-
Hi All!
The Jazz Guitar Gods take all of your guitars away and will issue you 1 of 2 guitars.
The two in question are both in great condition and worth the exact same amount of money Today, tomorrow is to be determined and hopefully weighed into your opinion (you get to sell in 15++ years time should you choose to) - you play acoustically 50% of the time and with a floating pickup the other 50% of the time.
You do not get to play either first, only know the facts.
Option 1:
56' D'Angelico New Yorker Cutaway Sunburst
9.5/10 condition
Option 2:
1984 D'Aquisto New Yorker Natural
10/10 condition
So..
- As far as for strict solo jazz guitar purposes with a floating pickup, assuming they both play great, tonally, which would you take and why?
- Which do you think would carry more tonal weight for single note lines?
And finally...
- Which do you choose overall and why?
---------------------------------------------
My uncle and I have been debating going in together for one of these two.. we have notions them based on our ideas of both builders, their lineages, and their guitars as well as hands on experiences with both builders and would love to hear what you all have to say. I'm opting not to say anything particular about our opinions regarding either instrument so soon as to lessen the odds of bias.
Thank you kindly and looking forward to reading your thoughts!
Best,
ReedLast edited by ReedAmbedastam; 04-08-2020 at 04:44 PM.
-
04-08-2020 06:43 AM
-
dangelico, full out embellishments (inlays in board and headstock, multiple bindings, stairstep guard etc), more classic big band sound, very good balance but still made to be played as an acoustic with lots of midrange projection (esp when it is a parrallel braced example), I dont think the value would be the same
Daquisto, mid 1980s is very modern look, probably zero inlays, wood guard and simple binding etc. More modern neck shape with wider nut , and probably more modern sound too (i.e. less projection more warmth, certainly x braced), value considerably (5-10k) higher than the dangelico
I already have the Dangelico and not a (1980s) daquisto so Id take that. I sure hope gods dont take guitars away and they have more urgent matters to attend to
-
As much as I like all the gingerbread on the D'Angelicos, I prefer the modern look of a D'Aquisto.
-
Well I have a D'angelico but really I would take another one. For the same reason is that it has the perfect amount of gingerbread and details, I like fingerboard inlays and binding, plus a 56 D'a in good shape is great since during that period binding gas more prevalent.
-
The D'Aquisto will be worth x10 as much as the D'Angelico when it goes on the market. Both will be fine instruments, from the musical perspective they're a horse apiece. Sorry to sound mercenary. I'd be equally delighted with either guitar from the player's perspective, might lean slightly towards the D'Angelico in terms of sound, but from the financial perspective in 15 years you could put down a lot of the down payment on a house selling the D'Aquisto. Also, the D'Aquisto is likely to be more structurally sound (e.g., binding rot, cracks, finish wear, etc.), being 28 years newer.
So I'd take the D'Aquisto from the hard-headed perspective, even though emotionally I think I'd prefer the D'Angelico.
-
It all depends on which guitar you like. Different cosmetics and different sound.
Value wise if the D'Angelico has a cutaway, they are not far apart. If no cutaway, the D'Aquisto is probable worth double.
Either guitar is rare and should remain collectable for the duration of time anyone reading this post today has left on the planet. But I would not buy either guitar as an investment, I would buy them as a piece of fine art that one can enjoy both looking at, and also enjoy as a musical instrument.
-
Put your money on the S&P 500 Index fund today and buy a nice Bill Comins archtop guitar. Your investment will actually grow. And you will sound no worse on a Bill Comins archtop.
I am an atheist and don't believe in Jazz Guitar Gods. They can't take them away from me/ 'Cos they don't exist.
Anybody who tells you to buy a D'Angelico or D'Aquisto is trying to sell you one.
My atheist-there-are-no-jazz-guitar-gods contrarian humble and useless opinion. Don't mind me; I get this way around the full moon and new moon.
But I would buy a nice 1923 to 1929 Lloyd Loar Gibson L5.
-
Difficult choice! I think the newer one might be more practical for gigs, but I’ve always wanted a go on an old one. Just a go, though.
-
An ignorant tweet from the tundra. Somebody please explain why a D'Aquisto is so much more valuable? To me, it looks like less of everything, compared to a heyday D'Angelico. Also knowing that Jimmy more than flirted with Hagstrom, with a rather mediocre guitar as the result, detracts from his stature in my eyes. Is it that he made even fewer premiums guitars than John D'A? And didn't he admit that none was flawless? Just asking, no finger in this exclusive pie.
-
Originally Posted by Gitterbug
-
Thanks for all of your replies!!
Just for clarification, we wouldnt be going in on this as an investment.. there are far better investments outside of the guitar world - just trying to weigh that side in as well for what it may be worth.
For those debating about price, just please run within the hypetheticals.. but if you must know, the D'Aquisto is a touch more pricy right now (but less than 15% more).
I also just made an update to the original post and added:
"As far as for strict solo jazz guitar purposes with a floating pickup, assuming they both play great, tonally, which would you take and why?"
and
"Which do you think would carry more tonal weight for single note lines?"Last edited by ReedAmbedastam; 04-08-2020 at 04:41 PM.
-
I own three vintage D'Angelicos and all three are excellent for solo jazz guitar, both chord melody and single note lines. And that applies both acoustically and amplified with floating D'Armond pickups (also genuine vintage examples). Originally Posted by ReedAmbedastam
That said, I have yet to play a genuine D'Aquisto.
-
Originally Posted by Stringswinger
Originally Posted by Stringswinger
Wow.. that is beautiful!!
I guess i've just wanted to make sure a D'Angelico isn't so often associated with "Chunking away" rhythm playing and little ad-libs here and there but rather truly does excel as a lead instrument in its own rite as well. I would like to use either the Angelico or Aquisto amplified in a post bop combo as well - hoping it would excel there too (no pun intended).Last edited by ReedAmbedastam; 04-08-2020 at 11:47 PM.
-
chances are that jimmy D had a hand in building that 56 d'angelico anyway...as did diserio...
the d'aquisto for the win
cheers
-
You ever see an old guy driving a Corvette?
That's because when he was young, and craved a Corvette, he couldn't afford one. "Corvette" became imprinted on his mind as a symbol of success or satisfaction or something.
When I was a young guy, that was a D'Angelico New Yorker.
If I had one, the itch would be scratched and I wouldn't crave a D'Aquisto. Not the other way around.
All that said, sitting around the house in these viral times, I'm playing a Yamaha Pacifica 012 most of the time. My Comins is in the case, now that there are no gigs.
-
I'm going to throw a huge monkey wrench into the equation. I wouldn't pick either one.
I would pick specifically a D'Angelico New Yorker from 1937 to about 1945 specifically made to be as acoustically responsive as could possibly be made. Why? Not only am I interested in the good old American Songbook from then but in the history of the New York City musical scene and the history of the big band era from WWII. The D'Angelico guitars back then had a certain sound that couldn't be beat since the acoustic music was more popular than the electric sound of the 50s. Qs q bunch of you already know, I've got a 39 Excel that even with the flatwounds sounds great and has that particular tone D'Angelico was famous for. It's taken me a good while to learn how to draw that sound out of the guitar. The recordings I've heard from the 50s especially the cutaways are mostly electric and the tones can be adjusted all over the place. John D'Angelico's favorite style of music was chord melody and maybe the sound of the rhythm guitar. There, you have to work those guitars to really get the best out of them and when you get it right, you know it. Therefore I gotta go and screw this whole topic up with my craziness. I think I've been in the house too long.
-
Lol! Very right you are! It is most likely that he did do much of the work for this guitar.. what percent of it exactly, I don't think we can know. But the D'Angelico new yorker is still not to sound very much like the D'Aquisto considering the evolution of Jimmy's builds over the next few decades. Originally Posted by neatomic
Why the D'Aquisto for the win. Im more interested in the Why.. especially from a tonal standpoint. Thanks for your responses!
-
Hey Hotty lol Thanks for your reply! Great to hear from a real D'Angelico owner.. Frankly, Im not As big on the chumpy big band sound and the earlier american songbook as I am the music that came about later in the 50's and bloomed in the mid 60's, so I dont have the same affinity for earlier D'Angelicos (and or Strombergs for that matter) as others may. I bet your guitar is sweet and I enjoyed reading your thoughts though! Originally Posted by hot ford coupe
I'm going to throw a huge monkey wrench into the equation. I wouldn't pick either one.
I would pick specifically a D'Angelico New Yorker from 1937 to about 1945 specifically made to be as acoustically responsive as could possibly be made. Why? Not only am I interested in the good old American Songbook from then but in the history of the New York City musical scene and the history of the big band era from WWII. The D'Angelico guitars back then had a certain sound that couldn't be beat since the acoustic music was more popular than the electric sound of the 50s. Qs q bunch of you already know, I've got a 39 Excel that even with the flatwounds sounds great and has that particular tone D'Angelico was famous for. It's taken me a good while to learn how to draw that sound out of the guitar. The recordings I've heard from the 50s especially the cutaways are mostly electric and the tones can be adjusted all over the place. John D'Angelico's favorite style of music was chord melody and maybe the sound of the rhythm guitar. There, you have to work those guitars to really get the best out of them and when you get it right, you know it. Therefore I gotta go and screw this whole topic up with my craziness. I think I've been in the house too long.
-
Remember around 1956 Jimmy was relatively new to John's shop. DiSerio was doing most of the additional work. So Jimmy probably wasn't that intimately involved in the 1956 D'A in question. If it was a 1960-1964 D'A that would be a different story. Originally Posted by ReedAmbedastam
Lol! Very right you are! It is most likely that he did do much of the work for this guitar.. what percent of it exactly, I don't think we can know. But the D'Angelico new yorker is still not to sound very much like the D'Aquisto considering the evolution of Jimmy's builds over the next few decades.
Why the D'Aquisto for the win. Im more interested in the Why.. especially from a tonal standpoint. Thanks for your responses!
-
fws6 pretty much sums my experiences, also agree w/D'Aquisto fan, Jimmy likely wasn't carving tops and backs in '56 I think he started sweeping floors just 3 yrs earlier, but maybe doing some of the cosmetic work.
I've owned a number of D'Angelicos and find that most lean on that mid range sound, great for rhythm playing and chord melody. Never owned a D'Aquisto but the ones I've played had a more harp like piano sound, great for chord melody and single line playing. But both builders went through evolution in sound--later DA's, especially the very late 50s and early 60s models weren't quite as 'big' sounding to me but maybe more refined, possibly because Jimmy was doing more of the carving then and this continued into his own guitars in the 60s, and they got even more refined as the yrs went by.
Of course there's going to be exceptions to the rule and likely many exceptions through the careers of both builders.
As to the OP, you'd really need to get them in front of you to decide what works best for you personally between those two particular examples.
-
Wow. This is a good one.
In my lifetime I’ve seen the D’Aquisto you speak of. In Lark Street. It was spectacular.
But to me, nothing makes me weak in the knees like a D’Angelico New Yorker. The design of that guitar is the pinnacle for me. If I held one in my hands and I could afford it, shows over.
I owned probably the single greatest replica of the D’Angelico you referenced. The only reason I don’t say, “I’m sad I sold it” is because it lives with one of my best friends on the forum now, and he does it more justice than I could.
D’Angelico for me.
Joe D
-
D'Aquisto for me. As in the famed standard "all the way." There's just something about the finishes of D'Aquisto's that moved me. Very modern looking, and yet with memories of 'art deco' in his designs. But oh those bursts were to die for. Who cares what the guitar sounds like. Just look at that thing!
-
The very reason that you picked the D'Aquisto is exactly why D'Angelico made the later guitars as he did. Some of them had thicker tops and other parts to help eliminate feedback which would happen with the type of guitar I would choose. Every guitar that John or Jimmy made was built with what the player had in mind and what kind of music he or she would play. The great Chuck Wayne had green pool felt glued to the entire top. I can imagine what that sounded like acoustically. That's why a chord melody player might think his new acquisition is a piece of junk because it wasn't built for the kind of music he played. I had that problem when I tried out a Heritage made D'Angelico II that was in a store for a long time. Acoustically, the thing was dead as a doornail. The sound was pinched and the volume was poor. Although it was very easy to play and it played in tune, it was not worth the money to me. However, I'm sure that the thing would sing like a bird with a pickup and not feed back in the slightest. Originally Posted by ReedAmbedastam
The bottom line is everyone comes to the table with a different sound and requirement. Unfortunately, There is no one guitar that is perfect for every player there is. That's why they're made like they are. I got lucky in that my D'A was made for the older style and that's what I play. I hope at some time you can get your dream guitar. They come along when you least expect it.
-
I have had no personal experience with either of these instruments. In that regard, I haz a sad.
That said, I regard the D'Angelico New York to be the pinnacle and capstone of Deco design and the D'Aquisto New Yorker to be the seminal instrument in a more modernist direction.
If, by some miracle, I wound up with either of them, I would probably die of happiness.
-
Hi All,
This should come as no surprise to those of you who had seen my latest post.
Regardless, simply because I've yet to see such a thread and am interested...
Of the D'Angelico new yorkers from 1955 onwards (usually cutaways from then on, sometimes/often used with a floating pickup) and D'Aquisto New Yorkers of the 80's (almost always cutaways usually with a floating pickup), which recordings have these guitars actually been played on?
I thought it would be both fun and exciting if those who feel their information is correct could contribute!
Two Questions:
Please post a link or Artist, Album/Song and mention D'Angelico NY Or D'Aquisto NY and which era... if you knowOf course the real joke will be how few of us will be able to tell just from the sound.. especially in a band setting with the myriad variables (manner of recording, players hands, tweaked controls when applicable, etc..) and much of the magic being the relationship of the player and the guitar but fun nevertheless!!
?
For the Few of us with experience with late 50's (and later) D'Angelico New Yorkers and 80's D'Aquisto New Yorkers, would you prefer a De Armond pickup (and which) or a Johnny Smith pickup for the electrified tone
?
Thanks!
Last edited by ReedAmbedastam; 04-09-2020 at 04:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
Samick Jz4 update/upgrade
Yesterday, 03:41 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos