Played a 50s Gibson L4c and L7... surprised how thin the L4 sounded in comparison

[Steve Z]

Last week I was picking up a couple guitars (setups) from Carter Vintage in Nashville and spent some time playing a 50s Gibson L4c and L7. The L4c was definitely more comfortable with the 16" body, but Wow!... the L4 was super thin with practically no bass compared to the L7. As the L4 and the ES-175 are the same body dimensions (I know... carved vs laminate), I would have thought that the tone of the L4 would have been a bit fuller than it is.

Is this normal with the 50s L4s? If so, how did they sell so many if the sound was lack luster?

Anyone know if the pickup sound of a 50s L4c is full or close to that of a 17" body?

Thought this might be an interesting conversation.


I found good info this thread on the 50s L4c... The Gibson L4c aka Zeppo Marx

[Tom Karol]

I had a 1966 L4C from the early 70's to the early 90's. It did sound thin acoustically, despite the solid spruce top. But I had 12's on it, and I think it was designed for 13's - probably even bronze - it was supposed to be an acoustic archtop after all. Neck was great, but there were intonation issues. I had a DeArmond Rhythm Chief 1100 installed on it initially, but due to feedback and hum issues, replaced it with a Bill Lawrence AT-170 (good pickup - no longer available). I now have an Eastman AR403ce. Apologies to any vintage Gibson diehards, but I like the AR403ce better.

[medblues]

I had a 1966 L4C from the early 70's to the early 90's. It did sound thin acoustically, despite the solid spruce top. But I had 12's on it, and I think it was designed for 13's - probably even bronze - it was supposed to be an acoustic archtop after all. Neck was great, but there were intonation issues. I had a DeArmond Rhythm Chief 1100 installed on it initially, but due to feedback and hum issues, replaced it with a Bill Lawrence AT-170 (good pickup - no longer available). I now have an Eastman AR403ce. Apologies to any vintage Gibson diehards, but I like the AR403ce better.

I just bought an Eastman AR403ced (two humbuckers) and I like it, I will install P-90's in it just for fun (the current pickups are nice also).

[Archtop Guy]

Steve, Consider a mid 80's L4c. Harder to find but those were made with mahogany back and sides. More mellow and warm.

[zizala]

I have a '50 L-4c and its got a very forward cutting sort of acoustic voice which I like for what it is.
Its got good volume, fat trebles and mids, but not a deep bass. It feels responsive to play, and for a Gibson reminds me of some of the old 16" Epiphones that I enjoy.

It's got a carved spruce top, solid maple sides and a pressed maple laminated back.
I think certain acoustic archtops with laminated backs can tend to have that forward sort of tone....not conducive for allowing the sound to be spending much time inside the fully solid and responsive carved body.

I've played mine with a DeArmond Rhythm Chief 1000 and current have it set up with an old McCarty unit that I adapted to fit. It sounds great amplified either way with the magnetic pickup and the amp and tone controls and eq allowing for as much bottom end as I need.

My L-7's do have more bottom in the acoustic tone....a bit fuller altogether, but the L-4c is lively and audacious and I find a lot to love about it. Maybe I got one of the better sounding ones or I have more adaptable ears.
I enjoy 13.5" Epiphones from the early 30's and that maybe says something about my expectations!

Amplified the L-7's sounds great with the same sort of pickups, but adding a floating pickup to both models is a great equalizer. I do hear some difference coming through with the acoustic response of the different body sizes and builds, but overall I think an L-4c with the right floating pickup can please the ears for those who might find the acoustic sound lacking.

Here's my '50 with a '45 L-7