-
The topic is the question: is the only difference between the L5ces and the L5 Wes Montgomery model that the latter has only one pickup? Are there any other differences of design, materials, construction, dimensions, etc.?
-
08-21-2016 10:58 PM
-
I own 2 L5 CES's and 1 L5 Wes. That said, in my opinion, the Wes is more acoustic, slightly lighter and a tad brighter in tone. The 2 that I am comparing are of the same vintage and are both natural in finish. However, the Wes can be EQ'd to sound like the double PUP version. I suspect that bracing on both is similar. Dimensions are exactly the same.
-
The tonal differences are subtle, but they are there
And the Wes version is better for unamplified noodling ... like when you're watching TV
I like them both ... but I lean towards the Wes version ...
Except when I'm playing the 2 pup version
-
Like has been said, the general consensus is that the Wes is a bit brighter, but I do believe - as has also been said - that the difference can be levelled out with EQ. I hardly ever use a bridge PU, so I would lean towards the Wes because I think it's prettier (one of the most beautiful guitars ever made?) and there's less hardware to vibrate and buzz (and buzzes will surely come along the way). But thats just me, and others think differently.
BTW, being a fan of single coil PUs, I have seen Musicians Friend videos on YouTube demonstrating L5 guitars (both Wes and CES) with P90 and with staple "Alnico" PUs, but they must be rare birds and may have to be custom ordered.
-
i dislike the second pickup - never use it - big lump of metal in the middle of the guitar - a serious source of extra buzzes etc.
i got to try three L5 CES's and 2 Wes L5s and an L5 P - and the L5 CESs were all much warmer and thicker in sound and feel. one could very easily tell the way that the increasingly 'dead' top (from P to Wes to CES) damped the acoustic response and improved the amplified sound.
i wanted to prefer the Wes but there was no contest - it was not particularly subtle - i'm very glad indeed i got the CES.
-
Why do they put tuneomatic bridges on L5s?
I tried a brand new no pickup model, and it had a tuneomatic bridge and very thick construction, not much in the way of an acoustic voice. Not sure what model number it was, but I couldn't get my head around what it was actually for.Last edited by christianm77; 08-22-2016 at 06:37 AM.
-
I'm with Groyniad. I want to love the Wes. It's the beautiful one. It's the L-5 version of my old ES 175. However, the sound we all associate with the L-5 is in the CES.
-
Makes me wonder... Is the L5 CES, Wes and acoustic actually the same body design, bracing, etc. with the difference being number of pickups?
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
no pickup = lighter bracing Originally Posted by Steve Z
1 pickup = heavy bracing
2 pickups = heavier bracing
-
I read somwhere that the Wes has one less brace. Anybody know for sure?
-
Nah, I would say more that the new ones are designed primarily as items of furniture. Originally Posted by Steve Z
The old ones appear to legit acoustic archtops with pickups on.
-
The one with the staple pickup, replacing TOM saddles with nylon ones, would work perfectly for me...
-
It's true that the L-5 got more heavily constructed over time as it became essentially an electric guitar.
If you tried to retro-fit a 30s-40s L-5 with two humbuckers and the accompanying control circuitry you'd have an unstable top, in short order.
Consider, the guitar is filling two different niches at different points in its evolution. In the 20s-40s the L-5 was the big band rhythm section guitar. By the 50s, big bands had dissolved and jazz combos were the gig. The L-5 was THE electric guitar. Completely different instrument, as it were, with different construction needs. Supporting all that hardware calls for a thicker carve on the top and thicker bracing (plus cross bracing).
That said, you wouldn't want it any other way. The L-5CES is THE quintessential guitar when it comes to the voice of jazz. It is, along side the ES-175, the sound that people associate with "jazz guitar." Play a L-5P with a DeArmond (beautiful, by the way), a L-5 Wes, and a L-5CES side-by-side sometime. Blindfolded, you could pick out the one that sounds like all of the jazz records and concerts--especially if it is being run through a Fender Twin Reverb amp.
-
Was the single pickup L5 Wes playing the same as the Wesmo ?
Maybe his thumb playing made it sound less bright and more thick sounding like a CES?
-
*shudder* Originally Posted by Greentone
I do know a guy called Ofer Landsberg who has an early '30s L5 with a floating pup. This is what it sounds and looks like
TBH a modded vintage guitar like this - with the pickup already fitted obv, I'm not a monster - would suit my needs very well and probably not be too expensive compared to actual collectors instruments which would actually be useless for the purposes of everyday gigging. (Well alright, Julian Lage manages somehow, but I daresay he doesn't do too many pub gigs these days. ;-))
Well, of course, the L5 of the late 30's was already a different animal to the guitar Eddie Lang played. Bigger bands.Consider, the guitar is filling two different niches at different points in its evolution. In the 20s-40s the L-5 was the big band rhythm section guitar. By the 50s, big bands had dissolved and jazz combos were the gig. The L-5 was THE electric guitar. Completely different instrument, as it were, with different construction needs. Supporting all that hardware calls for a thicker carve on the top and thicker bracing (plus cross bracing).
I like the '67 L5 I tried, lovely response. A proper archtop guitar despite having two humbuckers in it. I reckon I could play a big band rhythm gig on one of those without plugging in. It would certainly mike beautifully. Probably crap for organ trio gigs.That said, you wouldn't want it any other way. The L-5CES is THE quintessential guitar when it comes to the voice of jazz. It is, along side the ES-175, the sound that people associate with "jazz guitar." Play a L-5P with a DeArmond (beautiful, by the way), a L-5 Wes, and a L-5CES side-by-side sometime. Blindfolded, you could pick out the one that sounds like all of the jazz records and concerts--especially if it is being run through a Fender Twin Reverb amp.
But I have a telecaster for that.
TBH - I have no problem with the idea of the modern L5 being a purely electric guitar (I mean, why not just get an ES175, but hey whatevs.)
The thing that does my head in is why on Earth would you issue a heavily built, acoustically quiet archtop top guitar without a freaking pickup and expect someone to pay almost $10,000 for it.
Seems a little odd.Last edited by christianm77; 08-22-2016 at 12:23 PM.
-
Well I can offer some perspective. I've got both a 57' L7 that was modded with dual pickups long ago. It has dearmond classics. It is both lightly built and the pickups are clear and strong. My WesMO is heavily built (!) by comparison. The sounds couldn't be more different. The wesmo heads right for that familiar territory you would expect it to have. Just nails the wes sound. As i said it is HEAVY!
the 57 L7 has a much airy tone that is in no way as thick. It is beautiful in its own right and gets right to that 50's L5 CES tone that you would expect.
-
Can I get an amen! Nice synopsis GT!
I soooooo much wanted to like a Hutchins WesMo over an L5CES. My ears wouldn't lie to me. I hate it when that happens!
Originally Posted by Greentone
-
But why? Whyyyyy? Whyyyyyyy? WHYYYYYYY?
Why do they sell the heavy quiet guitar with no pickup for 10 thousand dollar??? Why????
There are some things man is not meant to know.
I think the Gibson Corporation has been taken over by Azathoth, the Blind Idiot God. 'the monstrous nuclear chaos beyond angled space.'
It's the only explanation that makes any sense to me.
-
At least I wasn't the only one who played one of the new L5 acoustics and wanted to like it ....
But found the acoustic properties to be on the weak side .... even if the tone was there
-
I wonder who would buy it? Originally Posted by Bluedawg
You get more sound of a laminate Eastman. I played one immediately after the L5 actually. And a rather nice American made copy of a D'Angelico which cost around half the price of the Gibson. Lovely guitar, actually, wish I could remember the maker.
-
That could mean Henry J is Nyarlathotep ? Originally Posted by christianm77
-
My L-5 Wesmo is a decent acoustic guitar with a wooden bridge saddle. With the stock TOM, it was pretty dead. It is an amazing guitar (1996 IIRC) in my least favorite finish (Wine red). I got a great deal on it second hand and at the time figured that I would trade it for a blond or sunburst L-5 (one or two pickup model). But it is great sounding and plays as nicely as any guitar that I have ever played, so it is my "keeper for life" L-5.
Like Fender, I think Gibson makes great electric guitars. They used to make great acoustic guitars, but quite honestly, I have been unimpressed with their acoustic guitars for sometime, both flattops and archtops. They started making the archtops less acoustic in the late 50's and lets face it, these "electric" archtops do have the sound we all associate with jazz guitar. I think their flattops have been built heavier since the early 60's as well (for business reasons) and are not as acoustically alive as they once were. If you want a truly live flattop, buy a Martin. They still make them like they always have (I guess being a family owned firm, they have the luxury of building great acoustic guitars, not guitars built to satisfy stockholders and bean counters or greedy CEO's).
Here is a video of Andreas Oberg playing my L-5 Wesmo (I am comping next to him on my Maple Dupont Gypsy guitar):
-
Yes I do wonder why they but TOM's on them. Well the electrics, fair dos, but the acoustic models? Again, my sanity is threatened by eldritch horrors and queer alien logic beyond my ken.
The outer gods move in mysterious ways.
(TBH there's probably not much of a market for them in acoustic archtops, why bother, one wonders?)
-
Hmmm...Maybe you've hit on yet another reason the good fellows over at Heritage decided to remain in Kalamazoo! Originally Posted by christianm77
-
I could be wrong, but I suspect that if Gibson had the Bozeman MT folks do the work on the L-5P, as they did on the L-7, you'd get somewhere in the ballpark of what people expect a fully acoustic L-5 to do. I'm not saying that the Bozeman L-7 was exactly right, but it was _nearly_ so. It is a viable acoustic archtop.
Meanwhile, if I wanted an acoustic archtop (that I could have a floating pickup on), I would order up a Golden Eagle from Heritage. Those folks are making a very, very good acoustic archtop in the Gibson vein, these days. The Golden Eagle seems to be patterned after the Kalamazoo Award Gibson from the 1980s--a worthy guitar in its own right.
For an acousto-electric, however, I'm not sure that you can beat the L-5 CES Wes or L-5 CES. If it were me, I'd either find that special Wes that has a special sound, or I'd just step right up and get a 2-pickup CES--they always sound like jazz, to me.
Wes and his thumb? I always thought Wes' thumb lent a bright sound to things, at least when he really got going. Wes had a very heavy callus on his thumb that was approximately like hitting the strings with a heavy tortex pick. Listen to the difference between wes striking a glancing blow with the side of his thumb ( callus) versus using the pad of his thumb (more meaty). It's the difference between bright and dark attack. Wes had a tone control right in his right thumb.
Reply With Quote
Two guitar version of Finnish trad....
Today, 12:15 PM in Other Styles / Instruments