Quote:
Originally Posted by WmHulme
It seems like maybe the reason you’ve experienced acoustic archtops being easy to play could be the same reason they sound bad to you—the wrong strings. For an acoustic archtop to sound good, you should be using medium gauge PB strings, or monel. They are simply not going to sound that good acoustic with electric guitar strings.
|
That also seems to be the case with at least some flat top acoustic guitars. Those that are lightly built seem to respond better with lighter strings. In the case of my Huss & Dalton 00, there is a sticker inside that states to always use light gauge strings to avoid damage to the guitar. On the other hand McPherson guitars seem to fare better with medium gauge strings, presumably because they are heavier built.
With regard to archtops, aren't they similar to violins, violas, and cellos? If so, then it seems that if a builder takes the time and care in the building process, the instrument can be made to respond with other than heavier strings. This would certainly justify the high cost of the better instruments. My Gibson Citation is just such a guitar, and it sounds quite good with the strings that were on it when I purchased it. These were .012 gauge on the high E string and .052 on the low E string. I can even feel the guitar vibrating against my body.
But, then, this is not your typical archtop. It is quite expensive, and in any other circumstances than what I was in at that specific moment, I would never own anything close to that. It seems to me that its cost has more to do with how it was built than that somebody famous played this model or that it caters to collectors as a "vintage" guitar. I just don't see that a solid body guitar such as a Telecaster or Les Paul will benefit from the care taken to build the Citation or other similar (or better) archtop or a flat top guitar in which its acoustic properties benefit from such care in building. I bought it because I was absolutely blown away by how it played and sounded, and it had light gauge strings on it. I didn't know what the gauge was when I first played it, but knew that it "played like butter" and sounded great. I had never played any guitar that had that utter smoothness and sound. As the subject of this thread says, it alone had "the sound" that I heard in my head for an archtop.
I don't doubt that my Citation would sound even better (make that MUCH better) with medium gauge strings as you say. However, it certainly sounds fine even with light gauge strings, which makes it that much more attractive to me personally.
In googling around about these high end Gibson guitars, I found only one that was apparently more expensive than the Citation. This is the Super 4000 Chet Atkins model. That model was apparently built specifically as a collector's item with only about 20 or so ever built. It would be interesting to compare that to the Citation in terms of sound and playability. Would it honestly out perform the Citation or is it in the same league but more expensive due to only a few ever built?
Steve DeRosa frequently mentions some other brands of archtops as being exquisite models, so clearly the Citation is but one of many. He mentions Stromberg and D'Angelico, for example. Some fine players have owned these, based on what I have read. I would guess that, at least today, these would sell for much more than my Citation because in addition to their apparent exquisite quality, they are now also "vintage" collectibles and quite rare. It would be interesting to know if these sound good acoustically with light gauge strings on them. I suspect they would, even if they would sound much better with medium or heavy gauge strings.
In general, I would agree with your assessment, so all I am pointing out is that there are some possible exceptions. I can't imagine comparing my Citation to, say, the Ibanez AF95FM that I owned for a while. In my experience, these Ibanez guitars are an incredible value. But they are not the same as a high end archtop that is built without regard to production quotas and by very highly skilled luthiers.
Edit: My line of thinking on this also begs the question... I also have an Eastman FV-880CE-SB. If I read correctly (and I could be wrong), this is one of their most expensive archtops. I bought it before I even knew about the Citation. It is a fine guitar, but it simply doesn't compare to the Citation that just oozes class. From what I read about the Eastman archtops, the solid wood models have hand carved tops and are built with care by craftsman. I have no reason to doubt this. However, other than price, what accounts for the difference in quality? The Eastman is certainly a quality guitar, so I am not intending to knock it or say anything negative about it. However, to me there is a clear difference in the overall fit and finish and just overall quality between it and the Citation. That said, if I had not encountered the Citation, I would still be perfectly happy with the Eastman and have every intention of keeping it.
Tony
Tony