Archtops and Selmacs

Al Watsky

Stringswinger wrote: »

I find that if amplification is needed, an electric archtop is simply a better tool. Frankly, I have yet to play any Selmac (and I have played about a dozen Selmers, as many Favinos and a Busato) that sounds as good to me as my 1963 ES-175D or either of my vintage D'Angelicos. In the video that is linked in the first post of this thread, David's 175 sounds way better to me than whatever Selmac it is that Stochelo is playing (an Eimers?)

Where Selmacs work well for me is the purely acoustic gig. The cutting power is useful in that application and so I keep a couple in my "toolbox".

Stringswinger, I agree with you on several of your points , but I don't think that Stochelo's sound is less good than David's in the clip. Very different sounds both good. David sounds like a mainstream Jazz guy and has a pretty typical Jazz/Post Swing sound , its a good sound but its "that sound" , Stochelo, he's rocking that sound, but its that sound, IMO because of the limitations of an acoustic instruments ability to continue to produce volume thats in balance with the energy the player is expending his action needs to be higher for live work. Sounds a bit chirpy up top. So thats another set up issue. Actually. Player/virtuoso types always want to have their cake and eat it too. So they get setups in their practice room/studio recording comfort range so they can pull off their most raging riffs but then sound rather lame live because they will need more power on a live stage and play through their action.
The 175 and its ilk have the advantage over the GJ box from one perspective especially. You can play it with your fingers with no concern for developing volume with the right hand, its a distinct advantage.
I think GJ guitars can be amplified and don't need to be limited to purely acoustic settings and use.
Just some ideas.
Cheers.

Michael Bauer

It's funny, I've seen Alphonso play gypsy jazz gigs on a Selmer, a Favino, a Holo, a Patenotte, a flamenco guitar, a Gibson ES-125, and a couple of others I can't remember, and he always makes them work. It's kind of fun, too, because each instrument elicits a sightly different style of playing from him, so it keeps him fresh, and makes the gigs have a different sound.

When I was speaking of archtops earlier, I was strictly speaking of acoustics. An ES-175, and I have owned and played a couple, really aren't proper archtops, since the tops are made to be thicker and "deader" than an acoustic archtop, to cut feedback and improve the electric sound.

Comparing an ES-175 to any Selmer is apples to oranges. The 175 was designed to be an electric guitar. The Selmer wasn't. While I simplified an started using a Krivo through a Fender at gigs, I still don't think anyone has come up with a great pickup for gypsy guitars, at least any that allow any of the soul of the guitar to survive the amplification process. But we play a couple of places where noisy crowds of 100+ are common, and I quit trying to have a purist sound.

Here's what I would say: acoustically, a properly played Selmer/Busato/Favino will kill an archtop. As for electrics, sorry, but there has only been one great electric jazz guitar to my ear, and that was the ES-150/250 through 1939. All the rest have pretty much that same, soulless, neck humbucker sound that made me quit listening to 99% of jazz guitarists. Frankly, I'd rather hear jazz on a Tele on the bridge pickup than yet another dreary guitar with a neck humbucker that I've heard a million times before. But that's just my personal taste. For alot of us, playing a gypsy jazz gig is just more fun on a gypsy jazz guitar. It has less to do with sound than vibe.

Anything will work, and if the player is good, who cares? Play what you like.
I honestly don't remember anyone on this forum ever telling anyone he "needed" a Selmac to play gypsy jazz. I think it's just that most people would tell him he'd want one. Vibe and ambiance are sometimes important, not just to players, but to audiences, too. But if you are happy on your 175, we're all happy for you, and I, for one, would love to hear you play it one day if I make it out to the Bay area again.

Stringswinger

@Al. If Stochelo played with a higher action, he would not be able to do his thing and so I suppose we need to put up with less than stellar tone in exchage for his awsome chops.

@Michael. I beg to differ. I love the classic jazz guitar tone from a neck humbucker. Do look me up when you are in the Bay Area. Come play some of my amazing archtops. Perhaps they may change your perspective...

Jazzaferri

I dunno.....some have a preference for one particular sound ....some don't.....doesn't need judgement either way. As for the audience if they like the end product ....well for me thats what counts....I don't think they are particularly interested in which chisel I use.

Pretty sure Stochelo could afford an archtop if he wanted. I think he likes his sound. I know I do. I like David Reinhart's sound too, and Ed Bickert exec etc etc.

Michael Bauer

Marc, I want to make clear that my thoughts only reflect my personal taste.

I even like neck humbuckers…if overdriven through a Fender or Marshall amp! But clean? Ugh! It's as sterile and lifeless a tone to me as I would ever want to hear. Maybe I'd like it more if everyone and his brother don't have essentially the same tone. Me? I'll stick with Charlie Christian for proper electric jazz tone, and Django for proper acoustic jazz tone.

I have a couple of friends in the Bay area. Don't be surprised if you get a PM from me re a visit in the next year or so.

Jon

I don't like using archtops for this music, for a bunch of reasons, but mostly because the string spacing on my ES175 is - or seems - less than on my Favino, making accurate rest stroke picking more difficult (I use a light, alternate picked attack when playing it in modern jazz styles). When I play the Gibson, I feel like I'm playing the amp in a way, and smaller variations of movement with the pick, and using the volume knob, bring out dynamics that I get from the Favino solely by much bigger variations in right hand force.

I also, and this is perhaps a learned aversion, don't like hitting the Gibson very hard - it seems wrong somehow, morally - and it doesn't respond really well to being hit. Gypsy guitars on the other hand - mostly - seem to love being hit, and I can get the tone I like with a fairly strong attack.

Maybe the people who don't mind archtops on gigs are lighter pickers, as all my issues come from a fairly aggressive right hand...although we've all seen Tchavolo playing any guitar he has to hand and sounding mostly fine (although I know which I prefer).

One other thing though, if archtops are just as good at the job, why aren't there just as many top flight, beloved gypsy jazz albums featuring archtops as there are with selmacs? Seems like most musicians, when they have a choice, or when they are making some kind of active personal statement (big concerts or recordings) are voting with their feet. If you can get a reasonable sound out of a gypsy guitar at loudish volumes then (and I think lots of amplified bands in uncontrolled circumstances just play too loud and create the problem for themselves anyway), why wouldn't you choose the kind of guitar you like the sound of most? If that's the choice you're making, then more power to you either way.

Jazzaferri

I solved my problem by playing electric fingerstyle. I agree that a hard attack on an electric doesnt sound right to me either.

While tone is such a personal thing, Django's electrified stuff sounds good to my ear. I have heard players using an electric in the acoustic string jazz environment who make it work and I have heard some who don't

MaximusVolumus

Below is a good example of an acoustic archtop in a GJ setting. It sounds amazing to me.

Al Watsky

Theres no doubt that Archtops that are intended for use as acoustic instruments can be pretty darn loud. Modern builders have pushed the envelope with volume. It can be done.
That said most Archtops produced today are electric guitars, or used by their owners as such. :peace:

Steveareno

I like them both, but prefer Stochelo's tone in the first clip...conversely prefer Adrian's tone on the archtop in the 2nd clip. Stochelo always seems to get a great tone and is one of my favorites, no matter what he's playing. The SelMacs seem to be more expressive and have a very romantic, beautiful quality, but some times can be a little too bright, harsh, plinky and clacky... Something I try to avoid on my Del Arte Homage The more lyrical players certainly seem to overcome this. I love the overall feel and playability of SelMacs, the light body, string tension and big necks. Many of the French also seem to like the Gibson with HB sound: Rocky, Birelli, David R, Etc. On a practical term, at gigs they come over very well and are easier to amplify, but I really like the sound of Stimers on SelMacs. my favorite Django cut is Honeysucke Rose with the Duke Elllington orchestra, but he's playing an electric Gibson archtop (ES 300 as near as I can make out). My only experience on paid gigs has been in a covers band, playing country and old RR, on a Tele and I know you don't want to mess around too much with amplification when the pressure is on. These days I'm more into acoustic and only play put at open mics and jams, mainly coffee houses. Jazzaferri mentioned the bluegrass folks mostly playing Martins. Not true. I recently subscribed to Flatpicking Magazine (good publication, with CD)...and it DOES seems like 99.9 percent play dreads: Martins, Collings, Bourgois, Wayne Henderson, Santa Cruz, etc. So they're kinda stuck in a similar stereotype. Mi dos centavos. Thànks for posting the video clips!
Swang on,