[onewilyfool]

Some of you may have owned both or played both, can you share your thoughts about the sound, tone differences, etc? I've heard that the late 50's versions of these are pretty good examples. I hear the LG-1'sare exceptional for blues? Thanks, Wily

[Stubee]

Owned a '62 LG-1 with original wooden bridge, nice neck & still have a '53 LG-2. IME the X-braced models have a more pronounced bass, better volume, just a better sounding & more versatile guitar. My LG-2 is quite loud & is a great flatpicker with real 'cut' but also a good rhythm guitar. I take it to pretty loud jam situations & it holds it's own.

[tpbiii]

Apparently I'm some kind a Psychic who can predict what you want and do it in advance.

Let's pick,

-Tom

[QuestionMark]

I've compared LG2s and LG1s...LG2s are fuller, louder, sweeter.

Another interesting comparison is a LGO vs LG1, both ladder braced, but mahogony vs spruce top. I have a LG0 equivalent (a Gibson Kalamazoo plant 1965 FT-30 Epiphone Caballero) and a LG1. When I compare both...the LG0/Caballero has a much louder, concise sound with more attack than the LG1. Yet, the LGO/Caballero was the less expensive model. Note: My LG0/Caballero has a replacement wooden bridge. Can't remember how it actually sounded when it had its original plastic wooden bridge many moons go before one day part of it just broke off and needed replacing.

I left off LG3s in this on the premise they are equivalent to LG2s except for their natural finish.

I would put the pecking order of sound (from my experience)as LG2, LGO, LG1.

Course everyone hears things a bit different and each guitbox can be different.


QM aka Jazzman Jeff

[zombywoof]

It may just be a fig newton of my imagination but to me at least LG-2s made from 1957 on sound a bit more subdued than those made earlier.

I have owned a good sampling of LG-1s, 2s and one lone LG-3. I still own a script logo LG-2.

I have a strange take on them. It is not that they did anything terribly well but somehow sounded pretty good trying.

I am really not all that much of an LG-1 fan. I am not saying I would kick one out of bed but when it comes to small body ladder braced guitars there are more than a few that I have liked better although most were made in the 1930s - the Kalamazoo KG-14 among them. It is probably because these others were generally built lighter so had more volume and were more responsve.

The LG-2s and 3s fare better in my opinion (although I will always think there is nothing finer on the face of the planet than an old Gibson burst). One of the things that I really do like about the LG-2 is you still can get some of that percussive low end as you hear in the bigger box Gibsons. It is not as in your face but it is there. I sometimes think that it is that low end which more than any other trait is what has kept me with Gibsons all these decades.

[JuanCarlosVejar]

does anyone here own the Arlo Guthrie 3/4 LG 2 model ?







JC

[zombywoof]

tpbiii, on 23 February 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

Apparently I'm some kind a Psychic who can predict what you want and do it in advance.

Let's pick,

-Tom

For some reason I am I hearing "Michael Row the Boat Ashore" in my head when I look. at that pic.

I started out around the time that pic was taken but no Gibsons. I had a 1930s Martin archtop a friend of the family, knowing I wanted a guitar so bad it hurt, had sitting in a closet and gave to me for my birthday. I got my first Gibson a few years later - a 1930s L-00. I could not tell you what year it was made as such things were not important back then. I do recall the guitar had a big crack in it. Not knowing anything I drilled two small holes on either end of the crack figuring it would keep it from spreading and then slathered Elmer's glue in it.

[fortyearspickn]

My experience is with a '64 LG1. I think what makes it stand out (not 'above' or 'below' just different) from the x braced crowd, I assume including the LG2, is the fact that the ladder bracing doesn't give you as much 'sustain'. With some styles of the blues, you are not looking for a 15 second sustain, bell sounding chime. You are more wanting a chunka chunka, pile driving - with each note standing out on it's own and not blending in with the ones you played 15 seconds ago. The ladder bracing is the only difference compared to other round shoulder small bodied guitars and it makes the sound unique. I love the sound of my SJ200 and H'bird TV, but I can't say they are 'better' than my LG1, only different.

[62burst]

zombywoof, on 24 February 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

For some reason I am I hearing "Michael Row the Boat Ashore" in my head when I look. at that pic.

Good one. Yeah, that's a real time capsule photo. I was wondering what song guy behind Tom had on his lyrics sheet. Tom very smoothly serenading the young lass in front of him. Lotsa crumpled up cig packs. Anybody's guess what model camera took the pic. Not likely a cell phone.

zombywoof, on 24 February 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

Not knowing anything I drilled two small holes on either end of the crack figuring it would keep it from spreading and then slathered Elmer's glue in it.

Nice visual with the "slathering".

[zombywoof]

JuanCarlosVejar, on 24 February 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

does anyone here own the Arlo Guthrie 3/4 LG 2 model ?

JC

Don't know about the Arlo version but I got to spend some time with an original that was up for sale last year. I would have ranked that guitar among the worst sounding I had ever held in my hands. Just dull and lifeless.

[JAddison]

fortyearspickn, on 24 February 2013 - 09:58 PM, said:

My experience is with a '64 LG1. I think what makes it stand out (not 'above' or 'below' just different) from the x braced crowd, I assume including the LG2, is the fact that the ladder bracing doesn't give you as much 'sustain'. With some styles of the blues, you are not looking for a 15 second sustain, bell sounding chime. You are more wanting a chunka chunka, pile driving - with each note standing out on it's own and not blending in with the ones you played 15 seconds ago. The ladder bracing is the only difference compared to other round shoulder small bodied guitars and it makes the sound unique. I love the sound of my SJ200 and H'bird TV, but I can't say they are 'better' than my LG1, only different.

Totally.. so many people out there can't quite grasp this. I don't know why. There seems to be something earthy and raw about LG1's that just keep me coming back to them.

[ryanfender]

I owned a 57 LG-1 until very recently. I really liked it but it lacked a bit of warmth. I just wasn't playing it so I traded it for a Swart Atomic Space Tone guitar amp. It gets used a lot more. That being said, I do have a soft spot for LG-1.

[AnneS]

fortyearspickn, on 24 February 2013 - 09:58 PM, said:

My experience is with a '64 LG1. I think what makes it stand out (not 'above' or 'below' just different) from the x braced crowd, I assume including the LG2, is the fact that the ladder bracing doesn't give you as much 'sustain'. With some styles of the blues, you are not looking for a 15 second sustain, bell sounding chime. You are more wanting a chunka chunka, pile driving - with each note standing out on it's own and not blending in with the ones you played 15 seconds ago. The ladder bracing is the only difference compared to other round shoulder small bodied guitars and it makes the sound unique. I love the sound of my SJ200 and H'bird TV, but I can't say they are 'better' than my LG1, only different.

I also have an '64 LG-1, and while I'm no blues-player by any means, this is a nice description of how/why it sounds so different from my maple J100xtra (of course). I hear a nice sustain, though, but I agree--it's not chimey.

15 or so years ago, I had the plastic bridge switched out for rosewood and the repair of the obligatory top crack; otherwise, it's all-original and it's as stable as can be. So although I think I understand the structural issues and projection differences associated with ladder bracing, the little box holds its own, tonewise, with other vintage, small mahogany boxes--to my ear, anyway.

Size? Bracing? Age? Luck of the draw? Nostalgia? Dunno, but I heard/played a number of vintage small bodies recently--none of them, from where I sat, had a leg up on the tonal qualities I hear when I'm cradling that Little Girl-1 on my lap...

[zombywoof]

I am gonna get obnoxious here and in the immortal words of Frank Zappa shout out shut up and play 'yer guitar.

Trying to come up with a formula or spreadsheet with respect to sustain and overtones to decide what is a "blues guitar" and what ain't, just is not going to work. There are really only two kinds of guitars out there - those you like and those you don't. Leave the labeling to the marketing teams at Gibson, Martin and others. Leave the decision as to what guitars we like for what styles of music to us.

[nid2007]

I have had many. My first Gibson was a '61 LG-3. Nice guitar...fairly thin profile neck. Not very big sounding, but nice tone. I brought it to Homecoming one year, and traded it in to Music Villa..and another forum member bought it the next day.
In my quest for a grail LG, I've had 2 B-25's, a '57 LG-2 and a '57 LG-1. Out of all those, I liked the LG-1 the best. While box-ier than the others for sure due to the ladder bracing, it had a very sweet sound--perfect for Woody Guthrie and old Dylan. Plus, the neck was better than the others...That LG-1 is, or was, listed for sale on trading post btw.

My '44 LG-2 is completely different animal. Sounds very much like a Martin 000-18GE or Authentic version, but sweeter.... it puts out much more sound than should come out of that little guitar. Mine has a "warble" to it as well..at least that is the best I can describe it. I expect that either comes from its aging, or the numerous structural repairs its had to endure.

In my experience, all the 50's versions of these little guitars are wonderful (with the right setup). For my taste, they lose a little something with the neck and perhaps bracing changes later on. And yes, a good 50"s LG-1 is a wonderful little blues guitar.

onewilyfool, on 23 February 2013 - 09:49 PM, said:

Some of you may have owned both or played both, can you share your thoughts about the sound, tone differences, etc? I've heard that the late 50's versions of these are pretty good examples. I hear the LG-1'sare exceptional for blues? Thanks, Wily

[BluesKing777]

Nice!


I have a few LGs.............


My 1952 LG1:

https://soundcloud.c...ng777/louise14b


My 1958 LG0:

https://soundcloud.c...king777/faith1a

My 1959 LG3:



And I liked the LG guitar size so much, I bought a 12 stringer! (1964 B25-12N -same size body as LGs):




Don't have a LG-2!


BluesKing777.

[rustystrings]

You know how the classic Gibson sound features a prominent mid-range with a drier, faster decay? I've read that because Gibson started out making archtop instruments, that sound was the ideal in the designers' ears. To my ears, there's a continuum of the archtop DNA in the Gibson sound that goes from pronounced but with added bass and presence in J-45/50/SJ guitars, to having strong mid-range with a less bass and possibly better projection in the LG-2 and -3, to having a more pronounced archtop-ish honk and decay in the LG-1.

Russ

[duluthdan]

BluesKing777, on 26 February 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Nice!


I have a few LGs.............


My 1952 LG1:

https://soundcloud.c...ng777/louise14b


My 1958 LG0:

https://soundcloud.c...king777/faith1a

My 1959 LG3:



And I liked the LG guitar size so much, I bought a 12 stringer! (1964 B25-12N -same size body as LGs):




Don't have a LG-2!


BluesKing777.

Wow ! Nice playin' I gotta learn me some of them blues. Fun!