-
In general, yes, but there are flattop that cross over into archtop territory, and vice versa.
Originally Posted by campusfive
John
-
05-23-2017 03:32 PM
-
OK, for the op's consideration, and others to opine, is an import Howard Roberts copy. Yes, they can vary depending on the maker, but I recently found a Korean Epi HR that is an acoustic canon. Not bad amplified, but I use it for unplugged couch playing/practicing. Cheap thrills for around $500 - $600. YMMV.
-
Re the Loar 300, I have no experience with it, but I believe the higher end Loars have huge fat V-necks. Something the OP should know ahead of time.
-
I have had a Loar LH300 for a few years now that I love. It has a very sweet sound. I played it acoustically for a long time and have since fitted a Kent Armstrong floating humbucker to it (the import kind). Now it is strung with TI flats. It is the sound for me. Even with the flats on it, it sounds great acoustically.
That being said, I tried a LH600 at a local store and it was a very big step up. I have considered getting one to have as a strictly acoustic archtop. It just feels redundant to have the 300 and the 600. But, again, big difference in the sound quality.
Bottom line, I would recommend the Loar LH600 without hesitation.
BTW, the V-shaped neck takes a minute to get used to. It has never bothered me at all. To me it is better than a thin neck. I have an Eastman AR371 (which I also love) and the thinner neck on that is more awkward than the V-shape. That's just me though.
-
I owned and used a REAL Gibson Loar L5 for several years and just could not get on with the huge neck. I thought that "The Loar" brand mimics the same neck, but I could very well be wrong, having never held one. Can anyone verify? Originally Posted by miken
-
I watched a Loar 309 on ebay. It didn't get a bid at $249, but it needed work. Apparently something wrong electronically, and the tailpiece was missing. Since I mostly want to do acoustic stuff, it might be a good buy. I could always add a higher quality pick-up later on. We'll see if it comes up again, maybe for a few bucks less.
Now I'm curious about the sound differences between the Loar 600 (mahogany neck) and 700 (maple neck). The 700 is supposed to be 'AAA' tonewoods as well. Both are nitrocellulose lacquer.
-
600 and 700, pretty close, from what I've heard. The 700 is very attractive though...
I was very unimpressed with a couple of 309''s I played. Didn't think they were much acoustically, and the P90 was the worst excuse for a P90 I've ever heard. The guitar was crap, honestly.
-
Pretty much my experience. Could not give that POS away. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Give Jerry Sims at Sims Music in Columbia a call and see if he can help you out. He's a good guy and may be able to get something shipped your way.
-
I have no affiliation with this seller, but thought it might interest the OP...
EASTMAN Eastman AR403CE Archtop > Guitars Electric Solid Body | Replay Guitar Exchange
-
I live near a Loar dealer. Not too impressed with the 309. The LH-600, though, is a very viable acoustic archtop guitar. If and when my son decides to move into acoustic archtop playing, I will direct him to that guitar.
-
My experience exactly. The 600 is a very good guitar, and if you want that "old school" sound, it's a much better choice than the Eastmans. There's nothing wrong with the Eastmans, but it's a very different vibe to the sound. Apples and oranges. Originally Posted by Greentone
-
I suspect that the problem for many people who pickup acoustic archtops is that they don't sound like flattops--which is what they are accustomed to.
In terms of marketing, therefore, many guitar makers have figured out how to split the difference between the two types with their modern archtops. I won't name some of the boutique folks, but when I pick up their guitars I think, 'Oh, trying to pick up the flattop trade.'
The Loar, OTOH, seems to be carved to sound like a traditional Gibson archtop. I mean this. Loars don't sound like Epiphones or Gretsches, to me. They sound like reasonable takes on 16" 1930s Gibson archtops. (I know...they are aiming at 20s L-5s, but be realistic.) It really is a lot like chugging on a Gibson in a swing setting, four to the bar, when you are putting a Loar through the paces.
Given current tastes, this may or may not be your cuppa. It _is_ authentic.
-
Yeah, I find that's true of some of the boutique gyspy makers too, that they're almost trying to "fill out" the bottom end of what it supposed to be a nasal gypsy guitar, and it ends up sounding less gypsy and more flattop like. But they don't cut through a mix the way that they are supposed when you pretty them up.
-
Word. Campusfive _knows_. Listen to his stuff sometime. He is all over the authentic swing sound on acoustic archtop.
I don't know if there is a craze for that in China, or what, but The Loar non-cutaway models can _do_ this stuff--if you have the technique figured out.
-
Yesterday, I went into a small music shop, and they had an Ibanez AF71. Cheap, and in perfect shape. Playability was fine, and the sound was OK plugged in. Acoustically, though- nothing. Really, not even enough volume for couch playing. It had a single floating pickup, and you'd think with that set-up it would do better acoustically.
So far, the Loar 600 or 700 seems like the best fit, on paper, anyhow. Too bad they don't make it with a floating or neck mounted pickup. I could add one, of course, but I'm not sure if I could bring myself to drill holes into $1000.
-
1) My 1937 ES-150 is a better acoustic guitar with a massive CC pickup mounted to the top than any kind of laminate or pressed wood top guitar even with a floater. Literally no one else makes a true CARVED top archtop under $2k except Loar and Eastman. Originally Posted by MushCreek
2) I could understand not wanting to drill into a vintage instrument, but even at $1000 retail, a Loar is not exactly one-of-a-kind. If you drilled the thing for a new RI DeArmond Rhythm Chief, and added an old L-5 style guard, you could probably sell it on ebay with the upgrades for almost what you paid.
-
Here's my Loar LH700, modified to a lefty guitar. Just want to show -- no big holes drilled into it, just small ones to hold the pickguard and pickup rod. Cost was also pretty reasonable since I bought a used Loar, and used a second-hand reissue Dearmond PU. Modifying it left-handed meant I needed a lefty bridge built (costly!) and a lefty pickguard, all total still around $1100. Another nice thing: The pickup is detachable from the under-pickguard pots. I can remove it and have a totally acoustic guitar.
Not sure if this still falls in the category of "budget" but I was happy with the cost investment. As a lefty, not going to find too many of these types of guitars around unless you create your own.
-
There are some cheaper Ibanezes with floating pickups: the current "Contemporary" series, which I haven't tried, and the discontinued AF105F, which I have tried. At least the one I played was terrible -- sounded awful both unplugged and plugged. Completely unusable and worthless at any price IMO, though maybe salvageable electrically with a different pup. Originally Posted by MushCreek
I think you have your answer -- for <=$1000 new, Loar is the only game in town in a truly acoustic archtop. Used, you might find an Eastman (though more likely $13-1500) or something like a Yunzhi/Mr Wu/Ms Lora (not very common). If you're willing to go for $15-1800, there are many more options (e.g., a lot of Eastmans, occasional Heritages), but if <=$1000 is truly your limit, you're going to have to be some combination of lucky and patient to get anything other than a Loar.
John
-
There are a lot of these guitars available, but many of them are 'B' stock- allegedly returned and checked over/repaired to factory specs. They stamp 'Used' on the headstock. I'd be fine with that, if I thought I was getting a good guitar. Are there any hidden dangers with these guitars, such as a bad neck set that the casual observer wouldn't notice?
-
For this price you should check this Ibanez
Ibanez AFJ91 Antique Fade Flat Hollowbody Electric Guitar
Or my favourite
Godin 5th Avenue Kingpin - Cognac Burst | Sweetwater
-
Have you [CampusFive] checked out the Guild 150 "Savoy" (pressed solid spruce top)? I'd be interested to get your take on it.
I played one a while back, and then again more recently. I thought the unplugged tone was pretty nice - it sounds like a guitar, not like a slightly louder solid-body (as many laminated archtops do). Volume-wise, almost a real acoustic, but not quite, especially the high E string (which is kind of plinky). It has a fairly thin body (2.5", I think), and I suspect that may have as much to do with its quietness as the pressed top.
I also played a Gibson solid-formed (which has been well reviewed here). This is also pressed spruce, but with a full depth body. TBH, it is somewhat louder and better sounding than the Guild, but not qualitatively dramatically so. They struck me as, if not the same species, in the same genus so to speak.
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
-
That's interesting about the solid formed you tried. I don't find my solid formed lacking in any way when compared to most of the other acoustic archtops I've played, including my '68 Gibson Johnny Smith or my '49 Epiphone Triumph. I find it to be a great acoustic archtop. Originally Posted by John A.
-
I'm sure they can be perfectly fine guitars, but it's just not even close to real, carved top guitar. Originally Posted by John A.
I actually got a chance to play some of the new Epiphone Masterbilt series for the first time yesterday. They slightly exceeded my super-low expectations. But going straight from the 17" Epi to a Loar LH-300 was like night-and-day - even the cheapest of the Loars was so much louder and fuller. And then comparing a LH-600 was even better.
Look, anything short of a carved, solid top archtop just isn't going to be in the same league acoustically as a carved top guitar. It used to be that the only options were a vintage guitar or a luthier-built one. And then Eastman came along, and you could get a great carved top guitar for under $2k. And then the Loar 600 came along and you could get a pretty darn good acoustic archtop for under $1k.
Whether it's a Godin, a Guild, a new Epiphone, a Gretsch, an Ibanez... you're just not going to get orange juice from an apple. Carved top = acoustic archtop guitar. Anything less than a carved top = something less than an acoustic archtop guitar.
-
I wish I could find a Loar to try out to get a better sense of how much more acoustic it really is than these pressed-top guitars. I've not seen a single one in a store. Originally Posted by campusfive
John
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos