Laminated or solid wood

Charles Meadows

So I am curious what of you guitar gurus think about this choice. Maybe Michael Bauer or Michael Horowitz will have some particular wisdom here, among others.

Most of my acoustic experience is with bluegrass. And you would be hard pressed to find a laminated guitar that would sound anything close to the solid wood ones. I've played tons of them, and have a Collings D1A varnish as my bluegrass guitar now. This is understandable with bluegrass since the desired sound seems to be that punchy midrange with plenty of bass.

But with the gypsy guitars (with which I have very little experience) don't seem to sound that different with laminated versus solid. The ALD Original I have sounds great, and just like Angelo's tone on his newer albums. If I recall most of the Selmers were laminated. But yet Dupont still offers solid wood on some of the higher end models. It would seem to me that this would change the sound to much from the classic Selmer tone that the two would be very different.

What am I missing? Is the GJ guitar construction such that the back and sides don't matter as much as the top?

Thanks.

Michael Bauer

I'm sure Bob, Craig, or one of the other builders here could speak with more authority than I can about construction issues. What I do know is this: in the '30s, lamination was very high tech, and therefore high end. Selmer and Busato did it, so in part this is just tradition.

To my ear, however, there are differences. Laminated bodies seem to me to lead to a bit quicker decay of the notes, and that lends itself to really the really fast playing that gypsy players. I could be wrong about this, but that's how I hear it. I suspect some of the brittle tone (compared to flat-tops) of gypsy guitars is a result of the lamination.

I'm not as good as Michael H. at describing sound, but flat-tops seem to come with built-in "reverb", the notes seem to swirl around for a while, even when they are gone. It's as if I am hearing them through a giant drain pipe. Gypsy guitars seem "reverb free". When the note is done, it's really done.

It's hard to say what it is. Different strings, different bracing, lamination vs, solid wood, pliaged vs, flat tops. They must all play a part. How much of that is lamination is probably more within the wheelhouse of Bob Holo or Craig Bumgarner.

Rodrigo Shopis uses solid wood, and he manages to get his guitars to sound very "gypsy". In fact, I have never heard any other builder not named Jacques or J.P. nail the classic Favino tone as well as he does. The Dupont solid bodies I have played have been less interesting to me, even though I usually like Maurice's guitars alot. Except for Rodrigo's guitars, the other solid-wood gypsy guitars I have played sound more like crossover guitars, part flat-top, part gypsy.

In the end, buy the individual guitar, not a set of characteristics. Laminated back and sides are the norm, and all my steel-string guitars are laminated, except for the '53 Mac. The three nylon stringers are probably all solid. I know the Shopis and the '24 Mac are. I'm guessing the Favino is as well. But if I found a solid body guitar that sounded fantastic and fit into my gaggle of guitars, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it.

noodlenot

Always an interesting topic. There are many variables to consider (as Michael stated), all in all I find the difference more obvious between a laminated and a solid rosewood guitar than between a laminated and a more dampening wood such as maple.

Jeff Moore

Notice what Micheal H says about solid wood GJ guitars: Almost nothing different.
I have a VR (lam) and a Lebreton (solid). Both are completely within the GJ ballpark. In fact the Lebreton seems more Selmerish even though the VR is dryer.

In general, I agree with Bauers comments but my experience is limited as nearly all of these guitars are laminate. I wouldn't give any preference over the difference in construction in choosing a guitar to buy. Only sound and playability matters, though you'd think there would be some characteristic difference. Maybe I'm putting words is Michaels H's mouth. He'd know if there's much sound characteristic to this difference.

frater

I have to agree with noodlenot. Maybe it's just a coincidence but some of the best "solid" Selmer I've heard were maple ones. I dig the old Maurizio Geri's Dupont, for example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8vlSf3UloY

Al Watsky

Aging thread and all but,
Ramirez 1A's are laminated with solid backs.
The thinking there was that it was a plus for the ribs to be more inert.
The lamination gets that done.
That builder went with a solid back .
It was said that that allowed the build to have a balanced output.
Balanced the highs with the lows.
In my experience a guitar with a solid back that is cracked will loose high frequency content.
So FWIW.
Most folks will tell you that a guitar with a plywood body will have more midrange content.
The solid body will have more mid range clarity and less low mids.
These ladder braced guitars ? Mids and highs till the top is lightened , by one means or another.
Highs and mids in many of the classic designs , seem to predominate.
Honking mids in some cases.
The adhesive used also effects the sound and weight.
So these old guitars can be an unfair comparison to the new builds , in part I suppose because the late model guitars aren't in most cases using water soluble glues.
Some builders will use solid woods because its one less production step and design for the effects , unless they want that mid range boost you get from the laminations.
For these Selmer types, I would prefer ply , that would be my personal choice as a builder or a buyer.
Its more durable too.
Had a guy come in with a recent guitar from a builder , it got smacked pretty good in the lower bout. The guitar was just slightly dented. The same guitar with solid woods would have certainly been "very" cracked. Side cracks are an easy fix, but still, nice that it didn't break.
Durable is good.