jedzep Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 That would be a great small bod 1-2 punch Kelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I'll throw out an option not yet mentioned: > Guild F-30 (Westerly) from the early '70s to early '80s. There's a particular shape that applied to F-30s during this period that had an uniquely narrow waist & upper body. I had one back in the day, traded it off for some unknown reason, and luckily came upon the rare rosewood version a few years ago. Very cozy guitar, but the lower bout is large & deep, so they still have a good deal of punch. Specs are: > 9" waist > 10-3/4" upper bout > 15-1/4" lower bout > 5" depth at endpin > 25.5" scale, 1-11/16" nut This model's specs differ significantly from F-30s that came before (Hoboken), and after (late Westerly, Corona, Tacoma, New Hartford). Those versions have more in common with the overall profile of a Martin-000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 LG-2 RI mahogany back, sides and top replica of John Thomas's guitar for comparison. That replica of my very rare guitar is a treasure. I'm so happy that it landed in your hands, Dave. A fabulous instrument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 Overlooked in the discussion so far is the matter of body DEPTH ["Note that while an LG2 is narrower than a J45 (14.45" to 16"), it is nearly as deep (4.5 to 4.75). A deep body (4.75) Blues King or Nick Lucas is almost as trying as a slope. Fwiw Martin 00s. 000/OMs and Ms are all 4.25 deep" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 Overlooked in the discussion so far is the matter of body DEPTH ["Note that while an LG2 is narrower than a J45 (14.45" to 16"), it is nearly as deep (4.5 to 4.75). A deep body (4.75) Blues King or Nick Lucas is almost as trying as a slope. Fwiw Martin 00s. 000/OMs and Ms are all 4.25 deep" Not overlooked - just well hidden.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 I own an American Eagle LG2 and love it and have been considering the Martin 00-17, You are not going to go wrong with either. Agreed! Martin's 17 series is pretty nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 The 'Arlo' model is, of course, the LG-2 3/4 resurrected from days of yore. They're small, fun to play, and vintage pieces are available if you watch for them. I hope the RI is better than the originals. I have never played a 1950s LG-2 3/4 that I would have even considered taking home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 I hope the RI is better than the originals. I have never played a 1950s LG-2 3/4 that I would have even considered taking home. They're different - and the vast majority need some attention before they live up to their potential. The disappointments are often the B-25 3/4 models - those are great for really young lesson takers, but not much else. I've found that the 'trick' with older 3/4 models is to find the right strings for the individual guitar, though all of them I've owned work nicely in 'high strung' mode. As with all instruments, preferences vary - I often apologize for the disdain I feel for Martin's current 15's.☺ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 I hope the RI is better than the originals. I have never played a 1950s LG-2 3/4 that I would have even considered taking home. It's pretty darn hard to get much depth of tone from such a small & ladder-braced box. But the '50s LG2-3/4 I owned was definitely cute as a button! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretplay Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 Like you I played a J45 for years but it was Doyle Dykes who introduced me to small body guitars. I have a CJ165 which must be the most comfortable guitar I have ever played, certainly if you are looking for a Gibson small body it's for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 It's pretty darn hard to get much depth of tone from such a small & ladder-braced box. This is where scale comes into play. Old Kay guitars are a great example of the wisdom of building smaller body ladder braced guitars with a longer scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willie King Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 I have a 1950 LG-1 with a new case that I can let go for $1500 plus shipping. Recently fixed the bridge and a loose brace. It is a player but solid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jjunk Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 I have to throw in a vote for the "New Yorker"! I have a Martin 0-16NY from the early 60's - it is the perfect couch guitar with a very deep and rich tone for its size. I tend to switch between that and my Gibson L-1 reissue, they're quite different from one another but both spectacular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedzep Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 Is that Martin a spruce top, JJ? Little Martins have big voices. You show as having an F25 in your list of guitars. Did you mean F20? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 You show as having an F25 in your list of guitars. Did you mean F20? The F-25 would be the folkie version of the B-25, from the '60s. 12 fretter, 2" wide fretboard at nut, short scale, double white pickguards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jjunk Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 Yep, the Martin is a spruce top with a mahogany body, 12-fretter. And that's correct - check out the "F-25 Folksinger." A bit of a quirky model for Gibson with it's flat and wide fretboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scriv58 Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 Just acquired this 1948 LG-2 this morning- it is 40" long, 14 1/4" wide at the lower bout, 4 1/4" deep where the arm rests and 4 3/8" deep at the tailpin- very comfortable. I would recommend this for those with shoulder woes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Excellent little guitar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuestionMark Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 It's a beaut! Enjoy it! QM aka Jazzman Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theflyingturtle Posted June 29, 2017 Author Share Posted June 29, 2017 First, I apologize for not responding sooner. I was literally overwhelmed with all the info that was shared. Secondly, thank you for your contributions. I am in L.A. right now and finally got to go visit Norm’s Rare Guitars and got to try a few dozen vintage guitars. I didn’t come home with one yet, but I didn’t expect to. My understanding of vintage guitars is limited by the lack of exposure. Once I get my bearings little guitar will start coming home with me! I got to try a KG-14, multiple L-1s and LG-2s including a banner year, Several B-25s and one that was a 12 string, an early 1930s LG-00, a Martin 16NY, a very early Martin 0-18, and more. My take aways were that I was shocked I liked B-25s! I did not know that the LG-2s became the B-25 and that some had X bracing. I could see myself owning one. I also came away blown away by some of the 60’s guitars with the dreaded adj. bridge?!?!?! There was a 68’, my birth year, that I could see owning. It was a heck of a strummer! I thought the L-00 would be too boxy sounding when strummed but it was a surprisingly good all-around guitar and even though it had a v shaped neck. I did not expect that. The KG reminded me of how much I do not like vintage V shaped necks so that’s out. The neck on the Martin 16NY was far too wide to be considered. LG-1s don’t sound good to my ears strummed but if I needed a fingerstyle guitar with some punch they’re tops! The big surprise of the day was the Martin 0-18. I’ve played three of them before that were vintage and I didn’t like any of them so when Mark picked it out and handed it to me I didn’t expect much but it had a bit of fairy dust on it. I have never played a Martin that made me consider spending more than I ever had on a guitar but this one did. Then I got a Snark and found it was tuned down a ½ step. I tuned it up and… Some of the magic went away. Sigh. In fact each guitar I played had something that I didn’t care for. The neck may have been too wide, too narrow, or the pick attack felt flaccid and on and on. I am new to vintage guitars and I don’t know much but each one of the guitars I played felt close, but no cigar. They were good, great even but magic is what I am in the market for. When it finally shows up I’ll buy it if I can afford it. In the end I learned a lot. I loved things that I thought I wouldn’t and did not care for some of the things I thought I would love. It looks like an LG body size will work for me and Mark was very helpful and Sylvia was great to chat with. I even got to see them make one of their videos. Fun! But I think the most important thing I learned is that if guitars are labeled vintage it doesn’t mean they are good, it could mean they’re just old. One down, now let’s see how deep the rabbit hole gets. Thanks again everyone for everything! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 I think the most important thing I learned is that if guitars are labeled vintage it doesn’t mean they are good, it could mean they’re just old. There 's a lot of truth in this. Some vintage guitars are great guitars, others are just old guitars. Keep searching until a great one speaks to you. You might also find that a modern interpretation of a vintage guitar is actually a better instrument than the vintage version of the same guitar. Keep an open mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 My take aways were that I was shocked I liked B-25s! I did not know that the LG-2s became the B-25 and that some had X bracing. A good B-25 (or it's Epi Cortez FT-45 clone), can be very good indeed. I've owned three of them, and currently still have a '66 FT-45, with the adjustable plastic bridge & ceramic saddle. There's a metallic sound to these little guys that I find very appealing. To be sure, I've played some examples that were rather bland & muffled - but the good ones are full & rich in tone, with the added spice of those unique metallic overtones. Fun stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Welcome to the alternate dimension of vintage guitars. I get the idea that you're beginning to realize how some of us are totally absorbed with this stuff. Don't worry - it just gets better! I decided years ago that just because a vintage instrument didn't meet my personal preferences didn't turn it into just another 'old guitar'. The next person may have completely different expectations from mine and, for them, my reject is the holy grail. I've passed on buying some vintage guitars that, while they didn't suit me, were financial 'steals' that I could have easily flipped for lots more than I would have invested in them due to my (youthful & immature) snarky attitude😛 Unfortunately, age brings wisdom (sometimes) after we've lost money😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 There 's a lot of truth in this. Some vintage guitars are great guitars, others are just old guitars. Keep searching until a great one speaks to you. You might also find that a modern interpretation of a vintage guitar is actually a better instrument than the vintage version of the same guitar. Keep an open mind. True that. When I started off with old Gibsons in the 1960s they were just "used" guitar. I bought them not for any special quality but because they were generally cheaper than new guitars. You also have to take into account that prior to around 1950 a part was considered complete when it looked finished. Then add to that the impact of passing time which will vary guitar to guitar. Not exactly the best combination when you are looking for any kind of consistency in sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 I've owned three of them, and currently still have a '66 FT-45, with the adjustable plastic bridge & ceramic saddle. There's a metallic sound to these little guys that I find very appealing. Have you ever played a 1950s National acoustic with the "Stylist" neck? This was an adjustable neck that had a metal core with a wood veneer surrounding it. Only thought of it because they also have a bit of that metallic sound you are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.