-
By all early accounts, the new Gibson "solid-formed" archtops are very fine guitars, though all agree, over-priced. I have a question born of my life-curse: I notice every inconsistency, contradiction, irony, whatever, that crosses my path.
Consider this from Gibson's website:
Note the implication that the continuity of the grain which is "redirected" into the arched shape, rather than "severed" implies this is an improvement in actual sonic quality over carving! So presumably they think this guitar sounds better than an L5?"The debut guitar in Gibson Custom's new Solid Formed™ Archtop Series, the 17" Hollowbody Venetian is born from a marriage of Gibson's 120-year legacy as the inventor of the archtop guitar and its ongoing reputation for innovation. This full-sized archtop is inch for inch the descendant of the legendary Gibson archtops of the 1930s, '40s and '50s, yet it surpasses even that lofty standard by employing a proprietary new Solid Formed™ spruce top and maple back, in which the grain of the wood is redirected into the arched shape, rather than severed as in traditional carving. The result is an elegant hollowbody archtop made from solid tonewoods, yet with a richer and more pronounced tone that lives and breathes like nothing you've ever experienced. Enhanced by a new stronger neck design that uses less wood, and with its resonance unimpeded by a "floating" pickguard-mounted mini-humbucker, it's a bold new leap in archtop evolution."
Consider now these words from a very, very early Gibson ad:
Another early Gibson ad read:"How would you like an instrument built as Stradivarius built his violins? Stradivarius...carved out the fronts and backs from a solid block of wood just as Gibson is doing it today, instead of bending to shape from a flat piece. These boards are carefully graduated by hand from a certain thickness at the center to a delicate thinnest near the outer edge and this, to a great degree, accounts for the wonderful tonal qualities of Gibson Instruments. This delicate graduation leaves the grain layers and fibers in their natural position, free and sensitive, helping to amplify vibrations to their finest possibilities."
These ads are found in Adrian Ingram's book The Gibson L5: Its History and Players."Gibson tops and backs are not bent5, soaked or heated—they are carved from solid blocks of the finest material nature creates. The difference is that Gibson tops and backs vibrate freely and openly, giving more tone and volume..."
So my puzzlement is over the fact that Gibson's current PR for the solid-formed line seems a direct denial, a repudiation, of their early claims about the sonic virtues of "unstressed" wood, i.e. wood not bent, soaked, heated, etc. but carved.
I'd love to hear how they would reply to the apparent conflict, or at least, paradox, between their initial claim to fame with carved-top guitars, and the current approach.
I know, I'm a trouble-maker...
-
04-07-2016 12:21 PM
-
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story is how I read that.
If you want more color on the solid-formed guitar, I recommend you get in touch with Bruce Kunkel who has his own shop but used to work in the Gibson custom shop and still builds and develops guitars and guitar innovation for Gibson.
I contacted him on a separate subject, and he mentioned in an unrelated aside a connection with the Solid-Formed guitars. His email address can be found on his website (contact page is here).
-
It really doesn't matter to me if a guitar is laminate, carved, or solid formed as long as the end result is a guitar with a beautiful sound. My L5, Solid Formed, and 175 all sound delicious.
Marketing hype is something I never believe in.
The new Solid Formed I bought sounds fantastic but I certainly didn't believe the Gibson sales pitch.
I bought it on a roll of the dice as I knew I had a 72 hour approval period. I rolled a 7.
I will say this. My Solid Formed is a acoustic cannon compared with my L5's but for me a amplified L5 is a tough act to follow. It is the king of the electric archtops IMO.
I have heard laminates that blew away hand carved axes. I have come to the conclusion guitars are like cars. Either you get a good one or you don't.
Everyone's ear has a different pleasure zone also. Personally if I could only have one guitar it would probably be a laminate were a person like Joe D would chose a thin carved X braced with a floater.
-
I'd be tempted to rout a humbucker in the top just to find out, Vinny...
Just messing with ya. Congrats on a new guitar. Glad you're enjoying it. It looks very pretty from where I am seated although personally, the Bozeman L7C would be my choice of poison.
-
What's over-the-top is how they imply that's their own invention/development, when other builders have been doing it for years.
-
Perhaps they've developed a new angle on the method? For all the criticism Gibson gets, much rightly earned, they still know a lot about making guitars. I have some really, really nice "budget" guitars, but my 2 Gibsons are in a whole other league, and they're late-era guitars.
-
Unlike guitar makers, guitars hold no secrets and tell no lies. Guitars establish or refute all tonal claims as soon as they are played.
-
is "solid formed" the cool new way to say "pressed"? because the only people who'll tell you "pressed" tops suck are the ones that paid a lot more for a carved top and want you to know it. and the only reason they can tell you're not using a carved top is with their eyes and not their ears. your adoring masses won't care.
that said, yeah, they are kind of expensive for what they (apparently) are.
-
Not to side track the post but I think that manufacturers are doing the guitar buying public a disservice by not providing better descriptions of their products. Sometimes it seems outright deceiving. Regardless of how a guitar sounds I would like to know what is solid and what is laminated.
-
Vinny we need you to put up acoustic vids of your new guitar. I am personally very intrigued to hear it, after your comments re comparative acoustic volumes. if only it was 16" not 17" I'd probably get one.
-
Today's marketing methods are mainly about sales increases, not really about helping the potential buyer to find and pick what he is really looking for. I have come across quite a few sales managers and find that even in private conversations they all had a tendency to be exaggerating, not really caring about objectivity and truth. I wouldn't trust a Gibson ad to be objective in terms of describing a product, as it is not it's purpose to be objective. But: every company should pressure their marketing department not to contradict statements in past marketing campaigns in order to be taken serious by the customers.
-
Some time ago now I played a new solid-formed guitar at my local shop and was impressed. I don't recall how it compared in detail to a carved Gibson, just that I immediately liked it. But yes, the marketing spin is humerous. Apparently the tops are pressed because they sound better, not because they cost less to make!
-
Marketing departments exist for the sole purpose of selling product. They can't blatantly lie, but when it comes to tone there is no right or wrong, just opinion. As for carved vs laminate vs pressed, I'm with Vinny. I have no preference for construct, just tone.
-
I agree about the end-result being what matters. My question, though, was one of curiosity about how Gibson sees the current method of solid-forming in connection with its original assertions that carving left the wood "unstressed" which made for more natural tone.
I'm not getting into the debate over which is better; I would like to know what Gibson's luthiers do with conflicting claims about the impact of the two different construction techniques.
-
Either, Gibson have discovered something about wood, that Stradivarius to Benedetto missed, or the marketing department came up with something that cannot be proven or disproven, yet makes you think you are buying a superior instrument to anyone else?
The only person who can tell us at this point is Vinny.Last edited by Archie; 04-08-2016 at 10:18 AM.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if the luthiers don't care at all about the claims the marketing department has made up. After all they are the ones who would know best.
Originally Posted by lawson-stone
-
Although you could argue that luthiers of hand made guitars, have a vested interest in the longest most drawn out artistic process, to suit their own requirements and often that of the buyer, due to their own bias or perceived ideas about quality?
-
I can tell you this. The solid formed Gibson has a more prominent arch than other makes I have owned plus the back and sides are solid also not laminate. I had a Vestax D'A NY. It has a solid formed top but the back and sides were laminate.
it was a great guitar amplified bit had no acoustic volume. It was opposite to the Gibson. Visually stunning with a Ok voice. The Gibson is plain Jane with a great voice.
Joe D is going to teach me how to make a YouTube video. I need to buy a video camera and some kind of a G3 zoom thingy. I am a bit of a dinosaur. I am a old analog guy. I would post a video if I had the equipment and knew how.
The solid formed is louder acoustically than my Super 400. Just sayin. It doesn't matter to me much as I like amplified tones. The only time I play unplugged is when I am learning a new song and don't want to annoy my wife.
The best way I can describe the form top tone is a huge acoustic voice with a amplified in the middle of the road between a LeGrande and a L5. Amplified a bit less acoustic than a LeGrand bit way more lively than a L5. Also huge sustain.
It feedback easier than a L5. You can't be too close to your amp.
-
I forgot about the solid back and sides. Thats going to add some presence (or should).
My Gb0-20 has a very pronounced arch which I like as it gives a more focused tone.
-
It's the usual hype. There are always trying to make everything, good or bad, sound as if it was the 8' wonder of the world. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
I remember ads for Leica camera lenses back in the 1980s. They didn't use aspherical lens elements like the Japanese manufacturers (Canon, Nikon etc.) had started to use to great advantage. Leica claimed their optical glass was so good that it wasn't needed, so they didn't have to "accept the downfalls of the aspherical lenses". The truth was that Leica was struggling severely at that time, bordering on bankrupcy, and didn't have the liquid capital to invest in up to date production machinery. A few years later the Leitz company was reorganized, the camera division split out from the rest of Leitz and new investors were found. At that time they bought new machinery and all talk about the supremacy of old fashioned non aspherical lenses stopped right then and there, once and for all.
-
The formed Peerless also have solid (formed) backs and solid sides.
Does the Gibson have a sound-post? I think that detracts from the Peerless (Monarch) acoustic sound, but seems to help with feedback, though I suspect design strength is the main concern. I'd be interested to know if Gibson found a way to form the top so that a soundpost isn't needed.
That would actually be a pretty significant thing.
-
No sound post on the Gibson.
-
Just throwing this out there as a woodworker. A hollow guitar body is a box. There are ALWAYS stresses inherent in a box, not the least of which is that wood expands and contracts with humidity. One of the things that contributes to resonance is a lot of tension on the top--thing of a tightly wound drum head for instance.
If you carve solid wood, there aren't usually a lot of stresses at that moment if the wood is dry, not warped, etc., just those inherent in the wood billet itself. But over time stresses develop, leading to a tendency for wood fibers to pull apart and even separate into a split. The box edges and bracing hopefully limit this tendency.
With a pressed top you literally reorient the fibers to create a new stable piece of wood. Over time it will want to move just like the carved top. Pressed tops should be very stable; solid sides after all are bent. Bent-wood rockers have lasted more than a hundred years.
As far as acoustic properties, I won't argue that a fine luthier using great billets cannot carve and fine-tune a great guitar superior to other methods. As for mostly machine-carved industrial production guitars, well who knows.
The pressed tops are very resonant and loud. IMO the sound is thinner than a carved top, in part because the top is usually thinner and lighter.
My only rub is that the pressed top is very cheap to make and should be substantially cheaper than a solid top. That's how Harmony and Kay made their guitars, including some very good ones, back in the last century at a very reasonable price.
-
Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
Just pulled this from Music Zoo (who are now selling them for $3800 and taking offers)
- 6 lbs. 1 oz.
- Bourbon Burst Finish
- Solid Formed Spruce Top
- Solid Formed Maple Back
- Maple Sides
- Solid Formed Neck
- Rosewood Fretboard
- 24 3/4" Scale Length
- 1 11/16" Nut Width
- 12" Radius
- 22 Frets
- '59 Neck Shape
- Johnny Smith Neck-Mount Humbucker
- Master Volume and Tone Controls
- Pearloid Dot Inlays
- Single-Ply Binding
- Rosewood Bridge
- Trapeze Tailpiece
- Vintage-Style Tuners
Would suggest the sides are laminate, Gibson's site also makes no mention of solid sides.
Oddly Music Zoo call the neck 'solid formed' too!
-
Fully agreed - and I'd like to add 'as soon as they are played' personally! Originally Posted by icr
Knowing that many Gibson users here would rather committ seppuku or hara-kiri than talk about other brands, I can't contribute to the discussion about Gibson "solid-formed" archtops, but scratch the surface of possible differences between solid formed or pressed solid soundboards and carved ones.
Though you could carve a pressed solid spruce top after the pressing (a process that requires high pressures and temperatures - a baking), this would make no sense from an economical view. Hence, pressed solid plates sport an uniform thickness (no graduation) over the whole soundboard. Though pressed solid tops can show a wide difference in terms of quality, the stiffness, the archs, arch tallness and location, etc., in general such plates feature more flattish archs, little to no recurve and little to no what violin makers call the 'hourglass shape'. All these factors can vastly influence the sound of a stringed acoustic box, at least as much as do the soundboard material properties.
If you'd take off the corner blocks of instruments of the violin family - they need the C-bouts (the waist of guitars) only for an easier bowing reason - or you'd look inside a violin, you'd get the shape of a guitar. The hourglass shape of fine carved instruments mirrors this shape inside the recurve, that area where the negative arch changes into the effective arching of the plate. Orville Gibson did not invent the archtop guitar, it was Lloyd Loar during his short stint with Gibson. The G. business men just took advantage of Loar's violin making knowledge. Loar knew that the top of the relatively stiff archtop box needs a certain bending or twisting stiffness near the bridge to bring out the full efficiency of the top. That's why the vast majority of archtop guitars has lateral soundholes. They enable the top to bend the right amount, the box to pump air in and out, the (standing) wave between the bridge and the soundhole to reflect in a certain way, and so on. Part of this deal is also to thin the soundboard area between the soundholes and the edge, called 'fluting', that can also visually contribute to the hourglass shape.
You see the difference between a fine carved box and one with pressed solid soundboard should be huge, at least in theory. In practice, seen from a Gibson POV, it might be not, and I wouldn't be surprised if the new Gibson boxes soundwise would be on a par with their carved G. counterparts. Why? Well, let's have a look at the plates that G. puts on the electric L-5s for some decades now: the tallness and placing of the archs, the recurve, the graduation, the hourglass. While I like the electric sound of my 1996 L-5WM, it is not only my own feeling these days that these boxes are made with considerably less violin makers knowledge than they were from the 20s to the 60s, and that by far most of their sound is resulting from the pickups. The 80% / 20% (electric/acoustic) rule. It's hard to tell the difference of plates from pics alone, but I wouldn't be surprised if the "solid formed" Gibsons would sound very similar to the carved ones. Personally, I had a hard time to be sure that my 1996 L-5WM has a carved and not a pressed solid top... the visual and dimensional difference could be marginal here. It seems to me that over the years the customers taste has simply adopted to the cost-cutting procedures, or to the ads and promises of the marketing department.
I'm going to show a few pics here from various guitars for getting an impression of what I've been telling. Though I have to admit that it is hard to see the archs, the hourglass, the recurve - and it is certainly not possible to see the plate graduations. As stated above the real test is the playing, the A/B playing of guitars...
Carved archtop guitar plates have sort of a 'built-in' grain run-out. Pressed solid plates are different, thus comparably stiffer length- and cross-wise. If you think about the grain line running around the waist of a carved top, also in the cross-section, you might get an impression about the 'hourglass shape'. Here the schematic center line longitudinal sections:
Also, their movement to changes of RH is much different -and they move more than some may think! By the way pressed plates are made (heat and pressure), they're generally more prone to stresses in the wood. I don't buy the resonance head drum theory applied on archtop guitars. Ideally, the only stress I'd put on a soundboard is the force of the strings/bridge.
It must be suspected that solid formed plates can sound really great and age nicely (my US and Geman examples from the 50s and 60s certainly do) - and that they are a superb way to save expensive tonewoods and the wallets of customers. But they cannot match to a really expertly carved acoustic box.
Now, time for the jazz club...Last edited by Ol' Fret; 04-09-2016 at 01:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
Samick Jz4 update/upgrade
Today, 03:41 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos