Hybrid Top on new Jon Gomm signature Lowden

[Carbonius]

Another reason for the new guitar... Wilma REALLY needs to retire!

[CoolerKing]

That one on the left looks like my face after a double shift! .

All kidding aside I wonder why the wear drops off at the edge. I guess it has to do with where his fingers end up but I'm surprised the scratches stop!

[Marcus Wong]

It doesn't look that bad given that it's nearly 30 years old! Haha Jon does admit to taking good care of Wilma which is probably why it still only has 1 sound hole.

[performingchimp]

Hi guys! This is Jon Gomm.

Loved seeing this thread, it's really cool that people are intrigued by the Hybrid Top idea.

What it is NOT: Plywood! Ha ha! Holy cow, the idea of a plywood top Lowden. Argh! No. Sure it has two layers of wood so I guess it's TECHNICALLY ply, but it's about as far removed from a hardware-store plywood as you could imagine. Every time I read the word plywood I felt a bit sick. Ha ha!

It's also not a Double Top, or Sandwich Top. No Nomex layer. Personally I need to know my guitar is made of wood, on an emotional level.

What it IS: It's a thin but otherwise standard spruce top on the outside, bookpressed to a thin cedar top underneath. So it's two layers. The cedar layer has the grain angle slightly offset. That's it! Simple.

The idea was to create a stronger top, hence the offset grains, to be more resistant to cracks and such from percussive techniques. However, it was also an experiment in tone. That's why we went for spruce on the outside, which is the projection surface, and cedar on the inside, which is the resonant surface.

George experimented with thicknesses, grain angles, glues and pressing times at length, as you can imagine!


The resulting top is pretty much the same overall thickness as a standard Lowden top, but it's a little stiffer.

George built two identical guitars for me, but one with this Hybrid Top and one with a standard solid spruce top, and A/B blind tested them, over and over, unplugged obviously.

The difference was very very strong. The Hybrid Top is louder, has stronger bass in the deep lows, and had very strong clarity. It also sounded older, more broken in. The famous Lowden mid range was moved upwards through the frequency range, slightly, so the voice is different, but subtly.

However, the Hybrid Top was harder to play quietly and had slightly less overtones, but actually this isn't a bad thing for me. (Lowdens are overtone crazy which is beautiful and great for specific types of playing, and if unplugged, but can hamper low tunings and amplification. Plus you sacrifice some note clarity, obviously.)

The sustain from the Hybrid Top was absolutely insane. I could play Parisienne Walkways on this thing! It just sings.

I've played a lot of guitars, as you can probably imagine, and have a very clear idea of what I like, and I loved the Hybrid Top instrument. It reminded me most of Mike Greenfield's fan fret. Not the same, but the power and bass were highly reminiscent. I guess to describe it clumsily but quickly: They have lots of bass and sparkle, but without sounding like all the mids have been scooped out (the latter is how most Taylors sound to me, for example. No offence intended, and I love a Taylor's bass and treble, but I do also like more warmth in the middle).

You could argue I'm biased, but in fact I was terrified I wouldn't like it. By the time Lowden finished building the two prototypes, I had pretty much convinced myself that the Hybrid Top was a terrible idea doomed to sound awful and I would've wasted George Lowden's time and wasted a guitar. When I heard it I literally wept with relief and joy.

As the guitar has aged (I've had it for about 10 months and played the sh*t out of it) it has softened a lot. The action (as in the velocity and attack of the notes, not the string height) is much more pliable, so it's easier to play quietly. It's still super responsive but not "HEY YOU ACCIDENTALLY TOUCHED ME, I FELT IT, SO HERE'S A MASSIVE NOTE" responsive.

N.B. 10 months aging from me is probably 5 years aging from most people. I know this sounds extreme but I have been hammering it, mostly outdoors, every day.

Oh. And I'm convinced you can really hear the cedar.

There's more going on with the signature model than just the top, and I'm happy to elaborate on the neck, frets, other woods, etc etc, if people are curious. Ask away!

I'd really really love it if anyone gets to try one, to hear what you think. If you hear of one coming to a place near you please go and have a strum and report back, if you can.

Thanks for reading.

Jon
X

[performingchimp]

Oh, P.S. Demo videos coming soon. Both plugged in and straight into a mic. I'll try to remember to post links here.

[Marcus Wong]

Wow.... Jon Gomm has joined the forum! Let me be the first to welcome you a huge fan of yours and thank you for shedding more light on your signature model. It's hard to find guitars with tuning peg holes the right size for the banjo tuners so this guitar might just do the trick (after I've saved up enough of course haha)

Looking forward to the videos, and interested to hear how different your original songs would sound on this.

[ukejon]

Originally Posted by performingchimp

Oh, P.S. Demo videos coming soon. Both plugged in and straight into a mic. I'll try to remember to post links here.

Fantastic of you to provide the answers to questions about this innovative guitar and it is cool that you are still hearing some of the cedar character. Very much look forward to hearing the demos, Jon. Also, such a timely bit of information given that we currently are debating in another thread about guitars that are overly responsive. You seem to have landed on a guitar that is beautifully responsive but not out of control.....which is perfect.

[rogthefrog]

Cool, Jon's here. Great intro post! I'm looking forward to the demos.

[oscarcorpasj]

Greetings from Spain Jon, your music inspires me a lot. I'm saving too for this guitar but it have to wait cause I'm in love with a flamenco guitar.


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

[Cincy2]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

so they're saying the two sheets of soundboard would actually be louder?

The "double top" guitar has been around for 15 years or so in the Classical Guitar world. The idea is that with two thin layers (cross grain or with a partial sandwich with Kevlar material) the soundboard's total weight can be reduced. Less weight can mean greater deflection given a constant impulse. I've owned several double top classicals of wood or wood / kevlar and I can tell you that the volume and projection are much improved over most standard solid wood tops. But.....you have to consider that the addition of more variables in the building process can also have unintended consequences. These are usually an overly bright sound that many players abhor. Done right, however, a double top can be remarkable.

Cincy

[CoolerKing]

Originally Posted by performingchimp

Hi guys! This is Jon Gomm.

Loved seeing this thread, it's really cool that people are intrigued by the Hybrid Top idea.

What it is NOT: Plywood! Ha ha! Holy cow, the idea of a plywood top Lowden. Argh! No. Sure it has two layers of wood so I guess it's TECHNICALLY ply, but it's about as far removed from a hardware-store plywood as you could imagine. Every time I read the word plywood I felt a bit sick. Ha ha!

It's also not a Double Top, or Sandwich Top. No Nomex layer. Personally I need to know my guitar is made of wood, on an emotional level.

What it IS: It's a thin but otherwise standard spruce top on the outside, bookpressed to a thin cedar top underneath. So it's two layers. The cedar layer has the grain angle slightly offset. That's it! Simple.

The idea was to create a stronger top, hence the offset grains, to be more resistant to cracks and such from percussive techniques. However, it was also an experiment in tone. That's why we went for spruce on the outside, which is the projection surface, and cedar on the inside, which is the resonant surface.

George experimented with thicknesses, grain angles, glues and pressing times at length, as you can imagine!


The resulting top is pretty much the same overall thickness as a standard Lowden top, but it's a little stiffer.

George built two identical guitars for me, but one with this Hybrid Top and one with a standard solid spruce top, and A/B blind tested them, over and over, unplugged obviously.

The difference was very very strong. The Hybrid Top is louder, has stronger bass in the deep lows, and had very strong clarity. It also sounded "older", more broken in. The famous Lowden mid range was moved upwards through the frequency range, slightly, so the voice is different, but subtly.

However, the Hybrid Top was harder to play quietly and had slightly less overtones, but actually this isn't a bad thing for me. (Lowdens are overtone crazy which is beautiful and great for specific types of playing, and if unplugged, but can hamper low tunings and amplification. Plus you sacrifice some note clarity, obviously.)

The sustain from the Hybrid Top was absolutely insane. I could play Parisienne Walkways on this thing! It just sings.

I've played a lot of guitars, as you can probably imagine, and have a very clear idea of what I like, and I loved the Hybrid Top instrument. It reminded me most of Mike Greenfield's fan fret. Not the same, but the power and bass were highly reminiscent. I guess to describe it clumsily but quickly: They have lots of bass and sparkle, but without sounding like all the mids have been scooped out (the latter is how most Taylors sound to me, for example. No offence intended, and I love a Taylor's bass and treble, but I do also like more warmth in the middle).

You could argue I'm biased, but in fact I was terrified I wouldn't like it. By the time Lowden finished building the two prototypes, I had pretty much convinced myself that the Hybrid Top was a terrible idea doomed to sound awful and I would've wasted George Lowden's time and wasted a guitar. When I heard it I literally wept with relief and joy.

As the guitar has aged (I've had it for about 10 months and played the sh*t out of it) out has softened a lot. The action (as in the velocity and attack of the notes, not the string height) is much more pliable, so it's easier to play quietly. It's still super responsive but not "HEY YOU ACCIDENTALLY TOUCHED ME, I FELT IT, SO HERE'S A MASSIVE NOTE" responsive.

N.B. 10 months aging from me is probably 5 years aging from most people. I know this sounds extreme but I have been hammering it, mostly outdoors, every day.

Oh. And I'm convinced you can really hear the cedar.

There's more going on with the signature model than just the top, and I'm happy to elaborate on the neck, frets, other woods, etc etc, if people are curious. Ask away!

I'd really really love it if anyone gets to try one, to hear what you think. If you hear of one coming to a place near you please go and have a strum and report back, if you can.

Thanks for reading.

Jon
X

Wow thanks for weighing in! Congrats on a very cool signature guitar and thanks for discussing the double top.

Matthew

[Rodger Knox]

The first thing I thought when I started reading this thread was that no one was mentioning the different species in the lamination as a major design decision, combining the stiffness of spruce with the lightness of cedar.

[Martin Keith]

Jon,

Very nice of you to stop by!
Thanks for all you do, and for breaking new ground with the Keith banjo tuners. I'm certainly appreciative!

I still play the original Passionflower video in my shop quite regularly.
Though I'm not the world's biggest fan of percussive guitar, that tune has always stood apart for me as something cohesively musical, and not just as a 'collection of techniques' as is sometimes the case.

Best wishes,
Martin Keith

[Martin Keith]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wong

Wow.... Jon Gomm has joined the forum! Let me be the first to welcome you a huge fan of yours and thank you for shedding more light on your signature model. It's hard to find guitars with tuning peg holes the right size for the banjo tuners so this guitar might just do the trick (after I've saved up enough of course haha)

Looking forward to the videos, and interested to hear how different your original songs would sound on this.

Marcus,

FYI, the Keith banjo D-tuners fit a 3/8" hole (0.375").
Most modern sealed guitar tuners require a 10mm hole (0.394") which is a mere .019" larger diameter (.0095" all the way around). So, any guitar with Gotoh/Schaller/Grover etc. type tuners will accept the Keith D-tuners with no modifications.
If the fit is sloppy in the hole, you can carefully wrap some tape around the shaft of the tuner to fatten it up until it's a snug fit.

Guitars with Waverly or other open-back tuners are a different story, and would require that the headpiece be drilled out larger. As evern it's up to each player to decide if this is the right choice for their situation.
I wouldn't necessarily do it on a '37 D-28.
However, IIRC I think Clarence White's guitar had a D-tuner mounted at some point before it became Tony Rice's guitar (his Teles all had them), so who's to say what should or shouldn't be done?

Cheers,
Martin

[Marcus Wong]

Hey Martin! Thank you for that bit of information. I'm assuming you're taking over the locking banjo tuners now? I own the Schaller ones but they don't work too well, and they're thicker than the Keith ones I believe haha I'll definitely have to take a look at Keith ones again then, thanks!

Originally Posted by Martin Keith

Marcus,

FYI, the Keith banjo D-tuners fit a 3/8" hole (0.375").
Most modern sealed guitar tuners require a 10mm hole (0.394") which is a mere .019" larger diameter (.0095" all the way around). So, any guitar with Gotoh/Schaller/Grover etc. type tuners will accept the Keith D-tuners with no modifications.
If the fit is sloppy in the hole, you can carefully wrap some tape around the shaft of the tuner to fatten it up until it's a snug fit.

Guitars with Waverly or other open-back tuners are a different story, and would require that the headpiece be drilled out larger. As evern it's up to each player to decide if this is the right choice for their situation.
I wouldn't necessarily do it on a '37 D-28.
However, IIRC I think Clarence White's guitar had a D-tuner mounted at some point before it became Tony Rice's guitar (his Teles all had them), so who's to say what should or shouldn't be done?

Cheers,
Martin