Options for 15” archtop

[Woody Sound]

Attachment 96097

What I've been playing for the past 20 years. 15.5" x 2&5/8", 25.5" scale.

Danny W.

Is the one with the floater carved lighter?

[Jimmy blue note]

And notice that in order to keep the long scale on the smaller body, the bridge sits back closer to the tail.

Yes, because the longer scale, no matter what the length is, always has it's midpoint at the 12th fret. That's your octave harmonic, the half point "fold" of the string. Then half of the scale length is to the nut, half to the bridge. Longer the scale, the ends are still half the length of the string measured from the 12th fret so you need to move the bridge back.

[RJVB]

Longer the scale, the ends are still half the length of the string measured from the 12th fret so you need to move the bridge back.

That's assuming you want to keep that 12th fret at a fixed position relative to the body. I can see why you'd want to do that with a "12 fretter", but would you really notice it for other designs if the 14th (or 13th, or ...) fret isn't perfectly over the neck junction?

I'd expect that the location of the bridge has much more effect on the acoustic voice of an instrument that which fret (or not) sits above the edge of the body.

[Jimmy blue note]

That's assuming you want to keep that 12th fret at a fixed position relative to the body. I can see why you'd want to do that with a "12 fretter", but would you really notice it for other designs if the 14th (or 13th, or ...) fret isn't perfectly over the neck junction?

I'd expect that the location of the bridge has much more effect on the acoustic voice of an instrument that which fret (or not) sits above the edge of the body.

You can join the neck where ever you want. A double cutaway joins at around the 20 (330's and 335's have different join points) and jazz boxes, with the notable exception of the Howard Roberts Fusion tend to join at the 14th. This is because players are used to a certain orientation of body and neck relationship.
But you're right, you can join it at any point and that will move the bridge point depending on the scale and neck join.
It's notable that classicals join at the 12th and with their scale, it puts the bridge at a time tested "sweet spot" that's become somewhat standardized in classical building.
Early Martins followed this tradition but when players wanted greater fret access, they moved the 12 fret (00 and 000 I think) to the 14 fret join OM, which did have the effect of 'pulling' the bridge towards the sound hole. A lot of vintage players say that Martins lost their "sound" at that point, and it's noticible.
On an electric, it's NOT going to be a noticible difference given the vast advantages of fret access weighed against an acoustic advantage that's kind of moot in a heavier built top.

The fret that the neck joins the body is an engineering issue of fret access and balance. The mid point (and the 'scale' of the string) is a matter of physics. If you move your midpoint to anything but the 12th fret, you can't play in tune. Think of the scale as a fretboard and string assembly that can be removed separately. The length of that assembly is always the same with the mid point harmonic being the 12th fret octave. But where you place that assembly can give you any variation of fret access and the end points (bridge and nut) will move accordingly.

Hope that's not derailing the discussion here.

[Woody Sound]

It might have been interesting if they made the 15” L5s with a 16 fret neck to keep the bridge more centered.

[Jimmy blue note]

It might have been interesting if they made the 15” L5s with a 16 fret neck to keep the bridge more centered.

GOOD idea! Oh wow, GREAT idea. 'don't know what that'd do for neck balance though. That puts the headstock out there, but hey, Gibson, make me one! I'll gladly beta test it for you. Orange burst please. Make that a 7 string too. I'm a reasonable man.

[RJVB]

GOOD idea! Oh wow, GREAT idea. 'don't know what that'd do for neck balance though. That puts the headstock out there

It that should balance arm positions a bit better with the guitar on the right leg (compared to a 12-fretter held in classical position). Best forget using such an instrument in classical position, though...

[Hammertone]

It might have been interesting if they made the 15” L5s with a 16 fret neck to keep the bridge more centered.

And with less oversized f-holes. Something like this, which is actually 15 7/8" wide:

[Woody Sound]

GOOD idea! Oh wow, GREAT idea. 'don't know what that'd do for neck balance though. That puts the headstock out there, but hey, Gibson, make me one! I'll gladly beta test it for you. Orange burst please. Make that a 7 string too. I'm a reasonable man.

The L5-S had a 16 fret L5 neck, but it was 24.75 like a LP.

[Danny W.]

1228452[/URL]]…’cause rayon don’t shrink like that!

But seriously folks, I never heard of a 15.5 / 16” L5 made after 1934. Is this a November Fools Day joke or is it real?

Gibson made 16" 1934 reissues from 1995 to 2008 and L-5 Signatures from 2001 through 2004.

1228533[/URL]]I never heard of that before! I just looked it up and it’s described on some websites as having a 24 3/4” scale. Others say it’s a 25.5” scale. Is it one, the other, or both?

As ht points out, 25.5" is correct.

1228538[/URL]]25 1/2" scale. Whoever posts otherwise is wrong. "Some websites" - ha!
The L-5 Sig/Rit does not sound like the L-4CES.

Some key differences:
-25 1/2" vs. 24 3/4" scale;
-maple vs. mahogany neck;
-2 3/4" vs. 3 3/8" rim depth
-15 1/2" vs. 16" bottom bout width

Some similarities:
-parallel braced carved spruce top;
-ebony board;
-L-5 tailpiece;
-L-5 bridge base/tune-o-matic bridge.

The Lee Rit version is X-braced with a standard ebony bridge saddle. Rims on all versions are 2 &5/8"

1228965[/URL]]And notice that in order to keep the long scale on the smaller body, the bridge sits back closer to the tail.

Yes--the top is arched appropriately for the bridge location.

1228967[/URL]]Is the one with the floater carved lighter?

It's got what Gibson calls "acoustic bracing", X-bracing with a lighter carve, but the thickness at the f-holes is the same as the CES versions. It's noticeably more acoustic sounding.

1229024[/URL]]It might have been interesting if they made the 15” L5s with a 16 fret neck to keep the bridge more centered.

1229036[/URL]]GOOD idea! Oh wow, GREAT idea. 'don't know what that'd do for neck balance though. That puts the headstock out there, but hey, Gibson, make me one! I'll gladly beta test it for you. Orange burst please. Make that a 7 string too. I'm a reasonable man.

Why? It's great the way it is!

Everything on the L-5 Signature is a standard 17" L-5 part except the body: neck, tailpiece, pickguard all have the normal dimensions. After so many years of playing this model I find a 17" L-5 looks wrong to me, and I've owned dozens of them.

1229083[/URL]]The L5-S had a 16 fret L5 neck, but it was 24.75 like a LP.

17th fret--it was a solidbody with typical single-cut parameters.

Danny W.

[ccroft]

Attachment 96097

What I've been playing for the past 20 years. 15.5" x 2&5/8", 25.5" scale.

Danny W.

[Woody Sound]

17th fret--it was a solidbody with typical single-cut parameters.

Danny W.

Ah yes, that’s right, I used one for several years. My memory is going ?

But I think the LP has a 16 fret neck.

[Hammertone]

...As ht points out, 25.5" is correct.The Lee Rit version is X-braced with a standard ebony bridge saddle. Rims on all versions are 2 &5/8".

Thanks for the corrections - I didn't realized that the Rit was not the same as the Signature. I checked the rim depth on the Signature I have here, and it's 2 11/16" - hooray for Gibson!

[The Lee Rit version has ]...what Gibson calls "acoustic bracing", X-bracing with a lighter carve, but the thickness at the f-holes is the same as the CES versions. It's noticeably more acoustic sounding.
Everything on the L-5 Signature is a standard 17" L-5 part except the body: neck, tailpiece, pickguard all have the normal dimensions. After so many years of playing this model I find a 17" L-5 looks wrong to me, and I've owned dozens of them.

I find the tailpiece, pickguard and f-holes to be out of proportion with the overall body size, and wish Gibson would have scaled them down. I prefer the f-hole and pickguard size as used on the ES-275. This is all design detail, of course. The L-5 Sigs I have played feel and sound great. I have yet to try the L-5 Rit - not so easy to find!

[339 in june]

Maybe we can suggest this :
Marchione 15 Inch Archtop Thinbody 2009（中古）【楽器検索デジマート】

[SOLR]

Maybe we can suggest this :
Marchione 15 Inch Archtop Thinbody 2009???????????????

a beauty ...for a price..

S

[Danny W.]

Thanks for the corrections - I didn't realized that the Rit was not the same as the Signature. I checked the rim depth on the Signature I have here, and it's 2 11/16" - hooray for Gibson!

I find the tailpiece, pickguard and f-holes to be out of proportion with the overall body size, and wish Gibson would have scaled them down. I prefer the f-hole and pickguard size as used on the ES-275. This all design detail, of course. The L-5 Sigs I have played feel and sound great. I have yet to try the L-5 Sig - not so easy to find!

Took calipers to two of mine--both were 2.64"-closer to 2.625" than 2.6875"

Since, as you point out, they sound great I'm not sure if reducing the f-hole size would be good.

Your last two sentences seem to contradict each other.

Danny W.

[frankhond]

Given that it’s a lot of precision work to make an archtop, and good competent luthiers are expensive… and cheap Chinese labor is cheap because it’s unsustainable… why go through all the trouble and risk to order something from China that has a high probability to have green wood, flaws, climate adjustment issues, extra setup cost.

If it’s too expensive to buy a locally produced archtop, perhaps the solution is a telecaster? They can be made with 7 strings and, as Tim Lerch has demonstrated, can sound very archtop like for jazz. Such a guitar will fit the beater scenario nicely.

[Hammertone]

Took calipers to two of mine--both were 2.64"-closer to 2.625" than 2.6875" Since, as you point out, they sound great, I'm not sure if reducing the f-hole size would be good. Your last two sentences seem to contradict each other. Danny W.

Edited for clarity if you re-read it. Posting late at night sometimes yields such typos. I've played the L-5 Sig. Yet to play the L-5 Rit.

Making the f-holes smaller would probably slightly increase the acoustic bass response of the box, based on my understanding of the acoustics of arched-top boxes

[Woody Sound]

My 15"ers.

[Woody Sound]

Maybe we can suggest this :
Marchione 15 Inch Archtop Thinbody 2009???????????????

I believe those are semis, not fully hollow.

[Woody Sound]

I’d be thrilled with an El Rey 7 or a Vignola style 7, but there’s no longer any way to get either one made by them. I’m tempted to buy one of the 16” 7s they made for Guitars ‘n Jazz, but I already have a decent 16. What I really want and need is a 15.

FWIW, the El Rey only comes in 14" or 16".

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

FWIW, the El Rey only comes in 14" or 16".

They also never made a Vignola 7. But I’m told that it used to be possible to custom order variants of some Eastmans. The Jazz Elites are custom made for Guitars ‘n Jazz, according to Lou Del Rosso. But they will no longer make any 7s other than his - so as I said in my post, there’s no longer any possibility of having either a 15” El Rey 7 or a Vignola 7 made.

[Woody Sound]

If I may hijack this thread: any ideas how Wu/Yungzhi would fare with a request for a nylon stringer (15" or 16")?

I'm sure you know that a normal magnetic pickup will not pick up the nylon strings. It would have to have some kind of built in pickup/mic/piezo system.

[RJVB]

I'm sure you know that a normal magnetic pickup will not pick up the nylon strings.

Heh, and I'm sure you know me well enough by now to realise I probably don't care or even prefer it that way

(My Cordoba only has a battery in the preamp to keep the thing from resonating; I don't even use the builtin tuner...)

[garthmoore]

Attachment 96035Attachment 96036I was a GB10 convert from the moment I first picked one up. I'm a 7 string player. I eventually became obsessed with a fully acoustic floating pickup version of that with solid woods and a mahogany/maple neck. I couldn't find one stock at the time but I love the warmth of 'hog necks. So I had Lora and the workshops in China build me a maple/spruce/hog 7 string 15" one until I could build it myself.
I got it for a little over a grand, put a benedetto/duncan S7 pickup on it, did all the final setup and changed to Shallers and it turned out to be the guitar I can't put down.
When you order a direct build from those guys, you can specify body depth (shallow for comfort and midrange clarity, piano-like bass emphasis in a deeper body), and if you factour in final setup and hardware tweaking post delivery, you may very well wind up with something that's perfect for you.
When it comes to smaller bodied guitars, since they're not the norm, this is a real, viable, and even quite affordable option. They'll even put your name on the headstock if you're so inclined.
The more specific you are on details if you order a custom, the more likely you are to get just what you have been looking for.

And Dang! I do wish Campellone made 15" and 7 string guitars. I'd be on his list in a second. I wrote him, no dice.

Sorry, where can you order models like these? any links or email? Anyone else here order one of these?

I've ben trying to find a used Sadowsky Jimmy Bruno on the market, they get snatched up as soon as they appear on Reverb or eBay.