-
Do you prefer your archtop to be carved spruce or other tonewood? Or, do you prefer a laminated archtop in certain circumstances?
-
03-31-2024 12:18 PM
-
For overall gigging I prefer laminates due to feedback issues. But in Duo situations or without a loud drummer Carved Top is usually my preference.
-
I like my Eastman with a carved top fine, but I love my modern laminate with poly Epi Broadway.
Neither is better, they’re just different.
-
Both are great!
-
Carved solids. As much as I like the ES175 for day to day playing, it doesn't have the harmonic complexity of an acoustic archtop.
-
I seem to favor laminates for the sound I'm looking for. A little drier with a bit more mids generally. Funny thing I played strictly carved tops for many years as it was easier to get them sounding nice. Thru time my playing changed, and here we are.
-
I have both, and I prefer the sound of carved tops. Feedback isn't an issue for me, but I don't play in organ trios.
-
Spot on the money. Laminates absorb more of the energy the strings produce but cannot push out as in the same way. The layers are in a sense holding back the full feed from the bridge and strings. It produces a different sound that many players actually prefer. When going through and amp then things enter another dimension, and it tends to even things out more but still very different. I much prefer the sound of a carved top in almost all situations due to the complexity issue Spook mentions. The only exception is that something like a L5ces with humbuckers gets a sound that is golden and beautiful. It is a sound that a carved top will not quite deliver. The best way to hear this is listen to Kenny Burrell when he plays his Super 400ces. Then listen to the recordings of him when he played a D'angelico New Yorker with a Dearmond 1100 on it. Both a smoking Kenny Burrell sounds but different
Originally Posted by Spook410
-
Album recommendations for this? I don’t know what he played when. I just know he always sounded good. Originally Posted by deacon Mark
-
Listen to this then any of his other recordings showing the Super 400. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
The D'a sounds brighter and more definition especially in the highs but the lows come out very smooth. This is in no way a sound of the Super 400ces.
-
When a luthier taps a piece of tonewood, what is he/she looking for? Can the sought after bell-like chime be found in even the finest piece of plywood? Will the selection make much difference in overall amplified sound? I believe it does.
True, a lot can be adjusted by means of electronics, but, is there still a special nuance remaining because of the carve?
-
For me, it's the instrument as a whole and not the general materials as a blanket criteria for what is better for me.
I've found inspiration in instruments with either material. Lots of factours come into play: balance, physical balance, response, set up, neck... but one thing for sure, there are instruments that were laminates and ones of solid construction that have been undeniable OH YEAH! guitars.
I for one, would never generalize a guitar strictly by top material construction. It's what brings out the music in me that makes me decide what's the best.
If I play better, it's a better guitar.
That's just me after a lot of years of playing and a lot of guitars though. What do I know? Very little compared to what's to be known.
-
I have three archtop guitars: a Matt Cushman 17", an Ibanez GB10 and a Gibson ES-175. These are not directly comparable instruments, so it's pretty much impossible to say which one suits me best or which one I prefer.
It depends on what I'm trying to do with the instrument. If I'm playing acoustically on my porch, the Cushman is going to definitely come out ahead. If I'm playing a gig and amplified, on the other hand, the GB10 or the ES-175 are likely going to be preferable. The amplified tone of those instruments is more pleasing to my ears than the Cushman, which has had about seven different pickups installed over the last 18 years. But acoustically, the Cushman is miles ahead of the other instruments. Interestingly enough, the GB10 has a surprisingly good acoustic voice given the small body size and laminated wood; perhaps that is because the pickups are not mounted into the top.
I just don't think that the carved-archtop-with-floater sound is usually as good as a laminated guitar with the pickups set in (or, in the case of the GB 10, a small bodied laminated guitar with very hot floating pickups). There are, of course, exceptions. I read an interview with Tal Farlow a number of years ago in which he opined that the qualities that make for a fine amplified guitar are opposite of those that make for a fine acoustic guitar. My favorite carved-archtop-with-floater tone is the Gibson Johnny Smith, but that instrument is not carved to be an unamplified acoustic guitar; it's carved to be plugged into an amp. I am generally not much of a fan of the Benedetto school of amplified sound; I think those guitars have a tendency to sound stringy and thin (some people hear that as "articulate") when what I want is fat and rich (which some people hear as "dark and muddy")
-
Great Video!!! 3 of the most delicious flavors of tone with 3 of the best cats ever,they look like they're having a good time especially Grant. Originally Posted by deacon Mark
I could never prefer one over the other...they're all my favorites.
Thanks for sharing that.
-
Personal preference is of course based on personal experience so my current particular preference for lam-top guitars comes from owning, playing and sampling many different models from all era's , makers and price ranges during the past 40 some years. I also do not base my preference on the use of laminated woods only , just as important to me is the size, the weight, the feedback-threshold and the neck size of any guitar. Do they work on stage ? Are they in tune ? Do they stay in tune ?
Does the sound inspire me ? Do I like the looks and the feel ?
To each his own. Things also change : for about 25 years the Super-400CES was my dream guitar and I owned about 6 versions of that model. Now it's my Trenier , a 16" plywood-top with a floater. It does it all : the Freddie-Green-style chink chink with a swing band, the fat/warm Bebop sounds a la Kenny B. in an Organ trio or the delicate chord solos on my drummer-less gigs, all the while being light weight, comfortable and stable.
Re the discussion about Kenny B.'s sound : all I know is that he placed the note choice and time above everything else. The sound he got on any of the MANY recordings he did is also heavily dependent on the tone engineer, the amp, the room etc. Any general statement is shaky IMHO ....
-
I’ve never played a guitar top. I’ve only ever played complete guitars that differ from each other in more ways than just how the top was made. So I don’t think I could say which I prefer. Not by design, I’ve wound up with a semi and archtop that have lam spruce tops. I like them both, but don’t know if that’s why. Originally Posted by ArchieHollow
-
I dunno, it's like apples and oranges to compare a live TV date with an album cut. That being said, I'm not a fan of humbuckers, they take all the life away unless you use distortion. Originally Posted by deacon Mark
-
One thought: laminate tops seem to lend themselves better to more processing with reverbs, delays, modulation. Not sure why, maybe because they aren't quite as full range, regarding overtones? Anyway, when going for a more "modern" sound, ala Kreisberg, Metheny, Hekselman, etc, the dampening of certain frequencies and note bloom (maybe?) seems to help smooth out the tone... just an idea, YMMV.
-
To me, there are three types of archtops and all are different, but great (assuming the right guitar).
1) Laminates (these can have built in pickups or floating pickups)
2) Carved top built as an electric (thick top, heavy bracing and built in pickup)
3) Carved top built primarily as an acoustic (these can have floating pickups, built in pickups or no pickup)
I have all three types in my collection of 11 archtop guitars. I love them all and I have no particular preference unless I am playing without the benefit of an amplifier,in which case a carved top, acoustic is indeed a preference.
-
SS summed that up really well!
-
Even though amplified laminate guitars have been around for nearly 80 years- long enough that they are no longer modern- I know what you mean. Particularly the ES-175ish kind of tone like Kreisberg, Metheny, Joe Diorio, Jim Hall, etc. I think of all of those as modern players. on the other hand, Joe Pass playing his old ES-175 sounded very different than those guys. With mine, it feels like there's a stronger fundamental and less emphasis on overtones compared to my carved archtop. Originally Posted by yebdox
Last edited by Cunamara; 04-01-2024 at 07:55 PM.
-
I prefer both. That's why I have two of each!
-
For acoustic playing: Carved top.
For amplified with magnetic PU: Carved top or laminate - no firm preference - depends on the individual instruments.
-
Just want to thank you all for commenting on my thread. It's enlightening to hear from both you seasoned, experienced jazz players and those of us newly on the scene. Letting us know your intimate vibes (feelings of your heart, hands and fingers, as well as the "heart of your ears") is an inspiration.
THANKS!Last edited by ArchieHollow; 04-03-2024 at 01:09 AM.
-
all 3 of those were singgle coil and 3 of the most famous, really cool
Reply With Quote
Comins GCS-16-1, Vintage Blonde
Today, 01:24 PM in For Sale