Jazz guitars,,, Why flame maple?

[D. Churchland]

Originally Posted by Chris Kemp

Might not be maple but it definitely is an over the top color scheme.

A very cool over the top color scheme

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by RussMason

Those who play jazz, particularly single-note lead phrases, do not want a lot of resonance, as one would normally get from rosewood or mahogany.

With maple, the single notes stand out clearly.

Good point. Maple is fairly high damping, and the the jazz rhythm playing of the prewar period also needed a rapid decay of the notes to get a clear, percussive sound.

[Taylorplayer]

My experience only comes from the perspective of a player. I have found that Maple tends to both amplify & record very well.

[harmonics101]

TaylorPlayer's remark is why i really need to coax my maple Gibsons out of their shells

Not the best back and side wood to play strictly acoustic.

But once you get them out you are puzzled why you waited so long. Everyone needs a bit of maple in their diet !

Harmonics101

[Tele1111]

Originally Posted by Howard Klepper

Violinmaking tradition.

Originally Posted by RussMason
"Those who play jazz, particularly single-note lead phrases, do not want a lot of resonance, as one would normally get from rosewood or mahogany.

With maple, the single notes stand out clearly"

All of the above. I have been lucky enough to play and own some nice Archtops. The carved variety. In looking back at the Archtop's "evolution", you can see changes in the size and shape of the "F" holes, transitioning to a more "S" shape as the guitar became more of a solo instrument. The bridges became larger as well, as the guitars were used more as electric instruments.
What did not change, were the traditional woods used, as Howard pointed out, whose roots come from Violin making. (If you look at the later work of John D'Angelico and All of Jimmy D'Aquisto's work, you will see what I am referring to.)

You have to remember, these instruments were originaly designed to project and cut through a full band setting. I think the added stiffness (?) of Maple helps do just that.

[kscobie8]

Originally Posted by Taylorplayer

My experience only comes from the perspective of a player. I have found that Maple tends to both amplify & record very well.

+1

My Douglas 335 copy is maple and it's got a great plugged-in sound. It works well with many different amps and pedals. I've never found a semi-hollow or hollow bodied guitar in another wood that works quite so well with variety. It's heavy, but it's got tone. The acoustic tone is also nice, just not very loud. It makes for a great late-night practice guitar.

I find that the bright tonal qualities of maple pair well with the mellow nature of archtops.


oops! electric guitar alert! one got through!

Mmmm, maple.

Bel isi,
-kyle

[Rick Homan]

Originally Posted by Howard Klepper

Where did you get this idea?

I got that idea from a luthier. Since he certainly knows more about building guitars than I do, I believed him. I will let him know that you and some others here disagree with him.

[harvl]

I've only built a couple of archtops that weren't maple (just started one today in fact - out of quilted maple), about 1/2 were flamed and the other half were quilted. I've used sycamore (which is pretty close to western maple) and one out of Claro Walnut, (I'll see if I can find some pic's of it.) Both were much warmer sounding guitar than maple, especially the walnut. Both were also easier to work with (meaning carve and sand) I would say that for something like fingerstyle acoustic stuff a less "bright" wood would be a good choice but if you want that classic sound with jazz chords, go with tradition.

[L-fan]

Originally Posted by harvl

I've only built a couple of archtops that weren't maple (just started one today in fact - out of quilted maple), about 1/2 were flamed and the other half were quilted. I've used sycamore (which is pretty close to western maple) and one out of Claro Walnut, (I'll see if I can find some pic's of it.) Both were much warmer sounding guitar than maple, especially the walnut. Both were also easier to work with (meaning carve and sand) I would say that for something like fingerstyle acoustic stuff a less "bright" wood would be a good choice but if you want that classic sound with jazz chords, go with tradition.

Wow. Wow. And Wow. Awesome guitar. I've been saying for a long time that if I ever struck it rich, I would get a sweet archtop made for me. Something like the above. What dreams are made of! Thanks for sharing those pictures.

[harvl]

Originally Posted by L-fan

Wow. Wow. And Wow. Awesome guitar. I've been saying for a long time that if I ever struck it rich, I would get a sweet archtop made for me. Something like the above. What dreams are made of! Thanks for sharing those pictures.

Thanks, it was called the "Fab 4" guitar, here are some close ups of some of the inlays...