-
Bridge is only one end of the vibrating string. The other end is the fret wire (or nut) that's on the neck. Neck absorbs and resonates with the string just like the body. Neck has a big effect on tone. You can do simple test to verify that. After you pluck a string, while it's ringing, press the headstock against the wall. Another test is you can do is to clam a heavyish object on the headstock and see how it changes the tone. Obviously, fretboard is not an insignificant part of the neck.
Originally Posted by jmgalich
The whole instrument is a resonating system. Everything affects the tone.
-
07-26-2019 02:35 PM
-
You are missing very little. Differences in fretboard material contribute very little to differences in sound, IMO. the total percentage of the neck that consists of fretboard wood is not very big. It's mostly about cosmetics and feel. Neck wood, OTOH, makes a big difference, IMO. Originally Posted by jmgalich
-
Funny thing is that there was a 6 month period in 2019 when there were three very nice used Campellones for sale and gathering dust in Toronto, all with excellent prices - one at the Twelfth Fret and two at The Guitar Shoppe. There's still a new blonde Standard gathering dust at Murch/L&M in Cambridge - my guess is that Glen would give you a screaming deal on that one. It has been there for quite some time. Actually, not a guess - I got in touch with him and he will give you a screaming deal. Originally Posted by Tal_175
Last edited by Hammertone; 07-31-2019 at 07:01 PM.
-
The one they have at Murch seems to be a short scale model. Also I'm under the impression that a lot of the Campellone's are more acouistical than L-5 CES's. Originally Posted by Hammertone
-
My guess is that if it had a humbucker and two knobs (or two humbuckers, four knobs and a three-way switch) set into the top, it would make a fantastic WES or CES-style guitar, closer in sound and weight to a late-50s L-5 than anything Gibson has made in the past 50 years. Originally Posted by Tal_175
Your guess is wrong. It's not short scale. Here are the specs Glenn Murch provided:
-25.5” scale
-21” body
-1. 11/16” nut
-Serial # 4640814
-3” rim
-Parallel bracing
Last edited by Hammertone; 12-15-2023 at 04:05 PM.
-
HT makes an interesting observation. IME, the L5-CES has evolved over the last 60 years. It has gotten, ahem, sturdier--not to fat shame the great L5.
I suspect that Gibson intentionally accomplished this transformation, which was also seen in the ES-175 (pick up a 50s example sometime and you will know what I mean), perhaps to match evolving tastes in archtop electric music. Music was getting louder and louder. An amp in the 50s typically meant 20-25 watts. In the 60s and beyond, this was apt to imply a Twin Reverb, i.e., 80 watts. Performances got louder. Archtop plates (tops and backs) got thicker, and bracing got more substantial, at least in part to deal with feedback issues. (Many performers simply went with laminate-body archtops.)
Pick up a mid-50s L5-CES sometime, if you get the chance, and compare it with one of recent vintage. BOTH will be superbly made, wonderful sounding electric guitars. The old one, however, will be quite a bit lighter and will have more of an acoustic voice--even with the two pickups and control circuitry.
-
IMO, the increased weight is a result of:
-spec drift;
-management's desire to minimize warranty claims;
-management's desire to reduce labour cost through quicker production with less hand work involved to prepare top plates. I don't know if back plates also got thicker, but I'd guess that they did;
-it being a really easy way to reduce feedback instead of expecting guitarists to know how to manage feedback.
-
Well may be like most things, heavier built electric archtop is a happy accident.
Last edited by Tal_175; 07-26-2019 at 07:35 PM.
-
TAL175,
Right on. The "sturdy" ES-175 and L5 guitars of the 1990-2015 period are some of the finest playing and sounding examples I have run into...and I have had the good fortune of playing a LOT, given that my best friend was a vintage dealer. (Alas, he passed away last year.) We played in a duo for 25 years. He was always bringing around instruments for me to evaluate. (Vintage) Additionally, I was going to shows and shops, like most of us on this forum, and sampling the new stuff.
As far as the archtops go, Gibson managed to hit a second renaissance (IME) during this 25-year period I am describing. Although the weight of a 175 or L5 in this period was in the 7.5-8+ pound range, the guitars just ooze creamy, jazzy tones.
This being said, if you get the chance to play a vintage ES-175, 300, 350, or L5, it's a real treat. Those guitars are just _lively_, to come up with a term. ES-125 and ES-150, too.
-
IME the prewar (parallel or x braced) archtops sound better. It is a small enough sample so that I can't be certain, but I am pretty sure Gibson's supply of spruce got hit hard by wartime needs. At some point, not sure when, they ran out of eastern spruce and switched to the western stuff. I am guessing that a Gibson luthier picking out out wood for an L5 or L7 in 1938 was finding better stuff than he would have in 1955. The prewar ones don't really cost more than the 50s ones, I think.
-
The weekend is here... let us know how she sounds!
You got good and accurate advice from the first reply to your post. I have a '47 L-5, and both a modern WesMo and CES in my collection. The two worlds are quite different.
The 1940s archtops usually have minimal clearance to mount a floating pickup, drastically limiting your choices. Usually it's down to a vintage DeArmond or a KA slimbucker type. Most of these have no polepieces, which means you can't balance them for different string types (and you'll want to).
Of the options that will fit, only a DeArmond 1100 Rhythm Chief approaches the power and warmth of a PAF in order to compensate for the acoustic nature of the instrument. They are very expensive and can be a pain to mount. The reissue is not quite the same, but it's definitely very good at a fraction of the price. I have one of them on a '47 Super 400. I have an original on an early '70s L-5C.
Anyway, let us know how the L-7 fares if you end up visiting the shop.
-
Will do. Originally Posted by rpguitar
The first comment is my expectation too. I was hoping to hear that L-7's of that era with a float could approach the modern L-5 vibe but I know they are apples and oranges. The L-7 I played in the past seemed a bit heavy and dull acoustically but may be it was just that guitar.
The store I'll be going to also has an modern L-5CES. I'll be able to compare the two.
-
It’s worth pointing out that the DeArmond 1100 is one of the few low clearance floaters that does have adjustable pole pieces. I think that makes it possible to use bronze strings, which might be preferable for acoustic tone. I installed a reissue 1100 on my ‘37 L-7 (17” X-braced). It has steel strings now, but I plan to try bronze strings on it. Originally Posted by rpguitar
The red refinish, L-5 fretboard and modern frets were done by previous owners. That’s why I wasn’t too concerned about drilling two small holes for the mounting rod. It’s a player’s guitar not a collector’s, but sounds and feels good.
-
The 1100 "plays nicely" (plays nicely) with bronze strings, actually.
I believe rpguitar can attest to this.
-
Unfortunately they didn't have the L-5. L-7 while sounded very good with a floating pickup, it doesn't feel or sound like an electric archtop. Nice guitar though. They had an ES 150 for pretty much the same price (5 grands Canadian), that sounded really good through DRRI.
-
I own a '44 L7, and put a Jason Lollar Gold Foil single coil floater on it. Adjustable pole pieces. Fits like a glove, and sounds awesome. Glad I did it. It's a monster of a guitar, plugged or unplugged. Everyone, especially me, loves it.
-
We each hear differently. What sounds good to one person won't meet the standards of another.
After years of playing acoustic piano's, and over the past decade a fair number of guitars, I fancy myself of having fairly decent ears regarding acoustic instruments.
One of the finest sounding guitars I've ever experienced was an L7 with a floating pickup, IIRC this L7 featured a custom Lollar floating pickup. That guitar belongs to a member here.
It has an electric-acoustic tonality to die for. I was blown away. Steve if you read this, tell them about your stellar L7!
-
Oddly enough, that video was one I watched several times when I was deciding on what I wanted to get, which became that '48 L7N upthread.
He has another vid where he plays a killer version of Sleepwalk on the L5 in the video you linked to. Sweet playing and sound.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
-
2B, this is as good as it gets: '44 L7 with Jason Lollar Gold Foil Single Coil floater, played through an awesome tube amp that Michael Biller sold me called the Skoter. It was his prototype for the amp. I sure miss Michael.
-
The L-5 and L-7 in that video sound quite a bit different from each other, but I’ll bet if he had instead compared two L-5s two or three years apart that they would also sounded significantly different. The wood would be different batches and hand-carved instruments will vary.
-
Is your L7 refinished? Perhaps a French method polishing job? It is very glossy. Not anything like what I've seen in person. Beautiful.
-
No refinishing. Just good old fashion elbow grease, Virtuoso cleaner, then Virtuoso polish as required at string changes. I'm careful to wipe her down to remove any smudges between playing. Also, The room in which the photo is taken in has much ambient light, so the guitar is picking that up and reflecting it. It's a big dome with lots of windows. Great for acoustic playing. I love it. Originally Posted by geogio
Thanks, Steve
-
How thick is that Gold Foil floater?
-
Lawson, Originally Posted by lawson-stone
It's skinny. 1/4" or a shade more. The L7 needs a thin floater. I posted a couple of pics in this thread at reply #21: What's better than a Bozeman L-7C? . You can see in the second picture how nicely it fits, and there is decent space underneath so it really does float above the top. It fits really nicely.
I you want more info, please let me know. I'll get out a decent measuring device.
Steve
-
I have two, a '60 and a '63. They both sound sweet and they smell good too. Both came to me like this but I'm happy
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading