-
Foxman,
I am in 1,000% agreement with you. The Joe Pass 175, if priced right, would be one of the best Jazz guitars ever made.
JD
-
02-17-2021 09:46 PM
-
bah humbucker!
cheers
-
There are two camps on this general topic of carved vs laminate.
One camp considers carved spruce to produce the superior electric tone compared to the laminate maple (not just acoustic). They believe people who play maple laminates are sheeps that follow the common behaviour, can't afford to get the real carved spruces models or for other practical reasons that justify the compromise in tone.
The other camp are people who are aware of the the tonal differences but actually like how the maple laminate designs sounds. They don't necessarily believe one is superior to the other. To them, the maple laminate isn't just a practical compromise but a desired tonal color.
I don't have an L4 but I have a Byrdland and an ES 175. Byrdland is carved spruce. It's not as deep as L4 but wider. I certainly hear and enjoy the more complex tone Byrdland offers compared to the ES 175. It's got better dynamics despite the shallower body. You hear a more nuanced response to your picking, especially when playing fingerstyle. When you pick harder it gets more explosive. It's a bit brighter but smoother and more layered at the same time.
Yet when I pickup my ES 175 after playing the Byrdland for a while, it puts a smile on my face. ES 175 is like a precision tool. It's got this simpler, drier tone. It gets out of the way and lets you be the sound. Still gives you that airy, fat archtop tone but with a sweet clarity and directness.
If I had to choose one, that would be my ES 175. Despite the fact that I'm not after that pure thunk of Tal Farlow albums (or Joe Pass Joy Spring). Put round wounds on an ES 175 and it is a different guitar.
Also note these differences mostly concern the player. For the listeners the differences would be extremely subtle compared to the other factors like the choice of amp, the pick, player's hands etc.Last edited by Tal_175; 02-25-2021 at 12:42 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Bezoeker
There was in addition an active jazz community that somehow found me useful as a bandmate, jamming partner, and market for various music stuff. It was good.
Then one of the big oil companies left for Tejas and the long, slow decline began*.
I would love to have an L4CES. But as I am no longer gigging, I cannot justify the expense. Keeping up with co-pays is enough of a challenge.
I don't know much about the majority (so rarely being a part of it) - but I think the L4CES is more widely admired than you might think.
* And is, in fact, ongoing.
-
I find the L4CES to be a superb sounding guitar. The last one I had was an earlier 2000’s ma’hog that sounded absolutely superb. I bought it sight unseen as part of a dealer close-out for skinny money. Unfortunately it had the soft and sticky finish of that period. So I sold it along with my same era HR Fusion III. (In retrospect, either or both probably deserved a re-finish to get rid of the goo.)
My prior L4CES was a much earlier maple (back and sides) that I got as a reclamation project - double neck break, at both the classic headstock location and way down near the heel.
Fortunately the heel break (which was far uglier) was hidden under the 175-style dark fade area after the refinish.
It fixed up beautifully, and sounded great - but not as generous in the bass and lower mids as the mahogany ones - in my one opinion. In contradiction to this though, I suspect the mahogany neck is the far greater contributor to the sound of the L4CES than the back and sides of the body.
I would absolutely encourage anyone to try one.
For fun, I still disagree that they are reasonably admired. Maybe in words they sometimes are, but the general gushing and prestige (not sure how to characterize that) and money flow goes to the L5.
But definitely a wonderful guitar. Just do not let one fall off a stand I suppose.Last edited by Bezoeker; 02-25-2021 at 08:38 PM. Reason: Bad spelling error
Pick shape/size
Today, 08:15 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos