Heritage Golden Eagle Vs Gibson L-5CES Wes

[randyc]

Part 5

Comparing acoustic qualities of the two instruments gives the L-5 an advantage in loudness and, for lack of a better word, “mellowness”. It’s a bigger guitar, so this isn’t a surprise. The Eagle is a bit “trebly” in comparison.

Amplified, the story is the same. The Eagle is “brighter” than the L-5 but not in a problematic way; amplifier EQ could be readily adjusted to produce a similar mellow tonal range as the L-5 produces. Although the sound of a Gibson Humbucker is what I have been conditioned to favorably respond to (when it comes to jazz), I liked the Bartolini just fine.

The Eagle’s phone jack (for the cable) is in the end pin, rather than on the lower bout as is the L-5. I don’t like this at all, my normal inclination (if no guitar stand is near) is to lean the guitar against whatever piece of furniture is available. This isn’t possible with the Heritage without stressing the most sensitive area of the guitar cable. Since the guitar is resting on the plug/cable, it’s also precariously balanced. A quick solution: place a stand nearby.

The Heritage has no tone control on the instrument, just a volume control on the pickguard. That wouldn’t be an issue with the majority of guitarists, I suspect, but it IS an issue for me. When I transition from comping to solo, I slightly adjust the guitar’s TONE control instead of the volume control, increasing treble response rather than increasing volume, for soloing. (I find that this allows the solo to be heard effectively without increasing the overall level of the group.)

If I used this guitar frequently, I’d either have to change my ways – which is disagreeable to me – or install a tone control. That wouldn’t be a problem at all, actually, any hacker with reasonable soldering skills and access to a drill press could do this in fifteen or twenty minutes at a cost of less than $10 U.S.

My conclusion is that the Eagle is a worthy competitor to the L-5. If I didn’t have a life-long Gibson bias, I could be completely happy with the Eagle after a minor correction or two. Given that the Eagle is normally available for far less money than the Wes Montgomery, one would think that it would be more widely used.

The fact that it is not perhaps suggests that others have the same conditioning that I do. If I’d bought the Eagle first, I couldn’t have gone long without buying an L-5 to compare with it. Having the L-5 gets one the whole package: looks, playability, sound, history and the indefinable thing that makes me play it well.

I really like this guitar but it’s not staying here in California …. Next week it will be transported to the east coast to my Uncle, a man who has been most influential in my life and an appreciator of fine musical instruments.

[riovine]

Part 5

Comparing acoustic qualities of the two instruments gives the L-5 an advantage in loudness and, for lack of a better word, “mellowness”. It’s a bigger guitar, so this isn’t a surprise. The Eagle is a bit “trebly” in comparison.

Amplified, the story is the same. The Eagle is “brighter” than the L-5 but not in a problematic way; amplifier EQ could be readily adjusted to produce a similar mellow tonal range as the L-5 produces. Although the sound of a Gibson Humbucker is what I have been conditioned to favorably respond to (when it comes to jazz), I liked the Bartolini just fine.

The Eagle’s phone jack (for the cable) is in the end pin, rather than on the lower bout as is the L-5. I don’t like this at all, my normal inclination (if no guitar stand is near) is to lean the guitar against whatever piece of furniture is available. This isn’t possible with the Heritage without stressing the most sensitive area of the guitar cable. Since the guitar is resting on the plug/cable, it’s also precariously balanced. A quick solution: place a stand nearby.

The Heritage has no tone control on the instrument, just a volume control on the pickguard. That wouldn’t be an issue with the majority of guitarists, I suspect, but it IS an issue for me. When I transition from comping to solo, I slightly adjust the guitar’s TONE control instead of the volume control, increasing treble response rather than increasing volume, for soloing. (I find that this allows the solo to be heard effectively without increasing the overall level of the group.)

If I used this guitar frequently, I’d either have to change my ways – which is disagreeable to me – or install a tone control. That wouldn’t be a problem at all, actually, any hacker with reasonable soldering skills and access to a drill press could do this in fifteen or twenty minutes at a cost of less than $10 U.S.

My conclusion is that the Eagle is a worthy competitor to the L-5. If I didn’t have a life-long Gibson bias, I could be completely happy with the Eagle after a minor correction or two. Given that the Eagle is normally available for far less money than the Wes Montgomery, one would think that it would be more widely used.

The fact that it is not perhaps suggests that others have the same conditioning that I do. If I’d bought the Eagle first, I couldn’t have gone long without buying an L-5 to compare with it. Having the L-5 gets one the whole package: looks, playability, sound, history and the indefinable thing that makes me play it well.

I really like this guitar but it’s not staying here in California …. Next week it will be transported to the east coast to my Uncle, a man who has been most influential in my life and an appreciator of fine musical instruments.

Kind of surprising that the L5 is louder. I would think that it's acoustic properties would have been compromised a bit because of the routed pickup vs the floating one in the Heritage. I'm guessing that maybe the difference in body sizes might be a factor. BTW, you said it is shorter, what is the scale length, is it 25 1/2.

Anyway, cool posts.

[randyc]

I would have expected the same as you (accoustic volume level, fixed pickup versus floater). BUT the Bartolini on the Eagle isn't a floater, let me see if I can get a photo of the mounting ...



OK, I think that this is the best that I can do. The pickup is mounted to the body with a layer of damping foam, adhesive on each side. (It's a pretty good compromise between cutting the top and a floater. Personally, I don't like the sound of floaters.)

So there IS some loading/damping on the top - more than a floater, less than a fixed pickup. The larger volume of the L-5 body must, as you say, account for it being louder ...

Although the Heritage BODY is shorter than the Gibson by several inches, they both have 25-1/2 scales.

[Drifter]

Outstanding review, thanks for sharing! What I like most about it is that you're not biased. What I miss most is sound samples. Anyway, great reading!

[randyc]

Outstanding review, thanks for sharing! What I like most about it is that you're not biased. What I miss most is sound samples. Anyway, great reading!

Oh my, Drifter ... I AM biased, just ask anyone. Being biased doesn't conflict with honesty, however, so if someone turns on the light, I can still see

I have a couple of reasons - not necessarily good ones, I hasten to add - for not including sound samples:

1. Limited frequency response of computer sound systems (I can't hear the difference between an L-5 and a Danelectro on this laptop) makes me question usefulness.

2. Limited knowledge - don't have a clue of how to record/include samples.

3. Lack of confidence in my own ability - neuropathy combined with arthritis limits my agility (and sometimes causes pain when I practice). Therefore I don't practice often ... lack of practice, the downward spiral and so forth.

But if someone could steer me in the direction of a website (for example) from which I could learn how to record my efforts then I can certainly TRY.

Given the objection listed in 1. would the exercise be useful at all ?

cheers,
Randy

PS: I'm stuck creatively in the era somewhere between Charlie Christian and Wes Montgomery. That's a good place for me ...

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Good stuff, Randy! I don't know if I could be as unbiased as you if one guitar was one I had owned for years.

By the way, I don't know what other forum members think, but when you post a multi-part article, I think it's easier to find and follow if it's all in one thread, versus one thread per part.

[Drifter]

Yeah, all right, you're biased. But you hide it very well. As you said, it doesn't conflict with honesty.
Don't feel pushed with the sound samples. They would just have rounded off the whole thing nicely. But your reasons not to are perfectly understandable.

And yes, I also would have preferred an all in one thread. Nothing important, though.

[randyc]

Good stuff, Randy! I don't know if I could be as unbiased as you if one guitar was one I had owned for years.

By the way, I don't know what other forum members think, but when you post a multi-part article, I think it's easier to find and follow if it's all in one thread, versus one thread per part.

You are dangerously close to pushing a MAJOR hot button !!!!!

Can't do it. Forum won't allow more than four pictures per post. Forum won't allow more than 10,000 characters per post. Forum characters are about four times higher than Microsoft "Word" character count. (One Microsoft Word character seems to equal FOUR forum words,)

No offense but your suggestion reminds me of a post from a few days back:

Husband: "Honey, where's the milk ?"
Wife: "Did you look in the refrigerator ?"
Husband (under breath): "of course not, why would anyone look in the refrigerator for milk ?"

PS: Did you guys think that I ENJOYED spending ten times more time editing and posting this article here than I had to on the other jazz forum where it was posted ? Sheesh ! I love this place for the members/contributors but the bulletin board features are sort of stone-age !

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

You are dangerously close to pushing a MAJOR hot button !!!!!

Can't do it. Forum won't allow more than four pictures per post. Forum won't allow more than 10,000 characters per post. Forum characters are about four times higher than Microsoft "Word" character count. (One Microsoft Word character seems to equal FOUR forum words,)

I find those limits annoying, too, but what I meant was:

Create a thread for a new article, posting part 1. Then reply to that, posting part 2. Reply with part 3...

If you don't want any comments slipping in between the parts, prepare then ahead of time and post them all in a flurry!

[randyc]

I find those limits annoying, too, but what I meant was:

Create a thread for a new article, posting part 1. Then reply to that, posting part 2. Reply with part 3...

If you don't want any comments slipping in between the parts, prepare then ahead of time and post them all in a flurry!

Advice from a subversive to one desiring to subvert ?

Well, thanks. The format shouldn't require awkward work-arounds like that. But then, probably I should refrain from airing my opinions as frequently as I've done

cheers, big guy

[fep]

Thanks Randy, I really enjoyed your review. Your posts are very useful to me.

I've been dreaming of buying an archtop and am struggling with which one and how much to spend.

And, oh yeah, I haven't sprung the whole idea and cost on my wife yet.

[lpdeluxe]

To record: get an inexpensive guitar-to-USB interface, most of which are bundled with recording software. Plugging into a sound card is cumbersome and produces low quality, unless you have an specialty card.

I've spent the last 9 years recording extensively, using Windows computers, and there isn't any really fast and easy way that achieves good sound quality.

Of course, I'm used to listening to my recordings under a microscope, so I do stuff like running guitar tracks through a high pass filter set around 150Hz to get rid of room rumble.

"Reaper" is a program you can try out for free -- I've tinkered with it, just so I could explain how it works to others (I use Adobe Audition). Here's a link: REAPER | Download

[randyc]

Thanks, LPD. It occurs to me that I have "Audacity" loaded on this laptop - that should work. If necessary, I could even record direct into any of my tape recorders, then transfer to digital media, that should also work.

Once I have a digital recording, how do I get it here - to the forum ? I use photobucket for the photos that I post here, is there a similar free service for audio files ?

Thanks,
Randy

[rio]

Yes, there's a site - tindeck.com

[randyc]

OK, guys, I started a new thread with the sound clips. I apologize for the lame playing - can't do a thing about it without shedding some years

[Drifter]

Lame playing indeed. We were all expecting some Eddie van Halen style.

[derek]

Thanks for the indepth review and pics Randy. For the record, I believe that your Bart on the Eagle is still considered a floater. If it is not cut into and mounted into the top, I think it is considered a floater.

If I am wrong and there is another term for this, someone please straighten me out.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Hmmm... Gray area? What about P-90s? There is no cutting, but you do screw them into the top.

[randyc]

Thanks for the indepth review and pics Randy. For the record, I believe that your Bart on the Eagle is still considered a floater. If it is not cut into and mounted into the top, I think it is considered a floater.

If I am wrong and there is another term for this, someone please straighten me out.

No, no, you're right, technically it's a floater but it doesn't have that disagreeable, sterile (to me) sound. It's secured to the top (as BD observed about P-90s, which I LOVE) so it loads the top enough to provide the dampling that I prefer in a jazz guitar.

I confess, I was predisposed to dislike the pickup but I'm 180 degrees out of phase with my old position.

Thanks for your observation,
Randy

[mr. beaumont]

No, no, you're right, technically it's a floater but it doesn't have that disagreeable, sterile (to me) sound.

why is it that so many modern floating pickups sound like that? johnny smith's old recordings certainly don't sound dry and sterile...

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Randy, that pickup on the Heritage is after market, right? I can't find an example on the Heritage web site, but in the past I know I've read they had some pickups whose backs had four little rubber nubs to rest on the guitar top. I think they claimed this was a good compromise between floating and routing: it was still attached to the finger rest, but was steadier and easier to adjust than regular floating pickups.

[randyc]

Randy, that pickup on the Heritage is after market, right? I can't find an example on the Heritage web site, but in the past I know I've read they had some pickups whose backs had four little rubber nubs to rest on the guitar top. I think they claimed this was a good compromise between floating and routing: it was still attached to the finger rest, but was steadier and easier to adjust than regular floating pickups.

Well, that would certainly explain the large notch on the pickguard. Knowing nothing much about Heritage guitars, I just assumed that the factory would put any pickup on them.

This pickup, to me, has all the advantages and none of the disadvantages of a 'bucker, the right sound without having to cut through the top. I'll be a little bit sad to see the guitar leave here Wednesday but I've certainly learned something about that Bartolini !

What is still a mystery about the Eagle is that there is no sign of any other p/u EVER having been mounted to the top ! No holes in the neck, suggesting an earlier floater and the top has not been cut. I'm left with a rather out-on-a-limb thought that the pickguard has been replaced and that the original pickguard also provided a floater mount ... any thoughts on that ?

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

What is still a mystery about the Eagle is that there is no sign of any other p/u EVER having been mounted to the top ! No holes in the neck, suggesting an earlier floater and the top has not been cut. I'm left with a rather out-on-a-limb thought that the pickguard has been replaced and that the original pickguard also provided a floater mount ... any thoughts on that ?

Did you look to see if anything was suspicious on the underside of the finger rest? While it could be that the guitar was ordered from Heritage with the Bartolini pickup, I have a hard time believing they would have used a finger rest with such a big cutout for the pickup. Don't look very professional.

[randyc]

Did you look to see if anything was suspicious on the underside of the finger rest? While it could be that the guitar was ordered from Heritage with the Bartolini pickup, I have a hard time believing they would have used a finger rest with such a big cutout for the pickup. Don't look very professional.

Good suggestion BD, here's what I found looking UNDER the pickguard, with my chin resting on the bottom of the guitar



That little 1/8 inch diameter hole just happens to be located in the center of the humbucker-sized notch in the pickguard. I'm envisioning a floater that looks like a lollipop ... humbucker size with a 1/8 diameter brass or steel rod protruding from the lower "end" of the pickup. It's not a bad way to mount a floater if one doesn't mind the miscellaneous thumps and rattles as one inadvertently makes contact with the pickguard.

A friend many years ago, had a BIG Framus (L-5 size) with TWO pickups attached to the pickguard, although not in the manner described above. The thing sounded wonderful accoustically but it was a huge PITA to play - feedback like I've never heard before (like sticking a microphone in front of a PA speaker). As beautiful as the guitar was, it was all but useless.

[randyc]

BD, Master of Knowledge, I await your thoughts about what the original pickup might have been !!! Seriously.