Smurfbird Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 I'm curious to hear from folks who have both a vintage LG-2, LG-3 and the newer American Eagle model. How do you feel they compare? I've loved the old models I've played, but I've only had the chance to play one new LG-2AE and it obviously needed to break in a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichG Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Since nobody has chimed in, I will say I used to have the AE that Sal has now and I played a LG2 from the Late forties or early fifties that belongs to Toby Walker before I bought the AE. So it was not an A/B comparison. I did like the neck better on the AE. I thought both sounded very good, but as I say not side by side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I think one of the things you are running into is that those who own old LG-2s do not feel much of an urge to acquire the new fangled version. Add to that the fact that the cost of older LG-2s is such that it still puts them within the reach of many folks. So I would guess that the LG-2 AE is going to appeal primarily to somebody who wants an LG-2 but does not want to mess around with a 65 or so year-old guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted August 17, 2014 Author Share Posted August 17, 2014 That's what's interesting to me. I've been able to snag a very good LG-3 for about the same money as a new LG-2/AE and I haven't had the chance to play enough with the newer model to see how they truly compare. The '61 LG-3 I have has a plastic adj. saddle that I'm looking to replace with compensated bone, since the '51 LG-3 I played had a slightly warmer sound (wish I could've bought that one). It's an age old question, I guess. New vs. old. How much work and upkeep will an older guitar require? How long will it take for a new guitar to break in? Will they compare? Are they comfortable? Thus far, I preferred the vintage for the worn feel and the various necks I've toyed with. But should the right AE come along, I'm sure I'll be tempted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Maybe I am the odd man out but what Gibson would have to do to get me into the room to look at an LG-2 AE would be to offer something I could not find on a original such as a soft V neck (maybe even 13 frets to the body), a 1 7/8" nut, a slightly deeper body or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jjunk Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 zw - I think you just described my dream Gibson! ...deep small body, 13-fret, wide nut. I have played my '66 F-25 (same body as the LG-2's??) alongside the modern AE. Love them both but they apples and oranges. The F-25 is a 12-fret and seems fuller and warmer to sing along with, but that could certainly just be the age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted August 18, 2014 Author Share Posted August 18, 2014 Jjunk, What's the nut on that '66? I have a '66 LG-1 and it's a tight nut. I'd guess it's 1-9/16". Which doesn't bother me. I could never do a wide but like 1-7/8". My little hands would become crippled. A deeper body would be interesting. Before you know it, we'll be designing a Roy Smeck/ JB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 The F-25 or Folk Singer had a double pickguard and a 2" nut although the neck still had a shallower profile than what you found on pre-1960 guitars. The neck on those guitars is pretty much the same as on the B45-12 string guitars. Starting in 1960 all other Gibsons got a new neck profile which is about the skinniest ever seen on an acoustic. In 1965 they lost the 1 11/16" nut with the guitars getting either a 1 9/16" or 1 5/8" nut. That same year the traditonal headsock angle of 17 degrees was reduced to 14 degrees. This was probably done to reduce the tension on the headstock to try and keep them from snapping off as the place where it met the neck was now pencil thin. Possibly the worst design change during the 1960s though was the bridge plate with Gibson going from the smaller solid maple one to an oversized plywood plate. I assume this had something to do with the new ADJ bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted August 18, 2014 Author Share Posted August 18, 2014 Zomby, What does neck angle change do the action or the need for neck resets? Thanks for the info! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Zomby, What does neck angle change do the action or the need for neck resets? Thanks for the info! Gibson did not change the neck angle only that of the the headstock. Gibson did this for the same reason they started added volutes at the end of the 1960s - to try and keep the headstocks from snapping. The thin necks and narrow nuts just took away too much wood from an area that was under a lot of stress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I have a '66 LG-1 and it's a tight nut. I'd guess it's 1-9/16". Which doesn't bother me. I could never do a wide but like 1-7/8". My little hands would become crippled. I'm in the same ballpark. In particular, my short pinky fingers make it tough to negotiate a larger profile neck. Played a very nice '51 LG-3 a few months back (my birth year, too!), but the largish neck just wouldn't work & had to walk away. Conversely, my LG-2 AE is a comfortable fit, while still loving the old '66 Epi Cortez. Both guitars are unique & satisfying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jjunk Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Yep, the nut on the F-25 is indeed a full 2"! Unique, but I like it. My ideal necks are those wider 12-fretters, like the Keb Mo and L-1, but I still find the AE so immersive. There's just something about that body size that works better for me than almost any other comfort and sound wise. Tempted to pull the trigger on a new AE, but even more tempted to save up for an all hog LG-2 Banner Reissue someday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Tempted to pull the trigger on a new AE, but even more tempted to save up for an all hog LG-2 Banner Reissue someday... Wasn't the mahogany top Banner RI an LG-1? I recall some info on these over at UMGF which if memory serves me right revolved around Gibson not getting the finish even close to the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jjunk Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 This is the one I've been hoping to come across one of these days... http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LS2MANNH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Gibson did not change the neck angle only that of the the headstock. Gibson did this for the same reason they started added volutes at the end of the 1960s - to try and keep the headstocks from snapping. The thin necks and narrow nuts just took away too much wood from an area that was under a lot of stress. Zomby I think the big nut and truss rod also contributes to than neck break thing…..Would like to see truss rod adjusted thru sound hole. Much neater/easier/smaller, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B1ues Boy Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 My J-15 will be delivered on Thursday but I'm gasing for a new LG-2 Americana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.