copy?...), Guild, D'Angelico, D'Aquisto or some of the custom makers like Campellone, Cushman, Holst, etc....

Or is only way to get that sound is by using an old vintage archtop like my Epi?

Thanks for any and all thoughts!

Hope it's not a silly question....

Mark

[jads57]

A lot of older archtops were Parallel braced as opposed to the modern X bracing used in many of todays designs. This is just a generelazation and there are exceptoins on both sides. Also your guitar is over 60 years old and has had time to open up sonically.
Mark Campellone builds many of his guitars with a Gibson L-7 voice in mind. Other luthiers have specific voices they like but can tailor it to the customers wishes. I have an Elferink Tonemaster that I asked Frans Elferink to build in that more traditional Gibson thicker top w/an X bracing (Johnny Smith style) but with a longer L-5C 25&1/2" scale and slimmer body depth 2&1/2"

[rlrhett]

I don't know specifically about 50's era Epiphones, but the 30's acoustic Epiphones is the sound I have always strived for in my acoustic archtops. I think the problem with talking about "archtop tone" is that archtops have a split personality. Early archtops were acoustic instruments, but soon became electric guitars.

Just from my time on this forum (which is only a few months myself) I have been surprised to discover that 90% of people are looking for the electric guitar archtop. I don't see a lot of love for the acoustic instrument. I could be wrong, but that seems to be my seat of the pants impression. There seems little interest in that acoustic tone you are referring. It isn't surprising to discover that the vast majority of guitars being made now are basically electric guitars.

Electric and Acoustic archtops aren't really compatible beasts. If you are playing improvised lines to cut through a band, you probably need an electric guitar. Same as if you were playing in a blues band or rock. Feedback is an issue, and the warm tones and nuances of a good acoustic instrument get easily lost. For that you need a fairly heavily built guitar with only subtle resonances. In the acoustic world, having a plywood soundboard is heresy. For an electric archtop it is probably preferable. Heck, there are convincing arguments that the electric archtop sound can be reasonably well recreated with a Telecaster and a good neck pickup.

If you are looking for a nuanced acoustic tone for recording or playing solo/small gigs, you need an archtop that is built differently. A good acoustic archtop will have that richness of tone, albeit one that is different than the obligatory Martin dreadnaught clone. Laminated tops with heavy plastic knobs, metal bridges, two humbuckers mounted right in the center of the soundboard, and possibly a centerblock are NOT going to give you that sound.

In short, they are really two different instruments. Akin to the difference between a classical and a steel string flat top.

[ArchiMark]

A lot of older archtops were Parallel braced as opposed to the modern X bracing used in many of todays designs. This is just a generelazation and there are exceptoins on both sides.

Good points, been trying to understand what the impact of the two main bracing types is on the archtop sound.

Also your guitar is over 60 years old and has had time to open up sonically.

Yes, agree...assume the age of mine (almost 66 years...) means that the spruce top may have come from nice old growth tree, has had ample time to season, and perhaps the age of the lacquer has some impact on sound too.

Mark Campellone builds many of his guitars with a Gibson L-7 voice in mind. Other luthiers have specific voices they like but can tailor it to the customers wishes. I have an Elferink Tonemaster that I asked Frans Elferink to build in that more traditional Gibson thicker top w/an X bracing (Johnny Smith style) but with a longer L-5C 25&1/2" scale and slimmer body depth 2&1/2"

The idea of a luthier tailoring your guitar's voice to your liking sounds very appealing...your guitar sounds like it must be very nice!

Thanks for all your input, jads57!

I don't know specifically about 50's era Epiphones, but the 30's acoustic Epiphones is the sound I have always strived for in my acoustic archtops. I think the problem with talking about "archtop tone" is that archtops have a split personality. Early archtops were acoustic instruments, but soon became electric guitars.

Probably one of the main differences between the 50's and 30's era Epiphones is likely that in 50's the cutaway style become more popular. My Epi is the cutaway style...but I purposely wanted one that had a floating pup, not built-in.

Just from my time on this forum (which is only a few months myself) I have been surprised to discover that 90% of people are looking for the electric guitar archtop. I don't see a lot of love for the acoustic instrument. I could be wrong, but that seems to be my seat of the pants impression. There seems little interest in that acoustic tone you are referring. It isn't surprising to discover that the vast majority of guitars being made now are basically electric guitars.

Now that you mention it, it does seem like there's more interest in the electric guitar type archtops.

Electric and Acoustic archtops aren't really compatible beasts. If you are playing improvised lines to cut through a band, you probably need an electric guitar. Same as if you were playing in a blues band or rock. Feedback is an issue, and the warm tones and nuances of a good acoustic instrument get easily lost. For that you need a fairly heavily built guitar with only subtle resonances. In the acoustic world, having a plywood soundboard is heresy. For an electric archtop it is probably preferable. Heck, there are convincing arguments that the electric archtop sound can be reasonably well recreated with a Telecaster and a good neck pickup.

If you are looking for a nuanced acoustic tone for recording or playing solo/small gigs, you need an archtop that is built differently. A good acoustic archtop will have that richness of tone, albeit one that is different than the obligatory Martin dreadnaught clone. Laminated tops with heavy plastic knobs, metal bridges, two humbuckers mounted right in the center of the soundboard, and possibly a centerblock are NOT going to give you that sound.

In short, they are really two different instruments. Akin to the difference between a classical and a steel string flat top.

Good points about the distinction between the two types.

Agree that if one plays with a band or does some gigs somewhere, you probably need a more electric type archtop.

As for me, I haven't played in type of jazz band situation since way back in my youth in the late '70's.

Given my profession is not music, I just play for my own enjoyment in my house.

So, my main interest (besides trying to improve my playing..), is to hear a really pleasing sound acoustically, as I haven't been using any amp (although lately have toyed with idea of getting one of those mini amps for fun...).

Thank you, rlrhett, for all your thoughts....

[jads57]

It always comes down to basically 2 types of archtops Acoustic w/ Floating pickup vs. Hollow Body (Carved and laminate) Electric with built in p/ups. And as well put rlrhett's post, it all depends on the band setting (loud w/ drums or more acoustic).

If nuance is what you're after then Acoustic Carved Top is what you want. But be prepared to pay more since Carved Tops are labor intensive to make. I'm extremely pleased with my Elferink and it was very reasonable $4-5k especially since the Euro rate is low.

Best of Luck!

[ArchiMark]

More good points, jads57....

Agree with you about impact of pickup differences.

Since I play at home for my own enjoyment, mostly acoustically, for me, floating pickup along with carves top is way to go.

If I ever play with a band again, I would consider a archtop with built-in pickups and possibly laminate top.

Any other comments about whether you can approximate somewhat the old vintage archtop sound in recent archtops?

[Jimmy Mack]

So many guitars being made, by so many makers, these days....you could spend a couple of years searching and trying out all the options!

Enjoy the old, the Epiphone, for you are very lucky to have it and that it pleases you.

[ArchiMark]

So many guitars being made, by so many makers, these days....you could spend a couple of years searching and trying out all the options!

Yes, indeed......but could be a fun journey, if one had the time to do it.......probably educational as well....

Enjoy the old, the Epiphone, for you are very lucky to have it and that it pleases you.

Thank you, Jimmy! Appreciate your good words....

Yes, I do feel lucky that I got it....and certainly would like to keep it.....

Just thought recently that it might be good to get a more modern archtop to use and put less wear and tear on the ol' Epi....but but don't have to do this....maybe I just have the 'wouldn't it be nice to get another archtop bug'....since it's been about 10 years since I got the Epi.....



Sold a very nice '68 Epi Howard Roberts Custom Blonde to get the '51 Triumph Regent......wish I'd kept it, but needed to sell to raise the $'s for the Triumph Regent....oh well.....

And traded a nice ol' '66 Gibson Les Paul Custom from my youth/rock band days to get the Howard Roberts....

So it goes....

Mark

[Fred Archtop]

iF SOMEONE

[Fred Archtop]

Hi,

If someone's looking for a vintage electric sound, then PU can make all the difference. If you are referreing to '40-'50 electric sounds then the key is to get a decent jazz box (either carved or laminated) equipped with a single coil PU relevant to this period, preferably a Charlie Christian type for a swing/bebop era or alternatively P90.

You can't get a Jimmy Raney/Barney Kessel/jim Hall original sound without CC (for the two firsts) or a P90 (for Jim and his good ES 175).

It works great this way.

Cheers.

[Hammertone]

When I listen to various jazz guitar videos online, many sound a bit too bright to my ears. My question is whether any of the 'modern archtops' would have a somewhat similar (wouldn't expect exactly the same...) sound as my ol' Epi ('51 Epiphone Triumph Regent blonde w/floating Armstrong pickup) to them?

Yes.

...Since I play at home for my own enjoyment, mostly acoustically, for me, floating pickup along with carves top is way to go. ….Any other comments about whether you can approximate somewhat the old vintage archtop sound in recent archtops?

The recent world of acoustic archtops offers a lot of choice. There are a few builders who have always offered instruments designed to perform similarly to older archtops, or who offer specific instruments with that sound, and there is a current trend among several modern builders to look back to the sound of the pre-Advanced Gibson L-5 archtop and attempt to copy it.

I have found most sound clips to be useless in determining the true sound of many archtop guitars. Generally speaking, I think the only way to understand the sound of a guitar is to play it in person. Of course, budget is a factor - I'd be happy to recommend several newer archtops that would "approximate somewhat the old vintage archtop sound" but, even used, these instruments are rarely available for under $3,000 - $4,000.

As far as pickups go, pretty much all of the newer acoustic archtop instruments can accommodate the installation of a vintage-style floating pickup like a Dearmond, or a McCarty-style floating P-90 assembly, floating CC (which is a new and very clever thing), or standard JS mini-humbucker.

[ArchiMark]

Hi,

Is someone's looking for a vintage electric sound, then PU can make all the difference. If you are referreing to '40-'50 electric sounds then the key is to get a decent jazz box (either carved or laminated) equipped with a single coil PU relevant to this period, preferably a Charlie Christian type for a swing/bebop era or alternatively P90.

You can't get a Jimmy Raney/Barney Kessel/jim Hall original sound without CC (for the two firsts) or a P90 (for Jim and his good ES 175).

It works great this way.

Cheers.

Thank you for bringing up pickup types.....agree that they make a real difference in sound....

Now all I gotta do if find out what CC means.....

Yes.

The recent world of acoustic archtops offers a lot of choice. There are a few builders who have always offered instruments designed to perform similarly to older archtops, or who offer specific instruments with that sound, and there is a current trend among several modern builders to look back to the sound of the pre-Advanced Gibson L-5 archtop and attempt to copy it.

Choice is good I think....for everyone....

I have found most sound clips to be useless in determining the true sound of many archtop guitars.

Agree that most are not as helpful as they could be. At least a few people doing comparisons take some effort to minimize variables between the guitars, same tone, volume, settings, same song played same way, etc.

Generally speaking, I think the only way to understand the sound of a guitar is to play it in person.

Yes, indeed...only problem is there isn't a good store with lots of archtops to try out near me.

Of course, budget is a factor - I'd be happy to recommend several newer archtops that would "approximate somewhat the old vintage archtop sound" but, even used, these instruments are rarely available for under $3,000 - $4,000.

Would appreciate your recommendations. Either here or message me if you prefer.

As far as pickups go, pretty much all of the newer acoustic archtop instruments can accommodate the installation of a vintage-style floating pickup like a Dearmond, or a McCarty-style floating P-90 assembly, floating CC (which is a new and very clever thing), or standard JS mini-humbucker.

Thanks for all your thoughts....


Still gotta find out what CC means.....

[DanielleOM]

CC = Charlie Christian (The original ones were massive and you typically see mounting screws through the top of the guitar located between the pickup and the bridge.)

[ArchiMark]

CC = Charlie Christian (The original ones were massive and you typically see mounting screws through the top of the guitar located between the pickup and the bridge.)

Thank you for the explanation!

[Hammertone]

...only problem is there isn't a good store with lots of archtops to try out near me. Would appreciate your recommendations. Either here or message me if you prefer.

OK.

If you like the sound of a 1930s Advanced L-5, L-7 or L-10, then the Bozeman-built Gibson L-7C is an excellent choice. It combines selected features of these guitars (short-scale, x-bracing, mahogany neck). It sounds remarkably close to the originals.

If you like the sound of the D'Aquisto guitars of the 1970's and forward, then I recommend one of the several used Trenier archtops currently for sale. I played one at Rudy's in NYC over the winter break and it was swell. It's probably still there. There's a 2009 one for sale at Gryphon guitars as well, and my guess is that it was intended to go for that sound. I'd also recommend John Monteleone's archtops - they typically have a very robust sound, and John would be happy to build you one that is voiced more toward the traditional sound of older archtops.

If you like a big fat sound in general, I'd recommend the Steve Lacey 18", oval-hole archtop for sale at Gruhn's.

If you like a '50s L-7 kind of sound, I'd recommend a 17" Campellone, although an 18" will certainly do as well. There are a few 17" and 16" ones available at Acousticmusic.org - Acoustic Music | Fine Fretted Instruments. The Music Emporium - Acoustic Guitars - Collings Guitars - Martin Guitars - Taylor Guitars - Finely Crafted Banjos & Mandolins - has some as well. The Murch/Long&McQuade location in Cambridge ON probably has one or two as well. And they are easy enough to find on reverb, ebay, and the for sale listings on this forum. I have a 17", long-scale, oval hole Campellone archtop that I'm considering selling as well. It has an extra-wide neck. Feel free to PM me about it.

If you like a pre-advanced L-5 kind of sound, you can get one from Gilchrist, Yanuziello, Trenier, and Duff. There are few other folks doing this as well.

Jim Triggs, Bill Comins, Steve Grimes, and a variety of other builders will be happy to build you an archtop voiced to sound like an older stye archtop. Their instruments come up used as well.

Lots more to come.

[ArchiMark]

Wow!

Thank you so much for sharing all the info about some good archtop choices.

Lots to consider.......

and more to come too.....great............

[icr]

[rhoadsscholar]

Great post ICR. Love hearing the differences back to back. 'L5 wins for me though'

[jads57]

I believe Trenier Guitars offers a 16" Broadway model that is modeled after the Epiphone Broadway.

[GNAPPI]

I have found most sound clips to be useless in determining the true sound of many archtop guitars. Generally speaking, I think the only way to understand the sound of a guitar is to play it in person.

Truer words are seldom spoken. Add to that you very rarely see the amp used in the demo, and even more rarely had the player describe how they liked their EQ set.

But for many in the doldrums of many guitar types, sometimes a video can turn you OFF enough to steer you in another direction :-)

[Fred Archtop]

I've released these two videos a couple of months ago.

GNAPPI is right, so many parameters will determine the sound, starting by the fingers/brain of the guitarist.

However here are some parameters referred to the archtops I am demoing in the clips and that I consider critical for the electric sound.

17" lower bout width, normal keyboard scale : DS 250; L5C, ES 300
16 " shorter keyboard scale : ES 150, ES 175CC, softer tone compared to 17"
Carved tops : ES 150, L5C, DS 250
Laminated tops : ES 300, ES 175CC, sound more compressed compared to carved top
Floating pickup (ie acoustic sound more preserved) : L5C with a floating Johny Smith humbucker in the first clip, same guitar with a floating Charlie Christian pickup in the second one.

Again, I consider that the PU make really a huge part of the vintage tone. Should work on any jazzbox.

Hope this helps.

[CamillusUSA]

Anyone ever make a connection to the Work Song and Jethro Tull's Locomotive Breath - a straight away ripoff to my ear. ;-)

D

[deacon Mark]

The only legitimate way to determine this and avoid all bias is to be able to compare in a room with someone playing but you cannot see the guitar. A shoot out of guitars behind a screen that hides any identity of the guitar and the player playing the same piece. If you pick up a guitar and play it bias will be an element. Most folks looking at a vintage Super 400, D'angelico, Stromberg, or name something else will first make a visual determination. Sound in and and of itself can also be a problem if the guitar plays hard or the neck does not fit you. Playing a great completely acoustic carved-top guitar should be done with no amps. The factors are sound, play-ability, and just general feel of the guitar as you play it.

This is not something that can be quantitatively figured out at any level. Even the room and the type of strings all play key parts in what the player hears and likes. I don't not care how great a guitar sounds if I do not like the neck.............then that guitar is not on any list I see as being good. I have played a number of great sounding guitars that have volume and tone but simply were not fun to play. Classic example from the flat-top world are Martin D style guitars set up for bluegrass rhythm playing. These guitars are usually awful to play and hard to get around on and by the way, do not play in above the 5th position............that is irritating.

I much prefer Gibson Guitars over Epiphones from the glory years of the 1930's and 40's. I have just never been and Epi fan for what I call a refined sound. Gibson manages a much more refine sound with a smoother overall response. Epi's are not as consistent across the spectrum. I generally do not like the neck's on Epi's like Gibson and in my way of assessing guitars nothing much beats a good old Super 400. I posted this a while ago but one of the finest guitars I ever played was a non-cut L7 blond from late 1940's. It was amazing it all ways. The neck was perfect, loud but with a sound board that responded to light touch, meaning it was carved to produce vibrations without banging the guitar to get the sound out. Had nice flame and all I though was this L7 was not a cutaway, my bias got the best of me. Most good playing is done in the middle range of the guitar a cutaway is not need.

[CamillusUSA]

Anyone ever make a connection to the Work Song and Jethro Tull's Locomotive Breath - a straight away ripoff to my ear. ;-)

D

[Greentone]

Back to the original question, I think that the 16" "The Loar" (if you get at least the LH-600 or LH-700) sounds quite "30s." Maybe not as mature and beautiful as a Gibson (for example, I don't detect "natural reverb"), but pretty authentic as a small-bodied archtop.