1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I have a question for the HERITAGE Eagle/Super Eagle experts on this forum : in how far does the thickness of the top plate
    differ between the electric (w built-in pups) and the acoustic version of the same model guitar ? From experience I know that this difference was (is?)
    quite severe with the corresponding Gibson Super-400 and L5 models. I owned a '62 Super-400 CN with a DeArmond Chief pickup installed and while this
    guitar had the most luscious low volume electric tone (and a decent acoustic volume) it was simply much too prone to feed back on stage so I had to let it go.
    The electric version I have now is MUCH heavier and I have no issues , even at a higher stage volume. The acoustic tone is poor, plugged in it is the bomb.
    I am wondering whether the Eagle/Super Eagle models differ in the same way....

    By the way, I'm looking to buy a Super Eagle !

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Having owned both acoustic and electric SE's the humbucker SE's are clearly noticeably heavier than acoustic SE's. My last acoustic SE weighed in at just over 6 pounds. Nearly a pound and a half less than a humbucker SE.

    Unlike Gibson's, which by and large were not custom orders, you know that most all Heritage archtop's each were custom ordered. So in that sense alone making comparison's between Heritage's and Gibson's doesn't work. You might as well be comparing a Gibson to any other fill in the blank brand archtop. The only thing a Heritage has in common with a Gibson is many of them were made in the same factory, and that they're each archtop's. The comparison's end there, imho.

    Each of the many humbucker SE's I owned had very decent acoustic tone. Whereas the lone Super 400 I owned did not possess an acoustic volume worth noting. But it sure was purdy!



    "You've got to be in the sun to feel the sun. It's that way with music too." - Sidney Bechet

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Not to derail this conversation, but I recently played Crimson era Gibson Super 400 CES at Dave's Guitars in Lacrosse, Wisconsin. And it not only played great,but had decent acoustic volume as well.

    From my perspective I've always found Heritage archtop mostly voiced quite bright to my ears. I believe this is maybe the sound those luthier prefer.
    But I much prefer Gibson specs with a thicker top and back. Which seems to have the midrange Heritage guitars lack.

    Again this is just my perspective as an older musician.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    2b, great post. And your beautiful pics will hopefully be enough to kickstart this forum.
    Although Ive had some pretty nice Eagles and HJS’s I am not a good candidate for assessing the acoustic properties of them, because I’ve only heard them on my own lap, and the TI-12’s that I use definitely restrict the acoustic sound.
    One thing I can offer is the thin tops on all of my Heritage guitars tend to sound mid-rangey to high pitch, regardless of how the pickup is mounted. They have never projected bass very well. I think decent bass comes from a thicker top and a deeper body. Heavier non flat wound strings will enhance your experience too.
    Joe D

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    I believe one of the OP's concerns is feedback. The big archtops do tend to feedback. I've learned to position the guitar outside the direct projection of the speakers. I learned that from Johnny Smith actually.
    MG

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    for $2500 I hope someone here bought this nice SE from Reverb

    Heritage Super Eagle Archtop Super Eagle 18" Archtop | Reverb

    a recent nice demo of a SE beginning at 1:08

    "You've got to be in the sun to feel the sun. It's that way with music too." - Sidney Bechet

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Holy cow, that was a good deal!

    I doubt that anyone could have gotten THAT much jazz guitar for $2,500 elsewhere.

    The SE really is a lot of jazz guitar.