Anyone own or have hands on with Yamaha LL36 or LS36?

[Dbone]

Originally Posted by darylcrisp

the LL shape, is it quite similar to a dreadnaught(Martin/Collings)?
it appears to have a deeper cut waist, so would sit more like a Jumbo style guitar I'm thinking?

The LL shape appears to have deeper bass/tone vs the LS shape(which makes total sense).

Anyone with the LL shape and you've played the LS shape, care to comment?

And the LL26 sounds quite nice in the videos I've listened too. Comments on these models also if you own one/played one.
And I wonder if the only difference in the 26 vs 36 is ornamentation, possible "prettier wood". Nitro finish is on the 36 and up, I need to check to see if 26 has UV cured poly or nitro.

thanks
d

26 is definitely not nitro,..just says gloss on Yamaha website...whatever that means...

36 is higher grade wood selections, more bling, higher quality tuning machines (Gotoh), closed tuning machines vs open on 26 (less maintenance)

I believe that’s it?

[Boneyard75]

I was disappointed with this model....
Overbuilt, in my opinion...the bracing is just plain too heavy to let this model ring....
Boneyard

[Boneyard75]

I owned an LL26....

Originally Posted by Boneyard75

I was disappointed with this model....
Overbuilt, in my opinion...the bracing is just plain too heavy to let this model ring....
Boneyard

[Dbone]

Originally Posted by Boneyard75

I was disappointed with this model....
Overbuilt, in my opinion...the bracing is just plain too heavy to let this model ring....
Boneyard

Interesting...First I’ve ever heard that...most talk about how lightly built they are...

[mcduffnw]

Originally Posted by Dbone

Interesting...First I’ve ever heard that...most talk about how lightly built they are...

Well, the Yamaha's are not as lightly built as the vintage Martin replica guitars out there...both Martin's and other makers, so if someone is comparing the Yamaha's to that style of guitar, then no the Yamaha's are not as light.

I would say the Yamaha's are a medium weight guitar. Yamaha is going for a more modern voicing/tone, and they do that in part by making a stiffer soundbox...top, sides, back...plust their L or C block neck block is a much more substantial assembly that a standard Martin neck block. amd that all add's weight. The Yamaha's are not heavy like vintage Westerly Guilds...per se'...but they do have some weight to them, in keeping with their design objectives of tone and structural stability over time.

Also, Yamaha's top bracing is thin...but taller than Martin's top bracing, and is also tall and thin on the backs...again, a design style they have used for a long time now in keeping with their tonal objectives.

The LL body shape is Yamaha's version of the dreadnaught body shape. They make a traditional Martin/Gibson dreadnaught shape, but the L/LL body shape...which actually debuted for Yamaha back in the late 60's/early 70's on a series of Japan market only FG models, the FG-500, FG-580, FG-600, FG-700, FG-1000, FG-1200...is Yamaha's "take" on the dreadnaught, amended to their design and tonal goals. Personally, it is my favorite dreadnaught body shape and is super comfortable to hold and play...and to me...looks fantastic.

duff
Be A Player...Not A Polisher

[Dbone]

Originally Posted by mcduffnw

Well, the Yamaha's are not as lightly built as the vintage Martin replica guitars out there...both Martin's and other makers, so if someone is comparing the Yamaha's to that style of guitar, then no the Yamaha's are not as light.

I would say the Yamaha's are a medium weight guitar. Yamaha is going for a more modern voicing/tone, and they do that in part by making a stiffer soundbox...top, sides, back...plust their L or C block neck block is a much more substantial assembly that a standard Martin neck block. amd that all add's weight. The Yamaha's are not heavy like vintage Westerly Guilds...per se'...but they do have some weight to them, in keeping with their design objectives of tone and structural stability over time.

Also, Yamaha's top bracing is thin...but taller than Martin's top bracing, and is also tall and thin on the backs...again, a design style they have used for a long time now in keeping with their tonal objectives.

The LL body shape is Yamaha's version of the dreadnaught body shape. They make a traditional Martin/Gibson dreadnaught shape, but the L/LL body shape...which actually debuted for Yamaha back in the late 60's/early 70's on a series of Japan market only FG models, the FG-500, FG-580, FG-600, FG-700, FG-1000, FG-1200...is Yamaha's "take" on the dreadnaught, amended to their design and tonal goals. Personally, it is my favorite dreadnaught body shape and is super comfortable to hold and play...and to me...looks fantastic.

duff
Be A Player...Not A Polisher

26 and above is more lightly built than anything below in the Yamaha range at least.

I wonder if the 56/86 is more lightly built than the 26/36?

I was told by the Yamaha Canada guy that, in his view, there is a noticeable difference between the 56 and lower. He did not really say specifically what that would be attributed to.

One would hope that 1500 CND dollars extra for the 56 gets you something noticeable besides more bling, better tuning machines again, and higher quality woods.

It is frustrating that it is so hard to compare these things in the flesh...you’re really placing your faith in Yamahas and the somewhat limited info that’s out there about them.

Had I not seen a 56 in person to have a direct sense of what my money is getting me I think I would have found it hard to pull the trigger on one.

[mcduffnw]

Originally Posted by Dbone

26 and above is more lightly built than anything below in the Yamaha range at least.

I wonder if the 56/86 is more lightly built than the 26/36?

I was told by the Yamaha Canada guy that, in his view, there is a noticeable difference between the 56 and lower. He did not really say specifically what that would be attributed to.

One would hope that 1500 CND dollars extra for the 56 gets you something noticeable besides more bling, better tuning machines again, and higher quality woods.

It is frustrating that it is so hard to compare these things in the flesh...you’re really placing your faith in Yamahas and the somewhat limited info that’s out there about them.

Had I not seen a 56 in person to have a direct sense of what my money is getting me I think I would have found it hard to pull the trigger on one.

I don't think the LL series are more lightly build than the FG series...like the FG or FS low end acoustics.

Yamaha was not going for light vintage Martin build style on the L/LL models, they were not going for vintage Martin voicing. They were also seeking to avoid the wear and tear, and repair issues that come from ultra light vintage build style...so put all that together and Yamaha clearly had a vision for what they wanted visually, tonally, and structural intergrity wise out of the original FG, L, and now LL, LS, and LJ body design.

And remember, this total "vision" of this model line was based on appealing to what the Japanese market wanted/wants...NOT...what the US market wants. That is why you see so very very few over here in the US or Canada, Yamaha can basically sell all that they can make over in the Asian markets, especially Japan, so they just do not feel the sense of urgency to push the production numbers and bring them strongly into the North American market.

It is a real shame for us here in the US and Canada, because these are really remarkable and superb guitars, and Yamaha would do very well with them.

They just don't really care, nor do they need to. They sell all that they can make, and they seem perfectly satisfied with what they are doing.

It just sucks for us, cuz we are mostly missing out on really great guitars.

duff
Be A Player...Not A Polisher

[Birchtop]

Originally Posted by Dbone

I think they run all the way through like before, but they are simply covered over with a nice veneer now on the back of the headstock.

Was there any particular reason why you parted ways with your 26?

Curious, now that you have your sweet LL56, can you show a pic of the end of the headstock? I would like to know if the five ply laminations run through the headstock like they do on the older ones.

[EDIT]. I was able to find pics that show the top of the headstock along with the neck heal, and the 5ply does not run through those areas as they do on the earlier runs (hence the added veneer back). Thanks though!

[Dbone]

Originally Posted by Birchtop

Curious, now that you have your sweet LL56, can you show a pic of the end of the headstock? I would like to know if the five ply laminations run through the headstock like they do on the older ones.

[EDIT]. I was able to find pics that show the top of the headstock along with the neck heal, and the 5ply does not run through those areas as they do on the earlier runs (hence the added veneer back). Thanks though!

I personally have the sense that it does run underneath the veneer...Not right to the top of the headstock though...Take a look here:

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/det...-jumbo-natural

I’ll have to look closer at mine, but this is what I always thought/assumed.