Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I think I might want to own one of these again someday, especially now that I have a flat top I really like for playing all over the neck. I had a 600 for a while, and it would have been great to set up as a rhythm box and just use it for that...but it sounded so good, I wanted to play all over the neck, and that's when the pretty hard V shaped neck started to bother me.
I really thought though that it was a great instrument, and unbeatable at the price.
|
I'm sure it is, and mine also came with a beautifully dense and homogenously black ebony fingerboard (I'm sure that makes a difference for the sound).
I've only avoided the LH600 (or 700) because of that neck and since the LH650 wasn't too hard to find. With the 6/700 I would have wanted to have the neck slimmed down by a luthier willing and capable to do that. For a more expensive guitar that's probably not something you'd want to do "out of the box" but esp. on a used Loar acquired for a nice price it's an option, IMHO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldFrets
Neither Loar model is a faithful recreation of any Gibson model, from any era. That's not a positive or negative, just a statement of fact.
|
So what are the differences according to you (the ones significant for the sound of the beast)? I know the Loar L5s had beech back and sides (and don't know if that was changed to maple before the model became a 17" and/or got x-bracing).