-
I clearly hear a difference in amped sound between my thin and thick carved tops. They both have the same pickup.
My Godin Kingpin sounds entirely different. That's a $800 axe compared to a $5K one.
They probably all sound the same to an audience. Maybe I'll find out one day...
-
07-18-2020 01:11 PM
-
Originally Posted by Hammertone
I would love to come across a counterexample.
-
Originally Posted by ccroft
-
Originally Posted by frankhond
Last edited by Hammertone; 07-18-2020 at 02:21 PM.
-
07-18-2020, 02:03 PM #130joelf Guest
? There must be hundreds of choices of good, cheap archtops worldwide.
My current one cost $700 + tax. Previous one, $1,000----W/$100 off b/c I called Paul Ash and told him I'd endorse it.
Crafty devil, that Paul...
-
Originally Posted by frankhond
Acoustic tone:
No, it won't sound like a Martin dreadnaught. If you want a dreadnaught, get a dreadnaught. Dreadnaughts have sparkling highs and boomy lows. That's why people liked them to accompany a singer. It doesn't step on the singer's midrange toes. I good acoustic arch top has great projection, clear single note sound, and balanced tone across its range. It takes on the role a banjo might in the 1920's, but with greater warmth and tone. There is a reason few people pick up a dread to play lines in an acoustic jazz trio. Likewise, if you hoping to accompany yourself on a Joan Baez song at a campfire singalong, an arch top probably won't be your instrument.
Quality:
Not all archtops are the same. Flat top guitars have had over 100 years of modern evolution since the first steel string guitars showed up. There is a "standard" design that, if followed, produces an acceptable acoustic tone. Flat top guitars can be produced by the tens of thousands in factories with workers who have never played a guitar (and some in Asia may never have even heard an acoustic guitar played). Archtops were acoustic instruments only for a few decades before becoming fancy electric guitars. There is no standard shape, thickness, gradation of the carved arch top plate that gives a consistent acoustic tone. Tuning a carved top to produce a good acoustic tone is hard and takes practice and skill. Just because it has a carved top doesn't mean that the luthier who made it was making an acoustic instrument. Most leave the factory with little acoustic tone and are meant to be plugged in.
My own journey in building my own came from having played a 1936 Epiphone Deluxe unplugged. It was amazing. Each single note was like playing a little bell, and a drop2 on the middle strings gave a satisfying harmonic blanket. I was hooked. I couldn't build another boring dread. Other than one Benedetto I played at a guitar show, I've never come across another arch top that even came close. Certainly no dread. If you want an acoustic arch top be prepared to kiss a lot of frogs.
Electric tone:
Can I get a good jazz sound on my Tele? Sure. I've posted pictures of my Tele before, and I am justifiably proud. But I don't play it. When I want to plug in, I reach for my full hollow thin line. Not because it sounds like an amplified acoustic guitar, but because I like the sound it makes as an electric guitar. There isn't a lot of daylight between the electric guitars as far as tone, but I do have a preference. If all I wanted was a versatile electric guitar, I wouldn't choose an arch top. Just like if I was playing acoustically with a piano, an upright bass, or a clarinet I wouldn't pick up my Tele (or dread).
As for feedback, I know plenty of people who gig with some form of flat top. Usually some Martin D-28 clone. Somehow they are getting the job done, and those guitars make arch tops seem like dampening acoustic tiles in comparison.
Ergonomics:
I honestly don't know how people play with an 11lbs Les Paul anchor around their necks; and I find sitting with a 3" arch top guitar more comfortable than a 4-1/2" dread. I have the action and neck profile dialed in for my archtops. Likewise, you can see from my post over on the "black arch top" that I don't put a finger rest on my guitars. If you don't like yours, take it off. Yes, fix the rattles. I've never had any "sympathetic" ringing on strings from the bridge to the back on any of my guitars. I suspect the saddle slots, but I couldn't know.
The point is, arch tops can be very comfortable instruments to play. Yes, like any tool, they need to be set up properly and maintained, but none of your "irritants" are an inherent feature of arch tops.
So as far as them not being "practical", all I can say is that they are their own instrument. If you want an Ibanez JEM or a Martin D-28, an arch top isn't a practical replacement. But if you want what only a full carved arch top seems able to give, you will never be satisfied with anything else.
Of course, not many seem to want or need that. So, back to the OP....
-
Ironically, I found this thread on our own Builders Bench page . . .
List of Archtop Luthiers
-
Originally Posted by Hammertone
-
Originally Posted by jads57
But for a little perspective, how many people who buy nice pianos ($$$) play professionally? Or for that matter, take them out of the house? We can do the same with nice archtops.
-
Originally Posted by HammertoneOriginally Posted by frankhond
As far as the OP, goes, well, most of the points I'd make have been covered, above and below.
IMO, the "Death of the American Archtop" is .... greatly exaggerated.Last edited by Hammertone; 07-20-2020 at 01:38 AM.
-
Probably a topic for another thread, but yes, you can hear the difference between a solid wood carved archtop and most laminates even when amplified. That assumes you're amplifying the acoustic sound with a reasonable fidelity pickup and acoustic type amplifier. If you've got a humbucker and a standard guitar amp, to my ears (YMMV), not so much. Can't say I can tell the difference between an ES175 and an L5 running through a Fender Deluxe from a stage. In the living room or studio maybe more of a difference.
As for musicians in the wild using solid carved instruments, there are a lot of folks playing carved Eastman's out there.
-
Originally Posted by Hammertone
-
Well this thread spurred me to
1. Get rid of the pickguard, for me it’s only a holder for the volume control
2. Replace the Zoller with a Lollar Johnny Smith and see what happens. Only they are hard to come by in the EU, anyone has one for sale?
3. Play into a corner and see if I like the acoustic sound better.
Not bad.
-
Originally Posted by Gitterbug
-
Archtops that typically perform well acoustically are specifically designed to do so. They are carved and braced with this in mind. They usually are only useable with floating in lower volume playing situation. They are way too reactive to ambient sound to reliably play in anything above a small trio sound volume wise (what I call low/moderate below). So they are not a versatile tool, but a specific one. They work well for solo play. They will not work well for many playing situations.
Carved archtops for higher volume playing situations tend have thicker carved plates and braces so they are less likely to feedback. In turn, acoustically they can be somewhat anemic to my ears. You can see the evolution of guitars matches the evolution of music and the venues they were played in.
Volume————-Guitar Type
Low——————Carved Acoustic Archtop/w or wo a Floating PU
Low/Moderate—-Carved Electric Archtop/w Floating PU
Moderate——-—Carved Electric Archtop/w Built-in PU
High————-—-Laminate Electric Archtop/w Built-in PU(s)
High/Highest——Laminate or Carved Electric Semi-hollowbody/w Built-in PU(s)
Highest————-Electric Solid body/w Built-in PU(s)
Regarding any comparison to acoustic flattops, they are designed to be different tools. In my view, good acoustic archtops excel at attack, balance in volume across the strings, string-to-string note separation, strong mid fundamentals, headroom and projection. A good acoustic flattop share some of these characteristics such as balance in volume across the strings, string-to-string note separation and sometimes headroom. Where they truly excel is in responsiveness to touch, sustain, harmonic complexity and extended frequency response. I enjoy both types of guitars for different reasons.
For me, who primarily plays solo, acoustic archtops suit my needs perfectly. I play them both acoustically and plugged in, but at a modest volume. For higher volume playing situations, I bring a semi-hollowbody or a Tele. They are more versatile tools.
-
I think a good compromise would be, Gibson only selling guitars online and direct.
I learned a lot when I was told Sam Ash paid Gibson $3500 for my Solid Formed and was forced to keep it for sale at $6,999. It hung on the wall for 4 years. Yes, ugly pickguard and all..
Let the stores sell the import stuff. The world is built for it.
If Gibson sold only direct, think of how many L5’s they could build and sell for $7,000? (List $12000 x 50% plus $1,000 [which they weren’t getting before] = $7000, plus shipping).
If They need help understanding how to build And sell an L5 for $7,000, they should try and hire Mark Campellone as a consultant right before he retires and he can teach them how. He’s made a living at it for a while now..
JD
-
That "IS" the answer Bro.
-
[QUOTE=Max405;1048522]I think a good compromise would be, Gibson only selling guitars online and direct.]
This would be a very different Gibson, especially for the rest of the world. Hundreds if not thousands of dealers whose empty racks Fender and Ibanez would be happy to fill. And, talking of experience, communication with direct customers, individual packing and shipping as well as handling "I didn't like it" returns consumes time and resources. How would Epiphone fit in? What's good for Benedetto's scale of operations (and they may have second thoughts about direct-only) is not feasible in a Les Paul and SG world. So I assume that Max suggests direct sales for Gibson's archtops, not flattops or solidbodies.
-
Originally Posted by GTRMan
Car companies have stopped producing sedans, because there’s little demand from the general public.
And yet rich people still buy Bentley Flying Spurs and Mulsannes.
Think about it.
-
And no sense in having to explain unprofitable product lines when they go to sell the ‘new improved Gibson’.
-
Originally Posted by Max405
-
Originally Posted by Lobomov
I wouldn't call it greed. Gibson just charged what the market would bear. And well-heeled buyers were willing to pay $5000+ for a new 175, which pushed it out of reach for a typical buyer.
Pursuing the luxury or lifestyle market will run out of steam eventually for most companies.
That still doesn't negate my point that Gibson could produce a reasonably priced archtop made in America that I think would appeal to a lot of people. Godin has been doing it in Canada for years. Martin produces flattops at all price points.
-
Maybe Gibson actually prefers to address "common" buyers through Epiphone.
-
Originally Posted by teeps
-
Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
You mean like Honda Accords, Toyota Camry's, Ford Taurus, Lincoln's, Cadillacs, BMWs, Mercedes, Chevy Impalas and Malibus, Lexus, Infiniti? I'm not following.
Ibanez archtop with 0.010 Thomastik strings and...
Today, 05:27 AM in The Builder's Bench