Looking to be educated on Archtops

PittPastor

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
756
Reaction score
59
Location
Western Pennsylvania
Walter Broes: Thanks for the history lesson. Very helpful!

Still interested on how folks think the action is: Does it compare more to an Electric's or more like a flattop?

Also, if I ever ran a vintage one, I am assuming the laminate models are more durable and less likely to have the issues of Vintage flattops... is that right?
 

JohnW63

Enlightened Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
6,293
Reaction score
2,216
Location
Southern California
Guild Total
4
The action on my is a lot like a flattop, but, you can lower the bridge and get it low. I find it easier to play than my D-55, which has medium strings.
 

Walter Broes

Enlightened Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2005
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
1,957
Location
Antwerp, Belgium
Walter Broes: Thanks for the history lesson. Very helpful!

Still interested on how folks think the action is: Does it compare more to an Electric's or more like a flattop?

Also, if I ever ran a vintage one, I am assuming the laminate models are more durable and less likely to have the issues of Vintage flattops... is that right?
On a good guitar in good shape, the action is how you want it to be. Archtops come with adjustable bridges, so you dial it in to your taste. Acoustic archtops, just like flattops, usually have fatter strings on them than electric guitars, because you want the strings to "drive the soundbox".

Archtops have different issues than flattops because the strings don't anchor in the top. Whereas a flattop will develop bellying after X amount of time because of string tension pulling the top upwards, archtops have the opposite force working on the top. If the guitar has been strung with very heavy strings for a long time, or the bracing becomes unglued or worse, the top will actually sink on an archtop, not develop an upwards "belly".
 

PittPastor

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
756
Reaction score
59
Location
Western Pennsylvania
Thanks John and Walter!

Man, I wish there were a place around here I could get my hands on one of these and play it. I'm really curious now.

One more question:

It seems that archtops were made mainly for playing within a band, and one thing I notice in a lot of the reviews I've seen on YouTube is how they seem to be desigined to remove feedback from the equation... so maybe this is a dumb question: But are any of the archtops coming with an in-body mic (like the K&K) or something?

Seems to me a dial to blend the sound in between the humbuckers and a natural mic would give you a pretty versatile sound. No?
 

JohnW63

Enlightened Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
6,293
Reaction score
2,216
Location
Southern California
Guild Total
4
Most archtops , being hollow , do have issues with feedback. In one of GADs write ups, he discusses the difference between some models that have the sound block that does help with feedback, but also changes to tone of the guitar somewhat. Not too much, but you can tell, if you listen for it.

The semi hollow StarFire models have less issues with feedback.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,789
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
One more question:

It seems that archtops were made mainly for playing within a band, and one thing I notice in a lot of the reviews I've seen on YouTube is how they seem to be desigined to remove feedback from the equation... so maybe this is a dumb question: But are any of the archtops coming with an in-body mic (like the K&K) or something?

Seems to me a dial to blend the sound in between the humbuckers and a natural mic would give you a pretty versatile sound. No?

I think the issue is that mic would be a very efficient producer of feedback, so not a good idea in an arch top.
Guild did use a blender system in the F65ce, (a flat-top intended to be played on stage and feel like an electric) but it combined a UST with an in-body soundhole mic and had notch and phase controls to help squelch incipient tendencies to feed back:

qlkv5qdoehyneg6mxjqo.jpg

I suspect there's also some primary incompatibility between the ideal output levels of microphones and traditional pickups that makes combining them through a single output(jack) problematic.
At least when Guild was building electrics (archtops).
A mic/UST normally needs a preamp while a pickup doesn't.
I think it may in the end be a solution looking for a problem, since there are a good selection of archtops capable of producing rich warm acoustic tones for the right player.
Think Wes Montgomery for example.
And Kenny Burrell comes to mind for Round Midnight
George Benson?
Larry Coryell?
(I think all those guys used a Gibson Super 400 at some point, Montgomery most often an L5CES which was the Super 400's predecessor).
From Wiki's "L5" page:
" Also released in 1934 was the one-inch larger 18" archtop guitar named the "L5 Super" which in a couple years was renamed the "Super 400". These two master-built acoustic guitars are Gibson's top-of-the-line carved wood and highly ornate archtop instruments......Today the standard model of the L-5 is an electric version designed for less feedback when amplified, it is called the L-5 CES - (a perfectly carved acoustic (once amplified) becomes quite a feedback machine - thus the complaints from musicians about this feedback when amplified demanded a more feedback resistant build & design"
Super 400"PN":
Super%20400.jpg

with built-in pickups:

Edit: Link here wasn't working for me and my anti-virus claimed a credible threat. Edited it out because better safe than sorry. http://www.gibsonsuper400.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/gibson-super-4001.jpg if you like risks :)

Guild's premier archtop and absolute top-of-the-whole-line guitar, the Artist Award, started off without "built-in" pickups and the earliest pickup it used was known as a floating DeArmond:

dearmond1100.jpg


Note also the use of wooden bridges on all those guitars.
It ain't just an accident.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PittPastor

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
756
Reaction score
59
Location
Western Pennsylvania
I think the issue is that mic would be a very efficient producer of feedback, so not a good idea in an arch top.
Guild did use a blender system in the F65ce, (a flat-top intended to be played on stage and feel like an electric) but it combined a UST with an in-body soundhole mic and had notch and phase controls to help squelch incipient tendencies to feed back:

qlkv5qdoehyneg6mxjqo.jpg


Annnnd now I want an F65ce. I'll bet you can get the perfect tone with that thing! After my bad experience with the Fishman Matrix, give me all the adjustments I can get on the sound coming from the pickup.
 

kakerlak

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
128
Location
Oklahoma
Gilded's the guy to talk to on this, but I'll offer a (potentially inaccurate) rundown on archtop history.

Archtop guitars kind of came into being in the '20s and were basically a rhythm instrument. They were mainly there to provide some chick-a-chick-a chords in the background -- horns were the melody/lead instruments. Horns are loud AF, so archtops like the Epiphone's Emperor or Gibson's Super 400 kept getting bigger and bigger through the '30s-40s, up to 17-18" and beyond in order to stay just audible in the mix. That tight, percussive, quick attack-and-decay sonic quality helped them stay in a pocket in the mix where they could be half-heard.

With early electrics and guys like Charlie Christian, guitar began to expand into a melody/solo instrument and you start to see pickups and cutaways appear. Still, the carved top archtop guitar was seen as "proper" and amplification just a way to make it louder so it could sit in front of the mix and carry a melody. While western swing acts like Bob Wills and tinkerer weirdos like Les Paul were happy to break with tradition and adopt solid body electrics in pursuit of their ideal electric tone, jazz is kind of a stuffy world, where tradition carries and even a guitar used with amplification 100% of its stage life needed to look like a guitar was supposed to. And, despite concessions to size and feedback inherent to maintaining the big archtop form, some of that tonal character actually does make its way through the amplifier, even with conventional magnetic coil pickups, so the form isn't completely anachronistic in its utility as a jazz/swing/etc instrument.

Basically, form followed function for a while, began to change as function changed, then sort of remained as traditional. Even the high tech modern jazz guitar makers who have non-standard f-hole shapes, sleek contours around the edges, new bracing patters, slick hardware, etc. are still following the traditional form and still trying to make the best possible version of the same kind of tone that's been around for years.

This may be total BS and I'm sure Harry, Walter or others can come in here and clean up after me, lol.

As for you, man, you might have a lot of fun picking up an inexpensive, acoustic, non-cutaway '40s carved top guitar, something like a Slingerland, Kay, Stewart, Orpheum or lower end Gretsch/Gibson/Epiphone. They can be a lot of fun to mess around with on the couch!
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,789
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
This may be total BS and I'm sure Harry, Walter or others can come in here and clean up after me, lol.
And I'm no expert but that's how I understood the history too.
It's nice recap I would have been proud to write.
And I was thinking of this specific quality myself, this morning:

"And, despite concessions to size and feedback inherent to maintaining the big archtop form, some of that tonal character actually does make its way through the amplifier, even with conventional magnetic coil pickups, so the form isn't completely anachronistic in its utility as a jazz/swing/etc instrument."

In fact for the best guitars I'd say a LOT of that "acoustic character" can get through.
It gets me wondering if so-called "microphonic" tendencies of some pickups also play a role, enhancing that "acoustic" character in the signal.
 

kakerlak

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
128
Location
Oklahoma
And I'm no expert but that's how I understood the history too.
It's nice recap I would have been proud to write.
And I was thinking of this specific quality myself, this morning:

"And, despite concessions to size and feedback inherent to maintaining the big archtop form, some of that tonal character actually does make its way through the amplifier, even with conventional magnetic coil pickups, so the form isn't completely anachronistic in its utility as a jazz/swing/etc instrument."

In fact for the best guitars I'd say a LOT of that "acoustic character" can get through.
It gets me wondering if so-called "microphonic" tendencies of some pickups also play a role, enhancing that "acoustic" character in the signal.

I always like microphonic and/or otherwise "transparent" pickups. In fact, carrying that out beyond jazz guitars, the best "good" strats, teles, etc. sound like strats, teles, etc. unplugged.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,789
Location
Sillycon Valley CA

Nuuska

Enlightened Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
7,668
Reaction score
6,028
Location
Finland
Guild Total
9
Nutting in music can go too far.


For some to comprehend - maybe.

For the rest - never.

Or are we all longing to hear 600 yrs old music ???
 

PittPastor

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
756
Reaction score
59
Location
Western Pennsylvania
I don't know if I'd have the nerve to charge $500 for my D40C due to the "Dog Wound" crack on the side. But compared to that poor thing, mine is "mint!"
 
Top