#1
|
|||
|
|||
Gibson L-7 vs. Epiphone Broadway or Triumph
Lately I've been seriously considering getting a vintage archtop and seem to be gravitating toward one of these three based on things I've read:
Gibson L-7 Epiphone Broadway Epiphone Triumph Unfortunately, it's a bit tricky to find examples of these in one place to compare the unplugged tone. I'm looking for a good crisp, dry bark for swing tunes in a trio context with fiddle and mandolin (no bass player). I'm leaning toward something in the 17" range for the lower bout and am probably looking at something made between the mid thirties and the mid fifties. I'd be really interested in your oppinions on how these compare from an unplugged tone perspective. Many thanks!
__________________
Steve |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Hi Mellowman, I have examples of a few of these and have played others, though I don't own an L-7. I do have a 40s Broadway, a 30s Broadway, a 40s Triumph and a 50s carved-top L-50, which of course is a 16" archie. I suspect that any of your choices will give you a great example of the sound you're seeking (and I'd add evenness of volume over the strings and up and down the neck to your list, too!). One thing to bear in mind is that the L-7s will have "X" bracing rather than parallel bracing from about 1935 through 1939, with a somewhat warmer tone as a consequence. Epi Broadways from the same period will probably have black walnut backs and sides, with a tone that's a bit different than maple as a consequence. The necks are a bit different, too. I happen to like the Epi neck, but others like the Gibson neck equally well. Whatever you buy, check the condition carefully. It's easy to find a relatively inexpensive old archtop for sale, but many have shrunken binding, top or back or side cracks, plates separating from rims, loose braces, need a neck reset, have a sunken arch, worn frets, divots in the fingerboard...you get the idea. None of these things would necessarily deter me from purchasing a particular instrument if I liked its tone, but your budget and the price need to reflect reality. I'd certainly insist on at least a 48-hour inspection period, and I'd plan to have a good luthier look the instrument over during that period. Any of these models will be well worth your investment for repair, but expect to spend some money. Pay careful attention to the fit of the bridge to the top, too. Another thing is that, just like flat-tops, different examples of the same model sound different. Also, these Epi and Gibson models from this period will probably have Adirondack spruce tops, and may take a little playing to "wake up" if they've not been played regularly. If vintage seems like too much trouble or expense, you might give the Eastman 810s a look. They are full-depth acoustic archtops, have good acoustic sound and decent build quality at a pretty reasonable price, and will probably also deliver the sound you seek. http://www.archtop.com is a great place to do research, and Joe Vinikow a knowledgeable person to consult, in my opinion. I think you'd have a wonderful time with any of those choices. There's so much great music out there for them, and it's so much fun to play! Cheers, Mark McPherson |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
For your tonal purposes, I'd go with the Epiphones. My personal preference, too.
__________________
"Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest." --Paul Simon |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks guys. This is really great input!
__________________
Steve |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Steve --
A couple more thoughts: If you're trying one of these beasts out, be sure it's got medium strings or heavier (well, medium will be just fine) on it, as that's what they were designed and built to accept. Back in the day, they may actually have had much heavier strings installed, and they won't sound their best with light-gauge strings. Fresh strings make a difference, too. Also, don't discard the 16" archtops from your consideration. It's true that acoustic archtop builders progressively upsized body sizes during the jazz and swing eras, with 18" instruments like the Gibson Super 400 and the big Strombergs being exemplars. But that was in the days before amplification; thus the trend to larger bodies and heavier strings to hold down the rhythm in a big band setting. These days we have pickups and microphones to do the acoustic heavy lifting, and many people -- me included -- really like the 16"-bodied archtops for playing ease. The sound is just about the same as the larger-bodied instruments to my ear, maybe not quite as deep and not quite as loud, but a very authentic swing sound, very sweet, and maybe even better for lead work. The only problem is, in the vintage world, premium-quality archtops like the Broadway weren't made in the 16" size after roughly the late 1930s, so they tend to be a bit rarer than the L-7 and its 17" counterparts. But post-30s less-expensive 16" instruments like the L-50 can be very nice indeed, and a bargain in today's market -- but you have to know just what you're getting, since some of the less-expensive 16" models had pressed tops, not carved, or went back and forth in different model years. And Gibson made a *lot* of different inexpensive 16" archtop models, so you'll need to do your homework...as far as I know, all the 17" models you've mentioned had carved tops throughout their production -- discounting modern production, of course. The Eastmans have carved tops too. Finally, if you don't already have them, you might enjoy the three recordings by Steve Greene (I know they're available on Amazon); they feature acoustic archtops, played acoustically, and he's just a master of tone and taste on the acoustic archtop, IMO. Whew! Hope that's not too confusing. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than I am will correct my errors, too. Cheers, Mark McPherson |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
And one more thing: In any particular model year, I'm pretty sure that the Epi Triumph, Broadway, and Deluxe are all basically the same box, with the differences being in wood choice and decoration -- the more expensive models got fancier woods and more bling. They didn't necessarily sound better.
You might add the Epiphone Devon to your list, too, though they are less common. -- mcp |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I agree on the Epis - The line of carved top archtops they introduced in 1931 are fantastic guitars. If you are looking at a Broadway or Triumph, I would stick with those with the wider body which were came out in the mid-1930s (around 1936 or 1937). I would and find one made before 1948 when the build quality starts to drop.
If you are looking at a guitar made in the 1950s I would stick with the Gibsons.
__________________
"You start off playing guitars to get girls & end up talking with middle-aged men about your fingernails" - Ed Gerhard |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
If I had the money, I'd jump at the chance to own an Epiphone Broadway with the walnut back and sides (pre-1940, I think)!
__________________
********************* David M. Bishop Tucson, AZ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Boy the 30's and 40's Gibsons and Epis were the classic Archtop rivals constently trying to out do each other!! It would be fun to compare the same size and year guitars!! Like the Emporer and the Super 400. I almost pulled the trigger on a late 40's blonde L-7 a while back. I also had the pleasure to play a late 30's Style A D'Angelico which is really an amazing guitar!!!!!!!! I love archtop guitars but I don't play the styles of music enough to warrant owning a nice one. Maybe someday.
__________________
Crazy guitar nut in search of the best sounding guitars built today and yesterday. High End Guitar Review Videos. www.youtube.com/user/rockinb23 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I agree about comparing the old epis and Gibson's with similar specs. I'd be interested to know if there's a generalization that can be made regarding the tone of a 40's Gibson L-7 and a 40's Epi Triumph or Broadway. Sounds like some may feel the epis tend to be a bit crisper or brighter and the Gibson a little more smooth and round. That said, I know you gotta play the specific model because there's a fair amount of variation. Thanks again to all of your for the amazing comments!
__________________
Steve |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What you describe is my experience, too. It might be due to the listening position (because I've only heard Gibsons when other folks play them, while I've only heard my Epiphone from the playing position), but my Epiphone seem to have a little more "bark" to it's sound. It's not a bad thing...just different.
__________________
Martin J40 Alvarez Yairi FY-40 Yamaha FG180 Yamaha FG730S 1950 Epiphone Triumph |