Honest Question: What's the Gibson Tal Farlow's Magic?

[lawson-stone]

Joe
Never, Ever, apologize for your clips. I love hearing you play. I'm inspired by watching and listening. Few people also seem to capture the guitar in there recording as well as you do.

I can see why you think of the TF as like an L5. Your technique brings out a tone from the TF that really is in that sweeter L5 country. I typically associate the TF with a drier, authoritative tone that is less sweet and somehow on a continuum say between a great L5 and a great ES175-the two "gold standards" for jazz guitar tone for me. But the TF I associate with popping single-note lines that are kind of fat with a quick attack and decay.

The "Breezin" clip actually captures that dimension. That's a versatile guitar, and I imagine it takes a very talented player to bring out everything it can do.

Still, I even hear that in the other clips. The TF even with the lush chords and a bit of reverb still has a thickness that isn't L5-ish. I think of the L5ces as still being a bit more stringy (in a great way) sounding.

I know I'm not making much sense here... trying to find concrete ways to describe tone is frustrating!

But you always do bring out something from the guitars you play that is distinctive and beautiful.

[lawson-stone]

I am not a luthier so I can't tell you anything about bracing etc. but there are some similarities and differences between a 350 and a Tal Farlow. So first you must decide what sounds you like. Early Tal (ES 350) or later Tal (Tal Farlow model). I own both.

The 350 has P90 pick ups normally. Tal however changed the P90 in neck position to a CC pup. That may be a big factor in his sound on the 50s recordings. My own 1951 ES 350 sounds slightly different than what I hear on those recordings I think. Also Tal played old vintage amps (Gibson) no longer available.

The ES 350 is a way more resonant guitar (lighter build) than my (modern) Tal Farlow. They are both maple guitars. The ES 350 has a very nice acoustic quality that my Tal does not have. A Tal Farlow has humbuckers, an ES 350 P90s as I said earlier. The Farlow is less deep than a 350. Tal wanted it that way.

Still, I hear a quality in my modern Tal Farlow that I hear too on those old recordings by Tal. A kind of poppin' and "thunkin" sound. I hear it in the clip below. It's an old clip I recorded years ago. Tal through my Polytone. You hear it in my latest clip too.

DB

I'm loving these clips. I can hear how the TF is less acoustic sounding. My term for it is less "stringy" but I don't mean "stringy" in a negative way at all. My L5ces for all its rich tone still has a lot of string in the sound. The TF as you said has more pop. I think of the note as fat, but with a fast attack and fast decay. Playing fast and legato, you wouldn't say it lacks sustain, but each note is really fat and authoritative.

I think late afternoons my ability to put things into words gets muddy! But you and Joe D. have shown a massive range that the TF can produce.

Maybe it is Gibson Pixie Dust Magic after all!

[lawson-stone]

That was a good explanation along with the clips. I am wondering is laminate construction+slighly shallower depth+somewhat heavier with the longer scale all add up to a winning formula for Royal Thunk.

[Dutchbopper]

I'm loving these clips. I can hear how the TF is less acoustic sounding. My term for it is less "stringy" but I don't mean "stringy" in a negative way at all. My L5ces for all its rich tone still has a lot of string in the sound. The TF as you said has more pop. I think of the note as fat, but with a fast attack and fast decay. Playing fast and legato, you wouldn't say it lacks sustain, but each note is really fat and authoritative.

I think late afternoons my ability to put things into words gets muddy! But you and Joe D. have shown a massive range that the TF can produce.

Maybe it is Gibson Pixie Dust Magic after all!

How about these two Dutch players? They both play vintage Tal Farlows. Vincent Koning owns one and Maarten van der Grinten is trying one out.

Still, I hear the poppin' and thunkin' sound I do hear in mine a bit less in theirs.

[waltf]

[sgosnell]

I don't have a clue about what the difference between any of the guitars being discussed is, other than what I can hear through videos. A good place to hear the Tal as is with Andy Brown's videos. There are lots of them on YouTube. He plays his though a '60s blackface Vibrolux Reverb, and it's an amazing sound. In some videos he uses an Evans, and sounds exactly the same. I regret to say that I saw a Tal in a music store many years ago and passed on it, because I didn't think I could afford it. That was probably a fair decision for my family, but if I had been single I might have had a fling with it. Oh well, the chances not taken cannot be retaken. I probably could afford one now, if one were available, but the desire no longer lives. I'm satisfied with what I have. But I still like to listen to a Tal, and to Tal.

[rpjazzguitar]

I thought every one of the clips sounded great -- great tone, and fine playing.

But, if you blindfolded me first and then asked me if they were all played with the same model guitar, going by sound, I think I'd have said no.

[citizenk74]

Lawson, I dont know why, its probably my playing style - But the Tal to me, always had this kind of auto-wah sound to it. I am being serious.
Trust me, I am not whoring out some of my old videos so people will watch them, I just want you to listen to this Lawson.

God, I miss that Guitar. There are times when I want to play a guitar and the Guitars that I have are not what I want to play. I just want the no nonsense feel that the Tal offered. To me, it was just an L5, that was more comfortable to play. I am sorry. But that was my impression. Nothing felt more elegant and comfortable at the same time on my lap. It left a lasting impression on me. I always told Vinny, I don't play the Tal a lot. But when I play it, I wonder why I have any of these other guitars. Every time I picked that guitar up, I had this sense that IT COULD NOT get any better.

I wish I still had that guitar.

JD

Joe - I hear what you mean - there is to my ear, a certain bloom in the notes. Not in volume (though there is that) but in tone. The lower mids seem to speak first, followed by their mid and upper brethren, and then subside wit' da thunk. It's very quick, but it's there.

I credit your masterful touch for much of this. Your left- and right-hand technique enhance this aspect of the string's vibrational envelope.

Plus mojo.

[jazzkritter]

Might be fun tomorrow to take my L5 and the Tal, playing the same set of single notes and run that through an oscilloscope. I’m curious as to how the envelope will look as k suggests.
i was just poking a around the Gibson corporate forum, nothin of interest to the quest. But... someone claims the Viceroy Brown sunburst was named after a brandy called Viceroy and darn if it ain’t the same color)))

[vinnyv1k]

L5 vs Tal

Both are braced the same and have identical necks except for the fingerboard wood. Ebony vs Rosewood. The L5 has a fitted solid bridge base and the Tal has a compression fit like a 175.
17x3-3/8 vs 17x3. Same pickups.
All carved spruce and maple vs pressed all maple laminate.

To my ears I hear a distinct difference.
The L5 is more airey and open with a tighter bass. The L5 requires less volume for great tone.

The Tal on the other hand has huge compression and thunk you simply cannot get with a spruce top. Like Dick said a woody characteristic that you can only get from laminate maple. I have always thought of a Tal as a 175 tone on steroids. It is the lows where the Tal really shines and kicks sand in the L5’s face. The lows are so thick and buttery. The master of thunk unless you have a original ES350 before 1956.

One more thing about laminates. They do take longer to “ open up “ compared to carved. I consider myself informed on this as I usually buy new. As a general rule, carved 2 years and laminated 5 years.
My 2010 175 was just OK when new and then one day in 2015...OMG.
My 2014 Tal is now Mr.Thunkmaster. A TF thru a Twin is a beautiful thing........P.S. with TI flats.

[Dutchbopper]

L5 vs Tal

Both are braced the same and have identical necks except for the fingerboard wood. Ebony vs Rosewood. The L5 has a fitted solid bridge base and the Tal has a compression fit like a 175.
17x3-3/8 vs 17x3. Same pickups.
All carved spruce and maple vs pressed all maple laminate.

To my ears I hear a distinct difference.
The L5 is more airey and open with a tighter bass. The L5 requires less volume for great tone.

The Tal on the other hand has huge compression and thunk you simply cannot get with a spruce top. Like Dick said a woody characteristic that you can only get from laminate maple. I have always thought of a Tal as a 175 tone on steroids. It is the lows where the Tal really shines and kicks sand in the L5’s face. The lows are so thick and buttery. The master of thunk unless you have a original ES350 before 1956.

One more thing about laminates. They do take longer to “ open up “ compared to carved. I consider myself informed on this as I usually buy new. As a general rule, carved 2 years and laminated 5 years.
My 2010 175 was just OK when new and then one day in 2015...OMG.
My 2014 Tal is now Mr.Thunkmaster. A TF thru a Twin is a beautiful thing........P.S. with TI flats.

We have a winner in this thread. Most excellent post. Congrats!

DB

[Max405]

The man knows his stuff...

[lawson-stone]

L5 vs Tal

Both are braced the same and have identical necks except for the fingerboard wood. Ebony vs Rosewood. The L5 has a fitted solid bridge base and the Tal has a compression fit like a 175.
17x3-3/8 vs 17x3. Same pickups.
All carved spruce and maple vs pressed all maple laminate.

To my ears I hear a distinct difference.
The L5 is more airey and open with a tighter bass. The L5 requires less volume for great tone.

The Tal on the other hand has huge compression and thunk you simply cannot get with a spruce top. Like Dick said a woody characteristic that you can only get from laminate maple. I have always thought of a Tal as a 175 tone on steroids. It is the lows where the Tal really shines and kicks sand in the L5’s face. The lows are so thick and buttery. The master of thunk unless you have a original ES350 before 1956.

One more thing about laminates. They do take longer to “ open up “ compared to carved. I consider myself informed on this as I usually buy new. As a general rule, carved 2 years and laminated 5 years.
My 2010 175 was just OK when new and then one day in 2015...OMG.
My 2014 Tal is now Mr.Thunkmaster. A TF thru a Twin is a beautiful thing........P.S. with TI flats.

Wow Vinny
You just gave expression to some things I had a vague intuition about. I consider my question answered. Thank you!

[MaxTwang]

An ES-350T or Tal is a tall man's ES-175.

[AKA]

imho

l5 vs tal

both are braced the same and have identical necks except for the fingerboard wood. Ebony vs rosewood. The l5 has a fitted solid bridge base and the tal has a compression fit like a 175.
17x3-3/8 vs 17x3. Same pickups.
all carved spruce and maple vs pressed all maple laminate.

to my ears i hear a distinct difference.
The l5 is more airey and open with a tighter bass. The l5 requires less volume for great tone.

The tal on the other hand has huge compression and thunk you simply cannot get with a spruce top. Like dick said a woody characteristic that you can only get from laminate maple. I have always thought of a tal as a 175 tone on steroids. It is the lows where the tal really shines and kicks sand in the l5’s face. The lows are so thick and buttery. The master of thunk unless you have a original es350 before 1956.

One more thing about laminates. They do take longer to “ open up “ compared to carved. I consider myself informed on this as i usually buy new. As a general rule, carved 2 years and laminated 5 years.
My 2010 175 was just ok when new and then one day in 2015...omg.
My 2014 tal is now mr.thunkmaster. A tf thru a twin is a beautiful thing........p.s. With ti flats.

[Flat]

Man, what a thread!

• Players with experience with Tal Farlow models from different time periods!
• A bunch of great recordings from some really fine players demoing Tals from various years!
• DB’s amazing ES-350!
• Cats who knew and actually studied with Tal!

Thread like this could raise the market price for Tal Farlows! Anyways, thanks to Lawson for the ask, and guys like JoeMax and DB and Hammer and Vinlander *and added later but hell yeah Vinny* and others who really know and share their stuff. This thread oughta go in the archives!

[Max405]

Thank You Flat.
And certainly dont forget Vinny's "post of all posts"!
DB and Vinny have really praised the Tal for years. Frankly, I wouldn't have known about the Tal if it wasn't for Vinny. And all the GREAT playing that DB has done on it has only sealed its fate as one of the truly outstanding Jazz Guitars of our time.
If Gibson had half a brain, they would bring it back, along with the L5 and 175. Make a Signature model for Joe Pass (thinline single PU 175). Come out with the "Paisano Collection". And to it, add Sig models for the GREAT Pasquale Grasso and phenomenal Matteo Mancuso with their own touches. Pasquales will come with a pair of glasses and Matteo's would have a black sliding capo.
But, no.. Instead they are building 2 signature Jimi Hendrix models. Yeah, like when we think of Jimi Hendrix, we think of him playing a Gibson..
Sorry, rant over..
JD

[jazzkritter]

I’ll see your rant and add mine
#rant on
Gibson does have a brain...it’s called market demand. How many LPs and SGs can they sell to one 175? Whats the monthly demand for a Joe Pass guitar? Who knows TF other than this thread? How much would an L5 cost in 2022 dollars? Not to mention relative profit margins.
Not trying to be a jerk, and sorry if I sound like one, but Gibson’s brain are the investors who pumped the money in, and I’m sure if jazz guitars were profitable we would be seeing them.
Fact is, the market for archtops is literally dying off. Imagine the used market in 10 or 15 years!!! Mine will be there)
#rant off

[Lobomov]

I’ll see your rant and add mine
#rant on
Gibson does have a brain...it’s called market demand. How many LPs and SGs can they sell to one 175? Whats the monthly demand for a Joe Pass guitar? Who knows TF other than this thread? How much would an L5 cost in 2022 dollars? Not to mention relative profit margins.
Not trying to be a jerk, and sorry if I sound like one, but Gibson’s brain are the investors who pumped the money in, and I’m sure if jazz guitars were profitable we would be seeing them.
Fact is, the market for archtops is literally dying off. Imagine the used market in 10 or 15 years!!! Mine will be there)
#rant off

Yeah ... around my divorce ten years ago is kinda where it all ended in my head. You could still order a wide array of different Gibson archtops .. I looking at at Thomann and considering pulling the trigger, but thought it would always be there ... My mistake. Since then prices have doubled and you have almost zero options.


But yeah, it is just business ... and if archtops aren't profitable then they're not profitable. The few that I've seen in physical stores just sit there ... To take an example. One of my local shops didn't sell their 2015 ES-275 before this year ... Just just hung there for all to see but no one willing to buy for five years. Not surprising they only stock cheap Ibanez artcores and such these days.


Still Ibanez makes underrated stuff that even sometimes appear used at nice prices. I'm very happy with the PM100 I picked up for 1350€ a few years back

[jazzkritter]

Ibanez’ “low end” is way underrated. but I’m a known Ibanez fan. Your PM100 should be great)
I picked up a af95fm off Reverb for $450 shipped in May. Im not going to say it’s a match in quality to an MIJ Ibanez, but for the money those are fine jazz guitars. The neck is a bit thicker than an MIJ. i think the non MIJ pickups even thunk. As heretical as that may be.

Its ironic but Tal did not obsess over tone. He had one guitar, played it till it wore out. One amp, a 100 watt Walter Woods, one speaker a Bose 901 which a friend gave him. Standard Fender heavy pick. Heavy D’Addario flats with a 15/18 E and B. Traveling he took the Woods and requested a Twin just for the speakers. And a delay and octave splitter pedal. What he did obsess over was pushing himself to play faster; finding new inspiration for improvisation; and looking to play the same old in a different way.

[Stringswinger]

I’ll see your rant and add mine
#rant on
Gibson does have a brain...it’s called market demand. How many LPs and SGs can they sell to one 175? Whats the monthly demand for a Joe Pass guitar? Who knows TF other than this thread? How much would an L5 cost in 2022 dollars? Not to mention relative profit margins.
Not trying to be a jerk, and sorry if I sound like one, but Gibson’s brain are the investors who pumped the money in, and I’m sure if jazz guitars were profitable we would be seeing them.
Fact is, the market for archtops is literally dying off. Imagine the used market in 10 or 15 years!!! Mine will be there)
#rant off

That is a rant that makes accurate observations. The folks in control of Gibson are in business to make money. They have a fiduciary obligation to their investors and that means Les Pauls, SG's, 335"s and J-50 Flattops. Styles change and archtops will come back. Gibson will make them again. All in due time. Things are as they should be.

Back on topic, I have never had a TF. I do not like the cosmetics (though I would take a TF over a BK in a heartbeat). If they had a modern ES-350, I might have tried one. The truth is that the 175 and L-5 scratch my electric archtop itch just fine. But Tal, JD, DB and Andy Brown have all proven to me that a Gibson Tal Farlow is a great sounding guitar, even if it's looks do not appeal to me.

[waltf]

I do not like the cosmetics

[lawson-stone]

I’ll see your rant and add mine
#rant on
Gibson does have a brain...it’s called market demand. How many LPs and SGs can they sell to one 175? Whats the monthly demand for a Joe Pass guitar? Who knows TF other than this thread? How much would an L5 cost in 2022 dollars? Not to mention relative profit margins.
Not trying to be a jerk, and sorry if I sound like one, but Gibson’s brain are the investors who pumped the money in, and I’m sure if jazz guitars were profitable we would be seeing them.
Fact is, the market for archtops is literally dying off. Imagine the used market in 10 or 15 years!!! Mine will be there)
#rant off

If Gibson would price these mainly manufactured guitars competitively I imagine they'd sell well. I hear a lot of younger jazz guitarists on some of the internet radio stations. There are LOT of them. Most likely are playing 335s or the like, but if there was a 175 or TF available for a decent price, like under $3000, I think Gibson would be unable to keep up with the demand. Put the L5ces or WesMo at under $5000 and you'd hear a lot of people playing them. It's not the guitar's fault that there is no market for them. It's a price point issue.

[Gitterbug]

If Gibson would price these mainly manufactured guitars competitively I imagine they'd sell well. I hear a lot of younger jazz guitarists on some of the internet radio stations. There are LOT of them. Most likely are playing 335s or the like, but if there was a 175 or TF available for a decent price, like under $3000, I think Gibson would be unable to keep up with the demand. Put the L5ces or WesMo at under $5000 and you'd hear a lot of people playing them. It's not the guitar's fault that there is no market for them. It's a price point issue.

Under $3000? You can get a carved-top Eastman for roughly half of that, yet "a small group of skilled luthiers" can keep up with the demand.

[lawson-stone]

Under $3000? You can get a carved-top Eastman for roughly half of that, yet "a small group of skilled luthiers" can keep up with the demand.

But I suspect the Gibson name would sell more guitars, I don't know. They have tried through-the-roof pricing. Maybe they need to try more competitive pricing.