laminated v solid back and sides

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by blakey

On both types the top will eventually stop moving, typically about 10 years or so as a generalisation.

Can you show us where you came by this generalization?

Originally Posted by blakey

The body and sides for an all wood guitar may take longer. So it's still a subtlety evolving sound. I guess eventually even the back and sides stop moving.

Why doesn't the same 10 year limit on the top not apply to the back and sides?

Originally Posted by blakey

Ask yourself why some old vintage Martins sell for tens of thousands of bucks because of their jaw-dropping tone.

It's more than just tone. It's also rarity.

Originally Posted by blakey

Can you give me any examples of a revered and priceless vintage laminate acoustic? Probably not because it's game over after about 10 years and the fishpaste and plywood back & sides of the rest contributes nothing tonally.

I don't know enough about every vintage maker that was producing guitars to give you a vintage example, but as someone has already pointed out, Michael Greenfield makes guitars with laminate back and sides. Why would people being willing to wait a year or more and pay $20k if laminate b/s was indicative of an inferior instrument?

Is this an inferior instrument?


I understand you have a personal preference, but you're attempting to back it up with a pseudo-science mashup of fact, generalization, and invention. You walked it back a bit in this last post but I think you're still troweling it on a bit thick.

[blakey]

There's definitely a new vanguard of laminate that I've been missing out on.

[AmericanEagle]

What is most important is a solid top.
That contributes the most to the sound of the guitar.
The back and sides less so.
All my acoustics are solid tops and laminated back and sides.
They all sound great.
Plus, they are more resistant to low humidity, which we have here in Mass
during the winter months.

[cuthbert]

Originally Posted by blakey

You don't see many pro players nurturing their favourite laminate over the years. The price difference isn't a great leap anymore either.

Mmm...

[blakey]

Originally Posted by cuthbert

Mmm...

2 is good. It's better than 1.

[alistairm]

Originally Posted by jim1960

Can you show us where you came by this generalization?



I don't know enough about every vintage maker that was producing guitars to give you a vintage example, but as someone has already pointed out, Michael Greenfield makes guitars with laminate back and sides. Why would people being willing to wait a year or more and pay $20k if laminate b/s was indicative of an inferior instrument?

So does Greg Smallman and John Williams does a pretty good job on one.

I have played a bunch of pretty ordinary solid back/sides guitars and a bunch of utterly exceptional laminate back/side guitars.

As a generalisation, more expensive guitars are usually solid, but like all generalisations in guitar land there are plenty of exceptions!

There is much more to the equation than the materials used.

That said, at home my favourite guitars are solid back/sides and BRW. For camping/travel, laminated Mahogany floats my boat.

Variety is the spice of life and this is definitely one hobby where trusting your own ear and your own hands to determine what you like to play is more important than the spec sheet.

That said, for environments where the guitar isn't going to be cherished like mine are at home (eg travel, uni, shared house, gigging) it's hard to go past the additional robustness that laminated designs can offer.

[cuthbert]

Originally Posted by blakey

2 is good. It's better than 1.

I can add other three:



Do you know who David Crosby is right? And anybody who played an arched back Guild or a vintage Yairi can explain to you why they are good guitars.

[jim1960]

Perhaps you could offer some actual proof of the assertions you've made regarding backs/sides and time.

[Kerbie]

The OP asked for thoughts, so we can all share those. Courtesy is required.

[lkingston]

Less feedback is another reason I like laminated backs and sides (or HPL) for performing live.

[Vergil]

Originally Posted by slooky

I only buy all solid guitars. I would never buy a laminate. Some guitar companies are making all solid for the same price as a plywood back and sides. Why would you go with laminate?

Why would you play gigs (especially open air) with an all solid wood guitar?

Why would you take an all solid wood guitar to a party?

I think laminates have their place. When I first tried out a Yamaha A1R, my jaw dropped to the floor and I had to take my phone out to double-check the specs because it sounded incredible, and that model features laminated (rosewood) back and sides. The dynamic response was fantastic, the guitar went effortlessly from quiet to as loud as I could strum, without choking out, and I could feel the back resonating.