What Can't I Do With a Hollow Vs. Semi?

[Halowords]

I'm just toying around with ideas at the moment. However, I'm interested tonally and playing-wise what you can do with a fully hollow Archtop that you can't with a semi, or vice-versa.

 

At some point I'd like a nice hollowbody archtop for a primarily (if not entirely) acoustic guitar. On the one hand, I have two semi-hollows so I'm a bit tempted to trade one in for an Eagle Classic. On the other hand, I tend to (or like to be) a black hole for good guitars where once they enter my grasp they nary leave. I also happen to really like them both, so I'm torn since they're kinda redundant yet .

 

Unplugged acoustics aside, I'd be open to thoughts on weighing the pro's & con's of a thick-stringed semi-hollow as a Jazz and kinda-acoustic-y-when-plugged-in/putz-with-unplugged-around-the-house sorta guitar versus a full hollow. At lower practice volumes, I'd also wonder if there is much of anything I couldn't wing with a full-hollow archtop w/ floating pickup that a semi-hollow could?

 

Anyway, I intellectually understand the differences, but I'd still appreciate any words of wisdom that would help me decide whether to trade one of my semi's in or just wait for a while and save up enough money (not to mention spousal good-will from my penny-pinching wife) for another guitar. If anybody feels like being a sounding board for my internal debate, feel free. Either because of somethings I might have missed, or even just to help me solidify my thoughts.

[ingeneri]

Well obviously a semi just won't have the same volume or acoustic tone unplugged. So, it's hard to see how a semi would work for what you described in your other thread.

 

Lots of jazzers use semis these days, and they're probably even more popular than big boxes for the modern stuff (KR, Scofield, MMW, even Martino is back on a solid body Benedetto). But, personally, I find the sustain a pain in the ass for fast bop lines. It certainly doesn't get in Martino's way, but I find all the notes in my longer phrases start to bleed into one another without pretty conscious muting. That's the big reason I swatched from the Groovemaster to a 575, I missed that arcthop plunk.

 

Semis also suck for Freddie Green comping. But, even thinlines don't really cut it for that. Legato chord melodies would be ok, but I imagine they wouldn't work for something like a Barney Kessel chord solo that's more evisceral.

[jazzrat]

You will have to work the feedback issue with a fully hollow but I regularly

play my 575 in rock settings with a full band. It sounds amazing and the feedback is

totally manageable. Now a spruce top with a floater....that's pretty much gonna be

a small room, moderate volume guitar.

my .02 anyway

[smurph1]

Here's what i would probably do..(I said probably) Decide which of the two semis I liked more, (difficult I know) and then sell the other one to get the archtop I wanted..that way, I could stay in the good graces of my little lady, and still have that Archtop I was lusting after..As always, I'm a Hillbilly, and YMMV..

[unikh550]

Hollows can do anything except high squealy rock and blues notes that sustain. Putting foam in the f-holes will correct some of that deficiency, but diminish the true strengths of hollows.Having one of each, as one of my friends does, is ideal.

I'm just toying around with ideas at the moment. However, I'm interested tonally and playing-wise what you can do with a fully hollow Archtop that you can't with a semi, or vice-versa.

 

At some point I'd like a nice hollowbody archtop for a primarily (if not entirely) acoustic guitar. On the one hand, I have two semi-hollows so I'm a bit tempted to trade one in for an Eagle Classic. On the other hand, I tend to (or like to be) a black hole for good guitars where once they enter my grasp they nary leave. I also happen to really like them both, so I'm torn since they're kinda redundant yet .

 

Unplugged acoustics aside, I'd be open to thoughts on weighing the pro's & con's of a thick-stringed semi-hollow as a Jazz and kinda-acoustic-y-when-plugged-in/putz-with-unplugged-around-the-house sorta guitar versus a full hollow. At lower practice volumes, I'd also wonder if there is much of anything I couldn't wing with a full-hollow archtop w/ floating pickup that a semi-hollow could?

 

Anyway, I intellectually understand the differences, but I'd still appreciate any words of wisdom that would help me decide whether to trade one of my semi's in or just wait for a while and save up enough money (not to mention spousal good-will from my penny-pinching wife) for another guitar. If anybody feels like being a sounding board for my internal debate, feel free. Either because of somethings I might have missed, or even just to help me solidify my thoughts.

[byrdland]

Hollows can do anything except high squealy rock and blues notes that sustain. Putting foam in the f-holes will correct some of that deficiency, but diminish the true strengths of hollows.Having one of each, as one of my friends does, is ideal.

 

 

A good quality CARVED SPRUCE TOP archtop will take you and your playing places you wouldn't have dreamed of with a semi-hollow guitar. I believe that should be a primary consideration when looking for a "special" guitar. The insrument is simply more alive. The absence of pickups routed into the top will allow the top to respond to you in ways that won't happen with a semi-hollow. I have a 1968 Gibson Byrdland with a one piece carved spruce top and one piece maple back. It has two humbuckers stuck in the top and it istill is a much more lively instrument than a semi- hollow with a block in it or any laminated top guitar. It is a joy to play. I play in a fairly loud dance band using a 100 watt tube head and one 12" speaker in an open back cabinet. I can play pretty darn loud with the Byrdland. It will feedback if I have it cranked pretty good and the overdrive is on, but not to a degee I can't control it. I actually like it when the old girl "makes her presence known". She sounds beautiful. I've been on the bandstand and let her go for a minute for fun, and simply muted the strings with my hand to clam her down. Stage position in relation to the cabinet has a significant effect as well. Carved top instruments require more care, but are well worth it.

 

I also have a Heritage Sweet 16 that I've used with the same amp and band with no problems with volume or feedback. In both cases, the guitar cabinet is miked, so I'm not trying to be heard 2 miles away. I wouldn't use the Sweet 16 on overdriven material of course. The Sweet 16 is much louder acoustically than the Byrdland. It has a deeper body, and has no pickups routed in the top. It also has heavier gauge strings. I have a Bartolini floating pickup;

 

Really nice archtops are different ladies than other guitars. They don't reveal all their secrets at first pluck. Archtop.com has a 1990's Dana Bourgeois A-500 for just under $5,000. It sold for about that new. It's worth every penny. I remember the sound of one note played on one of those instruments from 15 years ago. It sound that good. I am unaware of any archtops that come close to that sort of quality for less money, except in the Heritage archtops. I've played $20,000 Strombergs. They're great for playing rythmn and cutting through the mix in a big band. That's what they were made for. I prefer my Sweet 16. The gentleman named Patrick that uses this forum is obviously an archtop lover. He knows what he's talking about.

 

Try to find and play a really nice solid spruce top archtop that is set up well with round wound strings and spend some time with it. If that's what you really want, I doubt if you will find a better "real archtop" for less money than a Heritage. $2500 to $3000 for a Golden Eagle in good shape is a deal.

[Halowords]

A good quality CARVED SPRUCE TOP archtop will take you and your playing places you wouldn't have dreamed of with a semi-hollow guitar.

 

[snip]

 

Try to find and play a really nice solid spruce top archtop that is set up well with round wound strings and spend some time with it. If that's what you really want, I doubt if you will find a better "real archtop" for less money than a Heritage. $2500 to $3000 for a Golden Eagle in good shape is a deal.

 

Yeah, I definitely want one eventually. Just trying to convince myself one way or another as far as if I want to take smurph1's advice and try to trade a nice semi-hollow that I really like for a nice carved spruce top archtop that I'd also really like. My thing is I really want a nice acoustic and think I'd get a bit more out of a full-on spruce top Jazzbox without any center block or pickup holes. We'll see.

[iim7v7im7]

Well here is my %$.02...

 

I own both an H-535 and a Sweet 16.

 

With the H-535, I play mostly blues and some classic rock tunes now and then. I have it set up with D'Addario 0.010s and Lollar Imperials. It has a rosewood -scale neck and is very easy to bend strings, use hammer-ons, pull-offs and other techniques associated with this genre of music. I play this instrument with tube amps in a clean to overdriven tone.

 

I use my Sweet 16 to primarilly play solo jazz chord melody arrangements of standards. It is set up with Thomastik Infeld Swing 0.013s and have an HRW 4-point mounted HB. It has an ebony long-scaled neck and the heavy strings offer slap and resistance which I enjoy. I use this with a solid state amp which offers clarity, tight bass and immediacy which I look for when playing chords and single line stuff. I may be in the minority here, but my Sweet 16 came with an HRW floating pick-up. I found it to be somewhat lacking in richness plugged in. This is why I made the difficult decision to have my top routed and install a full sized humbucker on a 4-point mount. The improvement in tome plugged in was like night and day frankly. I also found that the impactunplugged was neglegible due to the x-bracing and the PU mounting scheme.

 

I set it up with heavier strings and play straight-ahead jazz?

 

Sure I could, but it won't feel like my archtop and won't sound exactly like the archtop but it would be perfectly appropriate for jazz. Hell, Ed Bickert has played jazz on a Tele for years and he sounds great. There is a richness to the tone and difference in feel likely due scale length, scale material, pick-up and some instrument acoustics. The most important aspect is somewhat psychological. I feel more like jazz when I play my archtop and how you "feel" matters when making music. The opposite is true with my semi-hollow body. I feel bluesy. Don't underestimate this aspect.

 

What can the semi-hollow do that the archtop can't? Well that;s easy, higher volume, overdriven playing. The Sweet 16 is quite suseptable to feedback and is a subtle, speacialized, refined animal. The H-535 is a versatile race horse that can do almost any style of music.

 

You said you have two semi-hollows, if you want to get that extra 10% of a certain type of jazz goodness (at least to me) diversify and buy an carved top archtop. Just realize that it is a speciality instrument designed for a genre of music ( I know that many rock and blues artists play archtops, but they are usually laminated to be able to handle the volume).

 

Good Luck,

 

 

 

I'm just toying around with ideas at the moment. However, I'm interested tonally and playing-wise what you can do with a fully hollow Archtop that you can't with a semi, or vice-versa.

 

At some point I'd like a nice hollowbody archtop for a primarily (if not entirely) acoustic guitar. On the one hand, I have two semi-hollows so I'm a bit tempted to trade one in for an Eagle Classic. On the other hand, I tend to (or like to be) a black hole for good guitars where once they enter my grasp they nary leave. I also happen to really like them both, so I'm torn since they're kinda redundant yet .

 

Unplugged acoustics aside, I'd be open to thoughts on weighing the pro's & con's of a thick-stringed semi-hollow as a Jazz and kinda-acoustic-y-when-plugged-in/putz-with-unplugged-around-the-house sorta guitar versus a full hollow. At lower practice volumes, I'd also wonder if there is much of anything I couldn't wing with a full-hollow archtop w/ floating pickup that a semi-hollow could?

 

Anyway, I intellectually understand the differences, but I'd still appreciate any words of wisdom that would help me decide whether to trade one of my semi's in or just wait for a while and save up enough money (not to mention spousal good-will from my penny-pinching wife) for another guitar. If anybody feels like being a sounding board for my internal debate, feel free. Either because of somethings I might have missed, or even just to help me solidify my thoughts.

[Halowords]

Well here is my %$.02...

 

[snip]

 

The most important aspect is somewhat psychological. I feel more like jazz when I play my archtop and how you "feel" matters when making music. The opposite is true with my semi-hollow body. I feel bluesy. Don't underestimate this aspect.

 

That is, I think, the ultimate reason I will eventually get a fully hollow archtop acoustic (w/ or w/o pickup, preferably floating though). One thing I noticed on my cheap Yamaha acoustic flattop is that I tend to write or come up with the most heartfelt music. I just feel contemplative or something with an acoustic, or even just playing unplugged or for that matter really stripped-down. It's most notice it more when I just pick up a full acoustic.

 

You said you have two semi-hollows, if you want to get that extra 10% of a certain type of jazz goodness (at least to me) diversify and buy an carved top archtop. Just realize that it is a speciality instrument designed for a genre of music ( I know that many rock and blues artists play archtops, but they are usually laminated to be able to handle the volume).

 

Good Luck,

 

Yeah, I'm not worried about the feedback a/o volume with this. I've got an H-150, "Blues Deluxe" designated Prospect Custom, and H-535 so if I traded in or sold one of the semi's for an archtop, I'd be covered with the H-150 and remaining semi w/ a full center block. It's mainly just for the experience of playing one and I think in a band or songwriting setting, it would bring out the best in me as a starting point. Even rock stuff, I think I might actually be better a lot of times starting with an acoustic for ideas and translating it to an electric.

 

Again, that psychological aspect again. I do think there is something to that.

[iim7v7im7]

I know that this is anathema when we are spruce talking carved top archtops, but think hard about a floating pick-up vs. a full sized HRW on a 4-point mount.

 

I purchased my Sweet 16 10 years ago with a Heritage Floating HRW PU. I found the plugged in sound to be rather lacking (being kind) compared to my friends L-5. In 2007, I consulted Jason Lollar who was developing his Johnny Smith PU at the time and he advised me that there was just a physics limitation in floaters (size, height adjustability) vs. full sized sound board mounted humbuckers. I also considered a Kent Armstrong who is considered a good floating PU maker. I also reached out to Vince Lewis and Henry Johnson, both who were very generous with their time and told me about going to a full sized HB (HRW) on Rens's 4-point mount system. Both of them raved about the improvement over a floater. I was as you can imagine, quite nervous about routing a solid toped archtop.

 

Well, I did the deed 3 years ago, and I cannot begin to describe how much better the instrument sounds plugged in. Nothing sounds like a full sized HB and the extra ability to adjust hight beneath the strings makes all of the difference. I am now totally knocked out how the instrument sounds. Rich, balanced, uniform volume across the strings and wonderful subtilty in reproducing right hand dynamics. What surprised me was that it did not perceivably degrade the acoustic sound of the instrument. My Sweet 16 is X-braced and the pick-up ring only touches at 4-3/16" washers. The PU ring is raised above the sound board. The routed hole behing the PU actually emminates sound when playing unplugged. I think by reducing the dampening contact area, Ren has created the best of both worlds.

 

Some will disagree, but this was my experience and I wanted to share it.

 

Food for Thought...

 

 

That is, I think, the ultimate reason I will eventually get a fully hollow archtop acoustic (w/ or w/o pickup, preferably floating though). One thing I noticed on my cheap Yamaha acoustic flattop is that I tend to write or come up with the most heartfelt music. I just feel contemplative or something with an acoustic, or even just playing unplugged or for that matter really stripped-down. It's most notice it more when I just pick up a full acoustic.

 

 

 

Yeah, I'm not worried about the feedback a/o volume with this. I've got an H-150, "Blues Deluxe" designated Prospect Custom, and H-535 so if I traded in or sold one of the semi's for an archtop, I'd be covered with the H-150 and remaining semi w/ a full center block. It's mainly just for the experience of playing one and I think in a band or songwriting setting, it would bring out the best in me as a starting point. Even rock stuff, I think I might actually be better a lot of times starting with an acoustic for ideas and translating it to an electric.

 

Again, that psychological aspect again. I do think there is something to that.

[tbonesullivan]

If you are playing at a rowdy club, you will DEFINITELY want a solid body, as you can bash a few heads with it and not suffer any serious damage to the body. With a semi , you'd definitely damage the guitar.

[Halowords]

Comfort questions; First, do you find the larger size is something you easily adjust to? Second, would it be more comfortable standing up? My Yamaha acoustic is 16" wide and I don't have much problems with it, however after playing for a while the top edge of the guitar cuts into my elbow joint. I'd prefer to go w/ a 17" Eagle Classic, but want to be realistic if I'm likely to have problems. Meanwhile I'll try to find a full-sized 17"W X 3"D guitar to try out at ye olde music store.

 

Tonally, if I were to have to drop down in size, how comparable sound-wise are the Sweet 16 and Eagle? I'd rather not and stay with an Eagle, but figure it's worth asking first.

[byrdland]

Comfort questions; First, do you find the larger size is something you easily adjust to? Second, would it be more comfortable standing up? My Yamaha acoustic is 16" wide and I don't have much problems with it, however after playing for a while the top edge of the guitar cuts into my elbow joint. I'd prefer to go w/ a 17" Eagle Classic, but want to be realistic if I'm likely to have problems. Meanwhile I'll try to find a full-sized 17"W X 3"D guitar to try out at ye olde music store.

 

Tonally, if I were to have to drop down in size, how comparable sound-wise are the Sweet 16 and Eagle? I'd rather not and stay with an Eagle, but figure it's worth asking first.

 

If I'm not mistaken, and "Eagle Classic" is a hollow body electric with two humbuckers, probably with parallel bracing. An Eagle, Golden Eagle and Sweet 16 are acoustic instruments with X bracing, and can have floating or mounted pickups. If you want an "acoustic" guitar, the X braced tops are supposed to be louder acoustically. I would assume that a 17 or 18" body would be louder than a 16" body, with a little more bass response. The only way you can answer your quesion is to try out these various size and type of instruments and decide for yourself which one is the best for you. Everyone is different. The Sweet 16 suits me fine. Amplified, it has plenty of bass response for me. Most of the time, I run it through an amp.

[111518]

If I'm not mistaken, and "Eagle Classic" is a hollow body electric with two humbuckers, probably with parallel bracing. An Eagle, Golden Eagle and Sweet 16 are acoustic instruments with X bracing, and can have floating or mounted pickups. If you want an "acoustic" guitar, the X braced tops are supposed to be louder acoustically. I would assume that a 17 or 18" body would be louder than a 16" body, with a little more bass response. The only way you can answer your quesion is to try out these various size and type of instruments and decide for yourself which one is the best for you. Everyone is different. The Sweet 16 suits me fine. Amplified, it has plenty of bass response for me. Most of the time, I run it through an amp.

 

Just a note ... Since so many Heritage guitars are either player or dealer custom orders, it is almost impossible to generalize about the specs that you will find, esp. if you are scouting used guitars. My Eagle Classic, which originally was sold by Wolfe, though I don't know whether he spec'd it or the customer, is X-braced with a floater --so, it is really like a more simply (I'd say "elegantly," but then that's my bias) appointed Golden Eagle rather than the 2-bucker, parallel based version of the Classic. Another thing to consider is that all Heritage archtops tend to be enough thinner than comparable Gibsons that they have a significantly different feel. I'm 5'7", don't have long arms, and a 17", full depth Gibson just puts me in an uncomfortable playing position, sitting or standing --so, as much as I love some of the Gibson 17" guitars, I have to think thinline or 16". (Why I finally parted with the Super 400 I owned for years. It was so nice to look at, but at 18" I really couldn't play the thing, and I finally decided I'd rather have a guitar than a statue.) With Heritage, I CAN play a 17" guitar --there's that much difference. (For me.)

 

Lots of good advice on this thread --I esp. agree that setup and psychology are crucial-- so just one more note. Like so much of guitar tone, I think your question really comes down to a basic trade off. There is an inherent connection between acoustic volume and richness and a guitar's tendency to feed back. If it resonates unplugged, its gonna resonate plugged. So, any guitar that yields a rich, satisfying acoustic sound is going to be prone to feedback --doesn't mean it can't be controlled, just means its going to want to resonate. So, you just have to decide what spot on the spectrum --between a guitar set up for max. acoustic sound (solid wood, light construction and bracing) and the different requirements of a guitar intended to be played amplified at high volume (laminate, block, solid)-- best fits your needs. I own bunches of guitars, but if I could only own one, it would be some variety of semi. You don't have to plug them in to practice, or worry about the acoustic volume keeping up the wife, and I can take one to a gig and be pretty well assured I can get in the ballpark of the volume and tone I'll need, whatever the room, while still feeling the guitar itself resonate when I play.

[111518]

With your two beautiful new semi's, maybe this point is moot, but I did notice while looking through my most recent Vintage Guitar that Lark Street Music had an Eagle Classic with a floater (a bart. actually, which I'd like to try on mine), which probably means that it is X-braced, listed at $2,400.00. I checked out the pictures and it is a stunning guitar, in an simple, elegant way, at least to my eyes, with blocks, amber-ish sunburst, and seems to me a good price, esp. since you would be buying from a dealer with a very good reputation in the vintage world rather than the wild west of ebay. (Buzzy Levine, owner of Lark Street).

 

If I didn't already have a fairly similar guitar, and if I had disposable income, this one would have me itching. Sort of has me itching anyway...

 

http://www.larkstreet.com/list/pict/HeritageEagle.1946.jpg

[Halowords]

With your two beautiful new semi's, maybe this point is moot, but I did notice while looking through my most recent Vintage Guitar that Lark Street Music had an Eagle Classic with a floater (a bart. actually, which I'd like to try on mine), which probably means that it is X-braced, listed at $2,400.00. I checked out the pictures and it is a stunning guitar, in an simple, elegant way, at least to my eyes, with blocks, amber-ish sunburst, and seems to me a good price, esp. since you would be buying from a dealer with a very good reputation in the vintage world rather than the wild west of ebay. (Buzzy Levine, owner of Lark Street).

 

If I didn't already have a fairly similar guitar, and if I had disposable income, this one would have me itching. Sort of has me itching anyway...

 

http://www.larkstreet.com/list/pict/HeritageEagle.1946.jpg

 

I think that might be a bit out of reach at this point. If I lived in the vicinity I'd probably be able to make a partial trade for it. At this point, it's financially not feasible.

 

That said, thanks for the link to the pics. That is exactly the type of finish I'd love on an archtop, and I love everything about that. I love the finish, love the simplicity of the block inlays and chrome or nickel (not gold) hardware, the way the colors fade into each other on the back, the single-layer binding (sets off the neck & headstock and seems elaborate enough to be aesthetically pleasing and simple enough to seem utilitarian rather than show-offish). THAT is the kind of guitar I'd love, and some day I think I'll end up with something very, very close to that. Probably not quite yet though. But wow! That is sincerely one of the most amazingly beautiful guitars that really gels with my tastes exactly that I have ever seen.