-
Sorry if I missed this discussion. I'm just wondering whether someone has tried one of these and what they thought . I'd probably have to add a pickguard, but for now, I'm hoping someone here ( Jonathan S ? ), has taken one for a test drive.
Thx
-
09-20-2018 12:05 PM
-
This is the guitar that's actually a flat top with F-holes, right?
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Sorry, not sure that photo answered the question, and the descriptions don't say 'arched top', they just say 'f-hole'............
...so does it have a flat top ?......
.......and check out that TP........the old D'A style.........
Thx again......
-
I know, historically, the L-1 started as a archtop (1902-1925), but was reintroduced as a flat top (1926). What's happening in 2018 is surprising!
Gibson L-1 - Wikipedia
-
.......and the current spec's don't mention the size - - I'm hoping they're 16 in., but now I'm wondering whether they may be even smaller.....
-
Go here
See this:
Although it's an attractive photo it's a weird bird.
> 15" flat-top f-hole guitar. The market begs for this?
> Jazz guitar look but no opportunity for a magnetic pickup. Again, who is crying out for that? Which genre is this pointed toward?
> Mini - Super 400 inlays. I like that look but I can hear the jokes already about "Super 125."
> Unbound fingerboard with S400 inlays. I like unbound boards but the point of the S400 look is "superness."
> Single-bound body with S400 inlays. See above but even more so.
> Love that flat-script-and-vase peghead. Even unbound, it's a choice look.
The other weird point about this is that the "experimental" Epiphone Mastertone archtop variations have not been flying off the shelves. What makes Gibson want to jump on with what a higher price point?
-
if this is like a parlor size guitar I'd be very interested
-
There are a couple of videos on yt where it sounds pretty cool. But, it looks even smaller than the 15" guitar I own. Originally Posted by Sam Sherry
Go here
See this:
Although it's an attractive photo it's a weird bird.
> 15" flat-top f-hole guitar. The market begs for this?
> Jazz guitar look but no opportunity for a magnetic pickup. Again, who is crying out for that? Which genre is this pointed toward?
> Mini - Super 400 inlays. I like that look but I can hear the jokes already about "Super 125."
> Unbound fingerboard with S400 inlays. I like unbound boards but the point of the S400 look is "superness."
> Single-bound body with S400 inlays. See above but even more so.
> Love that flat-script-and-vase peghead. Even unbound, it's a choice look.
The other weird point about this is that the "experimental" Epiphone Mastertone archtop variations have not been flying off the shelves. What makes Gibson want to jump on with what a higher price point?
-
Cool guitar, I considered getting one but I'm saving for a nice seven string. It's a small body, I don't remember the exact dimensions but I think it's around parlor size. I haven't seen the word "jazz" mentioned anywhere in its advertising, I think it's more focused at the acoustic/delta blues crowd, and I'm sure it sounds great for that purpose, I could see it being used in typical blue rhythm while somebody much more experienced than me kills it on the harmonica. I'm sure I saw Robert Johnson mentioned a few times when researching it but I'm pretty sure he played the round hole model. I'd be all over this if I still had aspirations of Piedmont blues
-
$4,000?!?!?!
-
I'd like to see if this sounds any better than a $150 gretch jim dandy
-
I think the L-1 was always a round-hole, until now Originally Posted by Dr_turkey
-
Don't expect new Gibson acoustics for much less lol Originally Posted by joe2758
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
I think the L-1 was always a round-hole, until now I think you're right. Not sure why I thought it was the other way around
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
110 years ago it was an archtop with a round hole. Mine is pretty sweet. I wouldn't have changed a thing. Originally Posted by joe2758
David
-
CME currently has one ( used ) listed for $3465. on Reverb. They included a demo vid. ( No afffiliation, etc ).
It doesn't sound bad - for me it'd need a pickguard.
My next question will be how close in volume it'd be to an L-5 R/I.
Now I really wonder ( again / still ) about selling my old L-5 R/I, and whether I should go looking for another, knowing I'll have to live with the volume it'll have.
On we go.....
-
Ha-Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-haaaa!! Originally Posted by joe2758
-
I won’t be playing one. That’s just weird. Originally Posted by Dennis D
Keith
-
I keep thinking our best hope is that somehow Collings decides to make a ' Waterloo ' archtop. I mean, if they can make and sell an acceptable flattop for under $2500. , which they are, if their archtop sold for $3500.00 or less, for me that'd work.
Oh well.....
-
Robert Johnson, of course, played an L-1. That guitar had a round hole and a _long_ scale. In Johnson's hands, the guitar sounded stupendous. A Johnson era L-1 will set you back a _pretty penny_.
Not interested in the gizmo that Gibson is now calling the L-1.
-
Oh no it’s a guitar with f holes and no space for a magnetic pup.
I don’t understand it. (Covers quite a lot of early Gibson archtops in fact)
Seriously there’s more and more interest every year in acoustic roots music including early jazz, roots country and so on. The modern magnetic pup jazz guitar tone is inappropriate for these styles, so I think this guitar might do ok provided the pricing is right....
the styling is just right for the craft beer swilling hipster who plays country but is too much of special snowflake to play a dreadnought like everyone else haha.
-
Maybe not for three and a half
-
I guess I'm too much of a historian, at heart. I'm just not interested in a guitar that is "rootsy," but really references no early archtop or flattop that Gibson made back in the day.
It would be like selling a tie-dye shirt with smiley faces all over it and calling it a "hippie" shirt. Hmm? Hippies wore tie-dye shirts, but smiley faces emerged later, in the 70s.
Have a nice day.
-
Didn't know this model existed until this thread. As a self-confessed Gibson fanboy, often an acoustic offering like this from Gibson is gas inducing for me. But this design seems more about looks than functionality. (and I do think it looks really really good!) Too bad they couldn't figure out how to make room for an adjustable bridge. But then it would probably be an archtop! Go figure . . .
I love Gibson acoustics (I own 2) but I would never buy a Gibson acoustic without playing first -- they really are all over the place tone wise -- some are amazing, some are just dead wood, some have neck problems. If one of these showed up locally, I'd give it a try, but it would have to show stellar tone for me to buy it. I already have an LG-2 American Eagle which is a very sweet sounding Gibson small body acoustic and it is going to be hard to beat.
On a related note, a local shop recently got in on consignment a L-0 small body acoustic from the early 1920's. It is in excellent condition, it plays well and has a magnificent tone. Too bad I'm not rich !!! I'm hoping my Gibson acoustics age as well as that one!
I really don't get how in so many acoustic guitar discussions it's always about Martin vs Taylor. I've played and owned both and I'm not dissin' on either brand, but Gibson acoustics are my preference by a longshot.
-
I have an L-00 TV. It's fantastic. Looks like this is also an L-00 size guitar. 14.75'', max dept 4'' or so, short scale (guessing). But maple back and sides and f-hole (as oppose to mahogany and round hole in L-00's). The sonic differences should be brighter/crisper voice with shorter decay theoretically.
Reply With Quote
Improvisation is about listening
Today, 07:34 AM in Improvisation