Heritage Sweet 16 question for owners

[Hammertone]

Here's a question:

Is a 16" archtop guitar with a
-carved spruce top
-carved maple back
-solid maple rims - 2 3/4" deep or maybe less, like 2 1/2" or even 2 1/4"
-maple neck
-ebony fretboard
-biggish headstock w/Grover Rotomatic-style or similar tuners
-25 1/2" scale, 14th fret neck/body joint
-single floating or set-in neck pickup
-pickguard
-ebony bridge
-brass tailpiece ...

... neck-heavy?

Offhand, the only guitar I can think of with these specs is the Heritage Sweet 16, and there are probably enough members here who own or have owned one, to answer the question.

[Bluedawg]

I've never found my Sweet 16 to be neck heavy.

Not sure if it makes any difference, but when I play, I usually use a strap and hold the guitar like a classical guitar player.

[339 in june]

Mine (built in 1997) is very comfortable to play, sitting or standing, and certainly not neck heavy.

[2bornot2bop]

Every one I owned played like a dream. I’ve owned 4. Each had a 2 3/4” depth, which to my knowledge is standard for the Sweet 16. The necks on each were perfect. The current prices are a bit crazy, as they sold for $2400 max used in 2010. I’ve seen many priced at $4500 and more. This happened soon as it was suggested Heritage wouldn’t commonly produce archtop’s anymore. I’ve heard of price gouging but I paid $2800 for a L4CES 4 years ago. The market has gone nuts.

[jim777]

The market has gone nuts.

100% agree, it's not safe out there! lol

[Gitfiddler]

My former Sweet 16 was a wonderful archtop, not too big, ergonomically comfortable and not neck-heavy. Best of all, I only paid $1,600 for it on the used market over a decade ago. Remember those 'good old days' of relatively inexpensive Heritage archtops?

The only reason I let it go was my quest for thicker, more 'thunky' jazz tone. It might have been that specific guitar, or maybe the combination of the slimmer body depth and 25.5 scale. I'm much happier with the Golden Eagle that replaced the Sweetie. And yes, I miss her.

[2bornot2bop]

My former Sweet 16 was a wonderful archtop, not too big, ergonomically comfortable and not neck-heavy. Best of all, I only paid $1,600 for it on the used market over a decade ago. Remember those 'good old days' of relatively inexpensive Heritage archtops?

The only reason I let it go was my quest for thicker, more 'thunky' jazz tone. It might have been that specific guitar, or maybe the combination of the slimmer body depth and 25.5 scale. I'm much happier with the Golden Eagle that replaced the Sweetie. And yes, I miss her.

Those were the daze. I recall it being the perfect sofa archtop. But when it came to tone I always migrated towards an archtop with at minimum a 3” depth. I sold a rare Chestnut Sunburst S16 with a single humbucker for $3k. At the time I recall thinking that’s the max price for a Sweet 16 that I’ll ever see. I couldn’t have been more wrong.

[John A.]

The Eastman AR503ce has a 16" carved spruce top, maple back and sides (lam, but it doubt that makes a difference), 2 9/16" rims, 25"-scale maple neck, and die-cast tuners on a wide headstock. So that's pretty close to a Sweet 16 spec-wise. The ones I've tried were not neck heavy.

[JohanAbrandt]

The Eastman AR503ce has a 16" carved spruce top, maple back and sides (lam, but it doubt that makes a difference), 2 9/16" rims, 25"-scale maple neck, and die-cast tuners on a wide headstock. So that's pretty close to a Sweet 16 spec-wise. The ones I've tried were not neck heavy.

Really thin necks though?

[John A.]

Really thin necks though?

Didn't seem that way to me, but I'm not a great judge of that particular dimension.

[JohanAbrandt]

Didn't seem that way to me, but I'm not a great judge of that particular dimension.

I have never tried a 503, but its listed as eastmans version of a modern c. The same goes for the el rey which does have a really thin neck. I like it despite that, but …

[burchyk]

Carved does not necessarily mean thin and delicate... My H-575 was built like a tank

[John A.]

I have never tried a 503, but its listed as eastmans version of a modern c. The same goes for the el rey which does have a really thin neck. I like it despite that, but …

The 503 (like a lot of the Eastmans) has a 1.75" nut. So I think just by virtue of being a C shape on a relatively wide board it feels a little heftier than some other C's. But this is not something I'm particularly discerning about.