Gibson L4 CES demo and discussion

[jzucker]

Sounds good Archie! I love Rich's tone too. It's one of my favorite recreations of the '60s jazz guitar sound. I wonder where he keeps the guitar tone control? He uses surprisingly light strings too...

One of my all time fav tones was Rich Severson on his L4CES.

I spent a long time trying to achieve his tone on 'Sugar'. I went on to learn his arrangement (or approximate it) and came closest to achieving it, with my Guild X700.

In the end I also learnt he uses quite a few box (peddles) of tricks, to get his tone and he has a light touch which allows him to make almost any guitar sound very similar.

I suppose your theory stands up regarding solid tops, since the X700 has a solid top and that is the closest I think I got, to achieving the sound Rich gets on his L4CES.

Skip to 2:00 for 'Sugar'.

[Stringswinger]

Impressive playing and clearly an impressive guitar sound. But I suspect that JZ could make an Epiphone SG sound damn good. And the digital amplification also contributes to the great sound.

My take away here is this:

JZ is a top notch jazz guitarist (his playing shows what a healthy dose of natural talent combined with a LOT of dedicated practice achieves) and;

Gibson archtops make for an amazing jazz guitar sound.

But we already knew all that.

My other take away is that I need to stop watching videos like this. It makes me want an L-4CES and I already have enough damn guitars!

[jzucker]

Impressive playing and clearly an impressive guitar sound. But I suspect that JZ could make an Epiphone SG sound damn good. And the digital amplification also contributes to the great sound.

My take away here is this:

JZ is a top notch jazz guitarist (his playing shows what a healthy dose of natural talent combined with a LOT of dedicated practice achieves) and;

Gibson archtops make for an amazing jazz guitar sound.

But we already knew all that.

My other take away is that I need to stop watching videos like this. It makes me want an L-4CES and I already have enough damn guitars!

Thanks so much for your kind words. I still miss having a '60s sounding 175. Mine sounds good but doesn't really have that '60s vibe. I think it's easy for all of us to obsess over these things so I try not to wish I had my older 175s back...

[Stringswinger]

[skiboyny]

Thanks so much for your kind words. I still miss having a '60s sounding 175. Mine sounds good but doesn't really have that '60s vibe. I think it's easy for all of us to obsess over these things so I try not to wish I had my older 175s back...

How many guitars is too many?

[John A.]

in case you missed it...

I've gone back and forth a couple of times between your recent L4 and 175 recordings .... You kind of have to hedge the comparisons to allow for different players and signal chains (e.g., Severson sounding so similar on many different), but it's interesting to hear the spectrum of tonal character Gibson gets by varying top material and pickup placement, body dimensions and scale length, in their archtops. But through all that, I think maple vs spruce (whether pressed, laminated, or carved), might be the most noticeable factor. FWIW, my Seventy-Seven has the 175 size, shape and pickup placement, and a lam spruce top. It strikes me as splitting the difference between the 175 and L4.

[jzucker]

I've gone back and forth a couple of times between your recent L4 and 175 recordings .... You kind of have to hedge the comparisons to allow for different players and signal chains (e.g., Severson sounding so similar on many different), but it's interesting to hear the spectrum of tonal character Gibson gets by varying top material and pickup placement, body dimensions and scale length, in their archtops. But through all that, I think maple vs spruce (whether pressed, laminated, or carved), might be the most noticeable factor. FWIW, my Seventy-Seven has the 175 size, shape and pickup placement, and a lam spruce top. It strikes me as splitting the difference between the 175 and L4.

There's also top thickness. I often wonder why my '89 175 (lam mahogany) sounded so different. The obvious answer is the mahogony but it's not carved. It's a lam and the inner layers of it were probably birch play. You wouldn't think it would make that kind of diff. I wonder if it was pickup and top thickness?

[John A.]

There's also top thickness. I often wonder why my '89 175 (lam mahogany) sounded so different. The obvious answer is the mahogony but it's not carved. It's a lam and the inner layers of it were probably birch play. You wouldn't think it would make that kind of diff. I wonder if it was pickup and top thickness?

I lean toward thinking top and pickup had more of an effect than B/S species, with the caveat that I haven't had anywhere near as many 175's in my hands as you.

[Archie]

How many guitars is too many?

Too many.

[John A.]

There's also top thickness. I often wonder why my '89 175 (lam mahogany) sounded so different. The obvious answer is the mahogony but it's not carved. It's a lam and the inner layers of it were probably birch play. You wouldn't think it would make that kind of diff. I wonder if it was pickup and top thickness?

Here's laminated spruce top, lam maple back & sides, 5-piece maple neck, and ebony board in 175-sized object

[John A.]

How many guitars is too many?

When N is the number of guitars you have, for any value of N:

N+1 = the number of guitars you need, and N+2 = too many guitars.

[Archie]

There's also top thickness. I often wonder why my '89 175 (lam mahogany) sounded so different. The obvious answer is the mahogony but it's not carved. It's a lam and the inner layers of it were probably birch play. You wouldn't think it would make that kind of diff. I wonder if it was pickup and top thickness?

I don’t know JZ

I don't like mahogany backs and sides but I doubt I would be able to consistently tell the difference between that and maple ones. Maybe in person but certainly not on record.

Someone once said a new set of strings will change the sound more in a guitar than the woods ever will (within reason and guitar style). I think that's the perfect way to look at it.

I’m not saying you're wrong; you have a great ear.

Food for thought.

[jzucker]

I don’t know JZ

I don't like mahogany backs and sides but I doubt I would be able to consistently tell the difference between that and maple ones. Maybe in person but certainly not on record.

Someone once said a new set of strings will change the sound more in a guitar than the woods ever will (within reason and guitar style). I think that's the perfect way to look at it.

I’m not saying you're wrong; you have a great ear.

Food for thought.

This is one of my favorite 175s. 1989 mahogany back and sides

[jzucker]

Here's laminated spruce top, lam maple back & sides, 5-piece maple neck, and ebony board in 175-sized object

Sounds sprucey!

[Max405]

Hahaa..
Good one Jack.
I loved the sound of your guitar John. And the playing was excellent!
JD

[John A.]

Hahaa..
Good one Jack.
I loved the sound of your guitar John. And the playing was excellent!
JD

Thank you kindly, Joe.