-
No shortage of spruce or maple in the world for carved archtop guitars.
Good luthiers use good, well-aged wood.
Some buy it as they need it from specialist wood suppliers, some buy it and stockpile it.
Some even cut their own.
It's a non-issue. Marketing noise.
-
12-15-2019 09:43 PM
-
Originally Posted by Hammertone
-
Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
I've been close friends w a few prominent luthiers over the yrs. They all said that highly figured maple for example was more plentiful than ever. But they all also said they had a very difficult time securing properly seasoned woods, at least in the US.
They might acquire a few sets and found the moisture content was typically too high.
-
nor was highly figured maple ever considered the best tone wood!!..despite it's visual allure
cheers
-
Originally Posted by wintermoon
-
Originally Posted by neatomic
If you're having a custom 10K+ guitar built you're probably gonna want the anti mid 70s Gibson maple.
-
Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
For example, the Michigan maple that Gibson used back in the day isn't nearly as plentiful these days.
-
As Mark Campellone told me once "Fancy wood doesn't mean it sounds better."
In fact while wood quality is important, it's the maker carving it that probably is most important to the sound.
That said, I prefer thicker carved tops to the lighter thinner ones in the Benedetto or Heritage archtop style. Those sound more like a flat top to my ears, and lack the midst of a heavier build.
-
In the end I have no doubt whatsoever that a given modern L-5 or Super, etc is at least as well built as any that came before, light or heavy build notwithstanding.
But like Neatomic points out, a well played vintage guitar made w/ aged woods typically is going to sound better, it has those two advantages from jump.
I've had many vintage archtops and their modern equivalents played side by side and the played in vintage ones typically sound better, not always but usually. There's no hype there, and a similarly built new Gibson would likely sound just as good over time if built w the same aged woods, pickups etc, and was played in, no reason it wouldn't, though old growth wood could be a factor.
Now if we can fast forward 30 yrs we'd have a more defined answer.
All that said, modern Gibsons can be excellent, I've owned and played some good ones, they are first class instruments, I still have one or two myself.
-
Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
And then as has been pointed out, wood changes over decades. My house was built in 1908 and in the course of remodeling I have had a chance to heft some of the old wood, which is now almost featherlight it is so dry. Not only does moisture migrate out of the wood, the structure of the remaining material changes- resins, etc. We've hopefully all picked up an old guitar and smelled the distinctive scent of old wood; some guitars you know they will sound good just from that smell.
For tonewoods there are problems, one of which is that the old growth forests of suitable woods in the US and Europe have been by and large cut down long ago. For the good wood that remains there is competition from fine furniture makers, wood carvers, cabinet makers, etc. And much of that wood is in places where it is hard to get it out after harvesting. Some of those trees have become mythical beings in their own right- one is just known as The Tree.
The Tree — Luthiers for a Cause
As for why Gibson is overbuilding... one theory I have read is kerfed braces. To save labor and money, Gibson went to kerfed braces long ago which resulted in sunken tops. They don't have to be carved to fit the top because they're flexible. Because those braces are only as strong as the thin parts of the wood at the bottom of the kerfs, they provide little support against string tension. Some braces have a cap glued onto the tops of the braces, but often that wood fractures. So Gibson beefed up the tops, once they figured it out- a thicker top is stiffer, bearing more of the load and relying less on the bracing.
-
Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
"They just don't make'em the way they used to"
/thread
-
easy - warranty
-
Originally Posted by jzucker
DB
-
I doubt Gibson was using naturally dried wood towards the end of the 50ies: they would have needed to use wood that was already laid aside to dry in the 30ies and 40ies. Demand for guitars was rising fast and Brasil and Honduras were exporting large quantities of wood to the US. A '60ies L5 is probably already made from oven or kiln-dried wood? (Mahogany, rosewood and ebony that is, perhaps spruce is a different story?) (This is all very speculative btw, I can't really back this up with facts, but it makes sense to me ;-)
-
Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
-
Originally Posted by jzucker
-
Originally Posted by wintermoon
On the 175, rather than cut the bracing to match the curvature of the top, gibson took the shortcut of kerfing the braces so they were more flexible and took straight pieces of wood with kerfs and glued them to the top. On the more expensive archtops, the bracing is hand carved to match the curve of the top. A lot of the '80s 175 braces are kerfed only in a few strategic areas. Not all the way through like the double cutaway ES-150 or the Heritage 550.
-
Originally Posted by wintermoon
-
60's guitars were already made with the "new" wood. Good, old growth spruce resources were already depleted by the 60's in North America because of the World Wars. Airplanes at the time, like guitars, required wood with high stiffness to weight ratio. Spruce is the soft wood with the highest stiffness to weight ratio. That's why war planes were built using instrument grade spruce.
Guitars made after 30's all pretty much use the same quality spruce.Last edited by Tal_175; 12-16-2019 at 02:18 PM.
-
The bottom line is, we all gravitate to guitars that speak to us. Good thing there are so many great choices available for everyone.
-
Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
-
I don't have much to add. But I've discussed this with some of the original Heritage luthiers.
It is much harder to carve a thin top and back than thicker ones. It takes more time and risks cracking the wood. Some people want the top and back thin and tuned, and they will pay for the most experienced carvers, like Aaron Cowles and Marv Lamb. Most people don't care. The default is a thicker top.
Heritage used to make most of their floater pickup guitars lighter, especially up until about 2005 or so.
-
Pickup mounting holes are structural weaknesses. Tops are arched to structurally resist the downward force created by the tailpiece/bridge design. Putting a hole right near the bridge saddle eliminates a lot of the support from the arched design. Imagine putting a big hole right near the bridge of a violin.
Archtop guitars were designed based on the knowledge transfer from the violin and the cello world. Initially they didn't put pickups in them, so light build design worked. I presume guitars that sink have pickup holes. Probably they realized that they had to adopt the design for this structural change. I guess that's also why L5 CES's are more heavily built than L5 WesMo's.
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Originally Posted by deacon Mark
Last edited by Tal_175; 12-16-2019 at 03:22 PM.
Dell Arte/Stringphonic Basic 503 Gypsy Jazz Guitar
Today, 01:45 PM in For Sale