Laminates vs. solid wood
Phuzz
Well, I'm still on my "jazz-box" quest. I have another question
for all of you out there in jazz guitar land.
As I've been conducting my search, I've run across two basic
types of construction for a jazz box. One type is out of solid woods
and the other is out of laminates (or plywood as I call it).
What's confusing me is that there are guitars of both
constructions throughout my price range. For instance: The Epiphone
Elitist Broadway has a solid spruce top and maple sides and is,
usually, priced at $1999.00; the Gibson ES-175 and the Sadowsky -
Jimmi Bruno, however, are both out of laminates and both are well over
$3K.
So, here's my question: which is better - laminate or solid
wood? Why? Or - is it simply a matter of sound preference? Does one
type sound better than the other - although I have a very hard time
believing that Mr. Bruno would play anything other than an outstanding
ax!
There's my conundrum. All-y'all's guidance will be greatly
appreciated!
Cheers!
Phuzz in Virginia
pmfan57
Many of the famous jazz guitar recordings were made on Laminate
guitars, such as the ES-175 (e.g., "For Django"). Some prefer them
and some like carved tops better. Some like both for different things.
Gerry
> So, here's my question: which is better - laminate or solid
> wood? Why? Or - is it simply a matter of sound preference? Does one
> type sound better than the other - although I have a very hard time
> believing that Mr. Bruno would play anything other than an outstanding
> ax!
This has been covered a number of times. Particularly a few year back
when i was buying an Epiphone Emperor. MY takeaway was that a solid
top will produce more feedback. Acoustically, in a room, the solid top
will project more sound.
--
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ad nauseum
tomb...@jhu.edu
A general principle seems to be that a nice carved top of solid wood
will produce a more complex acoustic sound than a lam top, while a
laminate top will be less prone to feedback than a carved top. But
there are some laminates that sound better acoustically than some
carved tops, etc., and so it is difficult to rely on this rule in
every situation.
DaveB
"Phuzz" <squire...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:65ba2be5-58b5-4b84...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Laminate guitars came around after WWII as a cheaper alternative to carved
archtops. Many players used them because they could afford them. But, the
general tone caught on and on a well constructed plywood guitar can sound
very good through the right amp. Carved archtops are much richer sounding
accoustically, usually described as more "woody". Now, which one would work
best for you depends on a few main factors. First, what's your top priority?
If it's tone, play both types (of decent quality) and decide which tone you
prefer. Both can be very nice, just different. However, you should also
consider some of the other inherent differences mentioned. A plywood box is
much more stable and will withstand changes in tempature and humidity
better. On average the price is less for a plywood box.
woland99
IN not very distant future (since big spruce trees are becoming
extinct - harvested to build frames for houses for rich Asians)
the only material for new guitars will carbon fiber. That may
not be that bad - I bet there will be extensive computer modelling
done - analysis of tonal properties of top wood instruments and
then computer controlled shaping of graphite archtops. With
stability and uniformity of graphite it should be possible to mass
produce pretty amazing sounding "modeled" guitars.
oasysco
Sound aside, you pay Gibson prices for a Gibson made in the US and
let's face it, there's no other guitar out there with such a rich
early jazz history as an ES-175. You're paying for that vibe - and one
damn nice guitar as well (I have one).
As for the Elitist line... they cut some corners to give you a solid
top - internal wiring is not up to the braided thick Gibson standard.
The pots are much smaller, too. Still, I'd love to try one as I had
the regular BWAY some time ago and liked it (with swapped pups).
As for feedback, usually laminates are said to FB less, but I've had
laminate archtops that FB like a mutha and the 175 is no silent guitar
itself. If it were me, I'd not worry about the FB when deciding,
thinking body constrcution has as muhc to do with FB as the materials
used.
As for pure acoustic tone, I agree with Gerry, solids usually have a
better rep, but I've had solid wood ones thta sounded boxy
acoustically and laminates that sounded alive. Personally, I don't
care for good acoustic tone from an electric archtop, but - and I've
found this to be almost universally true - solid wood hollow body
guitars - are lighter weight-wise than their laminate counterparts.
If I was looking to drop $2-3K, I'd try out as many as possible and
make sure I got oen I can live with. I'd probably do a ton of research
and put off any purchase for motnhs as I narrowed the field down to at
least a couple of makes and them models within those makes.
And to confuise the issue even more, there is no shortage of private
label builders nowadays to choose from.
As you probably know, there are average 175's out there and maybe a
few better ones. I had a 175 that was drop-dead gorgeous, but it just
didn't play as well as the one I have now. I'd think this average to
above-average thing is true of all makes and models, so try alot out
before you buy. And don't discount the used market.
Good luck and happy hunting,
Greg
Phil T
> Hello All,
>
> So, here's my question: which is better - laminate or solid
> wood? Why?
characteristics, as has been well documented by others. Choose based on
what you hear and what you like.
A carved top (which is solid by definition) has a lot of man-hours in
it, and starts out with a lot of solid wood and therefore costs a lot
more money. A solid top that is pressed into shaped costs a lot less
because there's less waste and less man-hours, but still costs more than
a laminate top that is also pressed into shape. Those are the physical
differences. Other than that, pick what your ear prefers.
Joey Goldstein
Laminates have better feedback rejection.
Solid *carved* tops sound better acoustically, but are more prone to
feedback.
Solid *pressed* tops come close to the sound of carved tops and are
somewhat less expensive.
Beware the word "solid" in any guitar ad describing the top of an
archtop. Dig as deep as you need to to find out if it's laminate, carved
or pressed.
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
Joey Goldstein
And Gibson's are more expensive because they're Gibson's, that all.
Still, nobody else has come out with a decent copy of a 175, ever.
Mark Guest
Joe Finn
news:65ba2be5-58b5-4b84...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Get one of each. If you can't afford it go one at a time.
A carved top will have nice complex acoustic signature. A plywood model will
generally be preferable if you'll be playing at higher dynamic levels
because it feeds back a lot less.
Heritage has a range of models that are moderately priced and are a very
good value.
Various Asian models are good too and quite affordable.
The Gibson name plate will cost you extra. .................joe
--
Visit me on the web www.JoeFinn.net
>
oasysco
That's because Gibson builds a special mojo into the 175 much in the
same way McDonald's does with their Egg McMuffins that makes them
addictive as well as the Coca-Cola company and their addictive Diet
Coke brand. In fact, if I didn't think it ludicrous, Gibson+McD's+Coca-
Cola might be in cahoots to keep me loyal to just those brands... and
Ford vehicles, too.
All of 'em are in cahoots, dammit! McD's knows I can't help but stop
by in the AM and buy an Egg McMuffin... and oddly enough, I'm usually
driving my Ford Truck... and I usually played my Gibson guitar the
night before... and to top it all off, days at work are filled with
ice cold Diet Coke. They know... they all know what it takes to get me
hooked and keep me brand-loyal!
Greg
P.S. Agreed with you on Gibson for Gibson's sake and the 175.
>
> --
> Joey Goldstein
> <http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
> <http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
> joegold AT sympatico DOT ca- Hide quoted text -
335p...@gmail.com
> "Phuzz" <squirebee...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
under the new regime. There are some really good deals to be had in
the used heritage market.
dunlop212
and playability, no electronics, no pick guard, no fancy inlay.
Personally, I need to have a guitar that plays and sounds great
unplugged. You can pick up a nice telecaster used for $300 for when
you want to play electrically.I would not pay a lot of money for a
guitar that tries to hit all the bases, the classic example being a
laminate or pressed solid top with a floating pickup.
I would kind of prefer a guitar that I wouldn't be mortified to put a
ding in.
Gerry
I don't feel "at home" with any guitar, until I've put a significant
ding in it.