Passed on used The Loar LH-300. Mistake?

[searead]

Seller only played 4 times. As new. He thought he'd give learning jazz a try but never found the time.
Out of curiosity I played a few of these in a local shop a couple of years back and liked them. But I was starting out and looking for something less exotic to my sensibilities. Now I want one. He's asking a fair price. I could have gone and played the guitar. But I don't know anything about archtops and he seems to know even less. It's never been set up. My understanding is the LH-300 can be good to go out of the box. But they can be inconsistent too.
In the end I didn't feel qualified enough to make an informed decision. I know the set up on an archtop is trickier than a flat top. Should I have gone and played it and trusted my gut? Sounds good. Plays good. Buy it? Or was it wise to pass. It may not be too late to change my mind.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Read

[MC5C]

The Loar LH300 has a pretty good spec. It says hand-carved top, and traditional (which I take to mean solid) maple back and sides. If you like the sound and the feel, then it's a good one for you. Archtop guitars are extremely user friendly and easier to set up than any flat top, including a Taylor. All you do is slacken the strings a bit, move the bridge to where the intonation is correct, set the bridge height with the thumb wheels, check the relief and done. Takes about five minutes start to finish, and that's if you need to find your ruler to set the action height. Longer of course if you need to work on the nut, or adjust the individual string intonation on the bridge topper, but still as easy or easier than doing the same thing on a flat top.

[Mr. Scott]

When asked I tell people that if a guitar seems good to them with regard to sound and, rather secondarily, looks, then get it: anything else can be dealt with later. So I'm sorry to hear that you rejected the Loar. Is there any chance you could make another offer to the guy? That model is a good spec for the money and are usually well enough built to enable a good setup.
A similar manufacturer you may like to consider is Eastman, similar in price range too and some would say a bit better built, although you can always get the runt of the litter.
I hope you find something soon. Take a more experienced player with you when you go viewing, just to check it out structurally. You can't beat a nice archtop.
Good luck.

[Silly Moustache]

Hi, I've had two or three Loar archtops. Last one was a top of the range (600/700?).

They can sound loud - pretty much like a budget flat-top, I guess the tops are retty thin to get that resonance - which is not a bad thing.

The neck is a good size with a clumpy neck (which I liked).

However, every one I've seen was made with an incorrect neck angle, which meant that the bridge was too low and the tailpiece touching the top.

The join underneath the neck extension was just a hunk of rough wood, covered in think black paint, which gave me concern about the neck lifting further.

If you can find one with good frets, properly placed bridge giving you a decent break angle to the tail piece and a sensible neck angle ...buy it. If not ....caveat emptor.

frankly it would be so much better to pay a l;ittle more for an Eastman if possible.

Good Luck.

[rlrhett]

I had the exact same experience as Silly Moustache. I just don't understand why people seem to rave about these guitars. Very poor QC and a middling tone.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kayakman]

No mistake on Loar guitars.

[Mandobart]

Originally Posted by Mr. Scott

A similar manufacturer you may like to consider is Eastman, similar in price range too and some would say a bit better built, although you can always get the runt of the litter.
I hope you find something soon. Take a more experienced player with you when you go viewing, just to check it out structurally. You can't beat a nice archtop.
Good luck.

There is very little comparison between The Loar and Eastman archtops IME. I've played a few of the lower end Loars (LH279 and 300) and found them very uninspiring. The tone is weak and fit and finish are on par with the cheap end of the Asian import spectrum. I've not had a chance to try the higher end Loars (LH600 or 700) that sell for about $1000 more. Eastman, OTOH, are definitely on the high end in sound, fit, finish and quality. I've played a few of them as well. They don't offer a low end pressed-arch acoustic. I don't think you should regret passing on the LH300.

[Steve DeRosa]

Originally Posted by Mandobart

...Eastman, OTOH, are definitely on the high end in sound, fit, finish and quality. I've played a few of them as well. They don't offer a low end pressed-arch acoustic...

FYI they do; the new model designation is AR400, and they're available in at least three finishes - tobacco burst (Ted @ LA has one of these - looks cheap IMO ), classic ('20s L-4 redburst - Soundpure had one and it's my fave of the bunch - this one's on my 2017 GAS shortlist ), and blacktop (like an F-2 mandolin or early L-10), as well as a mandocello version. Got some good reviews from what I've seen...

[mr. beaumont]

From the ones I've played, there is a big difference in quality between the lower priced 300 series Loars and the nicer 6-700 series. I played several 300 series guitars that were junk.

[Mandobart]

Originally Posted by Steve DeRosa

FYI they do; the new model designation is AR400, and they're available in at least three finishes - tobacco burst (Ted @ LA has one of these - looks cheap IMO ), classic ('20s L-4 redburst - Soundpure had one and it's my fave of the bunch - this one's on my 2017 GAS shortlist ), and blacktop (like an F-2 mandolin or early L-10), as well as a mandocello version. Got some good reviews from what I've seen...

The cheaper pressed top Eastman 'cello is a new one to me - it's not on their website yet. I have the carved top MDC805. But now that Goldtone and Morgan Monroe have jumped into the guitar-bodied mandocello market it's not surprising for Eastman to offer a less expensive option.

[tdq]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

From the ones I've played, there is a big difference in quality between the lower priced 300 series Loars and the nicer 6-700 series. I played several 300 series guitars that were junk.

That's interesting - I played a 300 and a 600 side by side and although the 600 was superior, there wasn't much in it. (but I also know I'm not as particular as some on here). I guess the usual adage applies, try before you buy if at all possible.

[upsidedown]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

From the ones I've played, there is a big difference in quality between the lower priced 300 series Loars and the nicer 6-700 series. I played several 300 series guitars that were junk.

Me too. I found them to be heavy, heavily finished (plastic?) and lacking in easily accessed tone. By comparison Godin's 5th Avenue and an Eastman AR-605 (no cutaway or electronics) were miles better.