Advice on archtop guitar

[Bill C]

What laminate are you using, because that really hasn't been my experience. I know this offends some people here, but I don't see any use for getting a hollow body unless it's completely carved and fully acoustic (ie, no pickups drilled through that gorgeous top.) If you're going to kill the acoustic tone like that, you might as well get a solid body.

I play a laminate hollow body partly because I prefer the physical size of the thing and position of the strings relative to my body over a solid or a semi. I've never been able to get single line notes to "pop" out of the guitar on a semi or a solid. Likewise there seems to be too much chordal sustain on a solid or a semi. I prefer the timbre of a laminate over a carved axe - it's a more bitter/sweet, less refined sound to my ears which I like - just my opinion

[jackmac]

The Loar guitars are about the only hand carved solid top guitars within my budget, which again I dont know much about, certainly in the few days I have had the yamaha the neck feels great to me, my friend who is an experienced guitarist tells me its a steal!

[82Benedetto]

I've been fortunate enough to play the new Loar models. Unfortunately, I wasn't impressed. They weren't even close to being in the same league as the Eastman's. I've no idea what factory makes them (perhaps the same one making the imported Parker archtops) but it didn't feel or sound all that great to me.

You can play jazz on any guitar, but I know for me, there was no going back when I played the nice solid carved archtops

[Meggy]

I play a laminate hollow body partly because I prefer the physical size of the thing and position of the strings relative to my body over a solid or a semi. I've never been able to get single line notes to "pop" out of the guitar on a semi or a solid. Likewise there seems to be too much chordal sustain on a solid or a semi. I prefer the timbre of a laminate over a carved axe - it's a more bitter/sweet, less refined sound to my ears which I like - just my opinion

What I think you are saying is that a laminate hollow body has a certain kind of tone of it's own, i.e. it's own character, which some of us like in its own right. I'm of the same opinion myself - no one is going to tell me that an ES175 sounds the same as a Les Paul amplified!

[Bill C]

What I think you are saying is that a laminate hollow body has a certain kind of tone of it's own, i.e. it's own character, which some of us like in its own right. I'm of the same opinion myself - no one is going to tell me that an ES175 sounds the same as a Les Paul amplified!

yes, I find archtops more comfortable to play and more dynamic in response than semis or solids, and - from the guitars I've played and owned - I tend to prefer the sound of a laminate archtop to a carved archtop - just my preference

[82Benedetto]

yes, I find archtops more comfortable to play and more dynamic in response than semis or solids, and - from the guitars I've played and owned - I tend to prefer the sound of a laminate archtop to a carved archtop - just my preference

No offense, but I think your ears are playing tricks on you. Plywood covered in a plastic, goopy polyurethane finish doesn't breathe. Actually, I'd love for someone to make a "blind" test; record a few different licks with a solid body and a laminate and see who can pick it out. I don't have a laminate, so someone with both would have to do it.

[Eddie Lang]

82B, I have to respectfully disagree with your comments. While it is true that some laminated wood guitars are not very good, you over-generalize and your statement cannot be considered as true. Are you saying that ES-175 and ES-300, to mention only those two, are crap? What about some gypsy jazz guitars, including the very coveted Selmer guitars created by Mario Maccaferri and after his departure from the company? There was a time when laminate was considered better by some because it was stiffer and allowed a lighter build.

In the case of archtops, laminated wood was first used and intended at electric guitars, not acoustic ones. It was found that laminated wood reduced considerably the amount of feedback. Moreover, an electromagnetic pickup picks up the vibrations of the strings and of the body of the guitar, including the top, but not its acoustic properties. It does result in a different tone from a solid wood archtop, but its tone is also just as different from that of a solid body guitar, which produces way more sustain BTW.

I totally agree with Meggy and Bill. Laminated wood guitars offer tone and structural qualities that are in general simply different from a solid wood archtop and solid bodies guitars, not better, not worse, just different. YMMV.

Nowadays, laminated wood is often destined at cheaper guitars, and the quality of the glue used is not always as good as it used to be (yes, this influences tone), but I think it is still safe to say that many new laminated wood guitars offer a very good value and can sound awesome, even better in some cases than some lower end solid wood guitars. Solid carved wood does not guaranty that a guitar will be well conceived and built with good craftsmanship. An overbuilt or poorly built solid wood guitar, carved or shaped, is just not going to sound better than a well built laminated wood guitar. So we have to be wary of axioms.

[82Benedetto]

82B, I have to respectfully disagree with your comments. While it is true that some laminated wood guitars are not very good, you over-generalize and your statement cannot be considered as true. Are you saying that ES-175 and ES-300, to mention only those two, are crap? What about some gypsy jazz guitars, including the very coveted Selmer guitars created by Mario Maccaferri and after his departure from the company? There was a time when laminate was considered better by some because it was stiffer and allowed a lighter build.

In the case of archtops, laminated wood was first used and intended at electric guitars, not acoustic ones. It was found that laminated wood reduced considerably the amount of feedback. Moreover, an electromagnetic pickup picks up the vibrations of the strings and of the body of the guitar, including the top, but not its acoustic properties. It does result in a different tone from a solid wood archtop, but its tone is also just as different from that of a solid body guitar, which produces way more sustain BTW.

I totally agree with Meggy and Bill. Laminated wood guitars offer tone and structural qualities that are in general simply different from a solid wood archtop and solid bodies guitars, not better, not worse, just different. YMMV.

Nowadays, laminated wood is often destined at cheaper guitars, and the quality of the glue used is not always as good as it used to be (yes, this influences tone), but I think it is still safe to say that many new laminated wood guitars offer a very good value and can sound awesome, even better in some cases than some lower end solid wood guitars. Solid carved wood does not guaranty that a guitar will be well conceived and built with good craftsmanship. An overbuilt or poorly built solid wood guitar, carved or shaped, is just not going to sound better than a well built laminated wood guitar. So we have to be wary of axioms.

First and foremost, you can't even compare modern laminates to gypsy style guitars. You're wrong here. The sides were laminated on the Selmers, but the top was always solid spruce and it was bent with a hot iron. The scale length of the guitar was also completely different...you're comparing apples to oranges.

Like I said, I'd love to hear a newer ES-175 recorded next to a solid body, using the same gauge and type of strings. Not much difference to my ears, likely due to the thick polyurethane finish in conjunction with the laminate already gunked up with glue.

And you also have to remember, the nice laminates like the Sadowsky's are made with much more care and attention to detail than the Gibsons, and they are also very, very expensive.

But please, record straight into your computer with the two different types of guitars. I would love to see a controlled experiment and be proved wrong, but I really don't think you're going to hear a huge difference in a blind test. I think it's the placebo effect with those laminates...

[Bill C]

No offense, but I think your ears are playing tricks on you. Plywood covered in a plastic, goopy polyurethane finish doesn't breathe.

Just to clarify, as far as I know the guitars I'm referring to were all nitro finished.

[Bill C]

Like I said, I'd love to hear a newer ES-175 recorded next to a solid body, using the same gauge and type of strings. Not much difference to my ears, likely due to the thick polyurethane finish in conjunction with the laminate already gunked up with glue.

And you also have to remember, the nice laminates like the Sadowsky's are made with much more care and attention to detail than the Gibsons, and they are also very, very expensive.

As far as I know Gibson still use nitro finishes for archtops (as does Sadowsky).

The Sadowsky archtops are similarly priced to a new ES-175D.

[82Benedetto]

Woops, you're right. I was thinking of the Cheaper ES models (though, still not that cheap.)

Anyway, would still like to hear a comparison of that 5 grand gibson to a solid body with the same setup.

[jackmac]

see that there is a hand crafted laminated top gretsch guitar at guitar guitar for £8000!!
Gretsch Eddie Cochrane Tribute Custom Shop Relic (GUITARGUITAR)

[wizard3739]

Actually, I have owned many archtops, a 1929 D' angelico, a 64 Gibson Johnny Smith, a 60's Gibson super 400, and a few others, vintage but not as well known. I have also played several Benedettos, and other high-end acoustic electric instruments. All were excellent instruments but, IMHO, none of them compare with my Sadowsky "Jim Hall" model for tone , quality of sound for jazz and practical gig value. I have no feedback problems and the Sadowsky seems to "stay in tune" much better than any other guitar I have ever owned. I also have a Frankenstein version of a Telecaster with with a "Joe Barden humbucker" in the neck pickup that I use as a backup guitar and it sounds a lot like an Ed Bickert Tele clone. It also has no feedback problems and has a very "easy to play" neck (important to an old coot with arthritis).

best wishes,
wiz

[Meggy]

Just to clarify, as far as I know the guitars I'm referring to were all nitro finished.

My Ibanez is cellulose finished! But I still maintain it sounds clearly different to my solidbodies, with more of that jazzy acoustic quality in the amplified tone. 82Benedetto is going to want me to prove this by making recordings I imagine - I'm not going to go to this trouble, so he'll have to forgive me for that! Having said that, you can hear Joe Pass himself playing my guitar here:

. This to my mind is a good example of a laminated archtop sound, surely not the same as a solidbody?

Non of this, by the way, is intended to denegrate the wonderful thing that is a nice handmade,carved-top jazz guitar! I'd love to own one myself one day.

[coolvinny]

I know this offends some people here, but I don't see any use for getting a hollow body unless it's completely carved and fully acoustic (ie, no pickups drilled through that gorgeous top.) If you're going to kill the acoustic tone like that, you might as well get a solid body.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, so no offense taken, but in my experience a carved top hollow-body with a built-in pick-up can still sound great acoustically. There is an undeniable loss of acoustic volume with a built-in pup, but not necessarily any change in the character or quality of the sound - if the guitar is built right.

I have all three: a carved pure acoustic archtop, a solid-body voiced for jazz, and a carved arch-top with a built-in pup...and 75% of the time I play the archtop with the built-in pup (and I play it acoustically, i.e. unplugged). If I'm playing with other instrumentalists, then I need to plug it in...but that would probably be the case with an archtop with a floating pup too.

[Doctor Jeff]

see that there is a hand crafted laminated top gretsch guitar at guitar guitar for £8000!!
Gretsch Eddie Cochrane Tribute Custom Shop Relic (GUITARGUITAR)

That price seems outrageous. Unless I'm mistaken, it's the same guitar listed here for a local craigslist sale?

NEW"GRETSCH Eddie Cochran Guitar TRADE?

Nice guitar, but not worth 9000 pounds!

[Geoffers]

The only advice I can give is usually your first arch top is not the one you end up playing, and if your like most, it takes a while to get your technique together. Depending on how much you played your acoustic, was it a flat top etc... I agree with the posts above don't spend to much and like derek said play a lot of instruments, don't look for momentary gratification, jazz takes time... good luck Reg

Thanks Reg and everyone else who took time to advise me some months back.
I did a lot of hard thinking, especially in light of all your comments, and came to the conclusion that laying out £2,000+ on my first archtop might not be the best way to go. Another factor is the one of perception: if people see me sit down at one of the guitar clubs I attend to play a bit of jazz I've just learnt and they see a name like d'Angelico, Guild, Gibson, etc., the first impression is, "Wow. Must be some guitarist." - I'm not. I'm new to jazz.

So, having re-adjusted my budget, I finally purchased an Ibanez Pat Metheny PM35 last Saturday. What can I say? - I love it! Just the tone I was after, comfortable to play, nice to look at, not too expensive as a first jazzer ..... I could go on.

Only problem now is remembering all those modes in 5 different positions and applying them intuitively over whatever the tune may be. That's going to take time and patience.

[kamlapati]

Congrats on the new axe. Betcha you'll be back for a carved top acoustic one day!