that's surprising about the assymetrical neck shape, haven't noticed that one mine, but then I haven't been looking for it.
Mine has a perfectly nice neck though, l like it.
I wonder what it is about Korean hollowbodies. I mean, I used to have an X175 from around 1960, and it's very obvious that's the spec FMIC copied for the Newark Street X175. Same body shape, depth, bracing, top and back thickness is similar, same neck construction as far as you can see (the way it's attached to the neck block is anyone's guess) etc...
The main noticeable differences are indeed the finish, it's thicker than a 50 year old lacquer finish, and the neck set. The Newark street guitar's neck set is both higher and steeper. (the angle of the neck off the body is bigger, and the fretboard sits higher off the body).
Despite the very similar build, unplugged, the guitar sounds completely different. I used to have a big DeArmond hollowbody, and while I definitely like the NS guitar better, acoustically, they're very similar. It's very difficult to describe sound in words, but I'll give it shot.
The NS guitar is plenty loud, I'll give it that. I'll attribute that to it not being built too stiff and tight, and the big neck angle. But there's something about it, there's a blurry-ness, a loose-ness that's not pretty. The vintage guitar sounded a lot more defined, a lot more definition in chords as well as single notes, the treble was both pointier ànd prettier, the midrange was beautiful and probably the main component, but in a very pleasing way, and while the bass was strong and big as you'd expect from a fairly big body guitar, it was a lot more controlled and control-able than on the NS guitar.
The vintage 175, for lack of a better description was "dry" sounding, and "woodier". The new copy has more of a blur, cloud, brash "whomp" to it when you strum it, and the bass is big but less defined, the midrange again is the main component but it's uglier, and the treble has a nastier midrangey edge to it too, and compared to the old guitar(s), no real acoustic-y treble, feels muted somehow in the real high end.
And all of this translates into the plugged in sound of the guitar too. I've had the pickups rewound, and as I reported on here, it does sound better. It has clearer, better treble than with the stockers that's not hidden by the "too much midrange" they used to have.
And for the life of me, I don't know what causes the difference in sound, and the similarity in that respect of the DeArmond archtop and the Newark Street Guild.
Could a large part of that really be the finish?!?!? I guess it could be, but it would really blow my mind a little if a finish did that much to the sound of a guitar.
If sanding a polyester based finish off an arched surface wasn't such a PITA, I guess I'd be up for the experiment, I've been learning to finish guitars in Nitro with my telecaster/partscaster builds, but I really don't feel like doing all the work of stripping a 17" archtop. No way - it's not THAT interesting to me.
Interestingly....I recently lucked into a "lawsuit era" (early/mid 70's) Ibanez Gibson ES175 copy. It was too cheap to resist, and the previous owner converted it to Lollar P90's instead of the stock humbuckers, so it was really calling my name. Thing is probably about 35 to 40 years old, made in Japan, finished in fairly thick polyester that has long checks and stress cracks in it, and guess what......none of the complaints I have with the recent Korean guitars! While it doesn't sound as sweet as my buddy's mid-fifties Gibson ES175, it undeniably sounds better than the Korean guitars...unplugged ànd plugged in. Go figure...maybe a guitar really needs at least a couple of decades on it before it starts sounding good?
Sorry for the long ramble.
