Laminated arched back - what's it mean exactly?

[GardMan]

Why would you think that a D-50 would sound any different than a D-55? Do you reckon the bling will make a difference, or is there more to it?

When I was first looking at Guild's rosewood dreads, considering the D-50, D-55, and DV-52, I posed the question to the forum re: their sonic differences. Someone (Steelpickin?) had had both a D-55 and a D-50 at one time, and commented on differences in feel (the low/jumbo frets of the D-55 vs higher narrower frets of the D-50) and sound (commenting that the D-50 was a bit more "in your face" and jangly, while the D-55 was smoother and majestic)... Whomever it was eventually sold the D-55 and kept the D-50, because it suited their style better. Although I ended up with a D-55 (having never heard other D-55s in person, I can't say how mine compares, tone-wise), the D-50 was never dropped from my short list of Guilds to experience and/or add to my stable... and that burst D-50 on eBay sure is tempting me (alas, I don't have the cash right now... less than 3 more hours to resist the temptation!).
Dave

 

[dayuhan]

Another question on the same theme... based on my totally non-systematic observation, the arched/laminated back appears most often on maple models, less so (and less recently) on mahogany, and very rarely in rosewood. Is that observation accurate... and if so, is there any special reason for that?

 

[Jeff]

Another question on the same theme... based on my totally non-systematic observation, the arched/laminated back appears most often on maple models, less so (and less recently) on mahogany, and very rarely in rosewood. Is that observation accurate... and if so, is there any special reason for that?

I don't know if Dayuhan's observations are correct, but seems to me the best sounding examples of Guild laminate guitars are maple, particularly the maple 12 strings. Nothing like em.

I have 4 plywood Guilds, 2 maple, 1 mahogany & 1 Rosewood. All except the F20 have arched backs & it's a different thing anyway.

By far the Maple G37 is, IMHO, the most surprising of the lot to play. It's just got something that makes you grin. It has a subtle big sound. Screaming value, probably the best bang for the buck of what I own. Keeps up with Taylors costing multiples of the price I paid.

The Mahogany D25 is a darn nice guitar, maybe a little more mellow tone than the G37, not as big sounding. Lots of magic.

The rosewood DC5 is my least favorite of the lot, acoustically it just doesn't have the same kind of jump the others do. Don't know if it's the Rosewood or the cutaway that makes the difference.

The F20. made in 57, has a maple plywood back, the sides may be solid (or not)? Anyway it's a tiny guitar & makes noise all out of proportion, 57 must have been a good year for maple plywood.

If I had to cut my plywood Guilds down by 50% I'd keep the maple G 37 & F20 & feel real sad about the D25.

 

[cjd-player]

Actually, that's a little-known, very rare early Ovation prototype. :mrgreen:

You should be proud to own that, Graham

They obviously did better with later efforts.

 

[dreadnut]

Gee Graham, I thought that was the custom Dolly Parton model :lol:

 

[brian f]

Thanks for that link Frosty. I enjoyed that. I can't make my uke sound like anything more than a toy. What a voice Iz had. Sad he passed so young.

 

[Recky]

Yes, Frosty, I knew it was Bruddah Iz. Love him! I play a bit of uke myself during my solo show.

Cheers,
Recky

This guy has found a different solution...

If you don't know this man he was Bruddah Iz - a very musical soul. Surf over to youtube and give a listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL-uL2M3xvM

It's been a long time since the days of hand-carved tops

Eastman (China) turns our some very nice and, of course, relatively inexpensive (China), carved guitars today. I owned one for a while - it was a great guitar!

 

[JerryR]

Actually, that's a little-known, very rare early Ovation prototype. :mrgreen:

You should be proud to own that, Graham

They obviously did better with later efforts.

Probably a bit like Graham - started out concave in the middle, and now a few years later, decidedly convex :mrgreen:

 

[Bikerdoc]

Hello Recky, welcome. Ya don't hear much about the Guild D15M for some reason but my 1986 is all hog top, arched Laminated back, grover tuners, bone nutt/saddle with a very sweet sound. Also, I've played both the 50 and the 55. Bling or no bling....I love the two I played. Again, welcome

Peace

 

[Graham]

Actually, that's a little-known, very rare early Ovation prototype. :mrgreen:

You should be proud to own that, Graham

They obviously did better with later efforts.

Probably a bit like Graham - started out concave in the middle, and now a few years later, decidedly convex :mrgreen:

Very true.

 

[kitniyatran]

For what it's worth, for most of my decent, heavy duty playing life I had a Martin D18 that I loved. Beat any D28 I ever tried as far as I was concerned. When i was looking a year ago to replace my Takamine jumbo(maple back) with a "good" guitar, in the under $2000 bracket I liked a Taylor walnut & a Martin rosewood, but then I found my D25NT, for less than $1000, & was finished looking. I often compare it as like a D18 on steroids : Great trebles & mids, similar mahogany/spruce sound, but bigger, with more bottom. I credit the arch, with the lamination allowing the arch to be done relatively inexpensively, yet tough enough to forgo back bracing.

 

[Andy Hiwatt]

Hi Recky
very interesting post here, and many interesting answers as usual.
I also own a 1982 D-25 that has got an arched back-keep in mind that well into the early Eighties Guild continued to build arched back D25- and I couldn't be happier with it.
It was my first Guild, bought on E-bay ,won it for an incredible price last year ($540) and I read a lot about the sonic features of the arched back and was very curious. When it arrived from the USA I was glad it was in fairly good shape, but it had very old and ultra light strings ( they must have been 0.8 or even thinner should they exist on earth) on, I strummed a chord and thought it was awful and volumeless. Of course I immediately changed the strings to Martin Sp 012-054 and ...booommm...I was blown away, I couldn't believe the projection this guitar had..the neck was very hard to play in the beginning because the guitar had been kept with the lighter strings for years, so I gave a little relief to the trussrod and after a couple of hours the guitar was playing incredibly, resonant ,lot of volume, big bass and medium tones and sparkling highs. I find the neck very comfortable as I got long fingers , the fretboard is wide enough to fingerpick at ease and when you strum it the chords are full. I find the arched back makes a great difference in sound.
After experimenting with various different strings I find perfect for my taste mounting Bronze strings on the D-25 , to give it a bit more "body" and to quieten the higher and brittle end of the sound spectrum that the mahogany produces.
I also own a rosewood D-50 that I love but have been through a lot of work with it(I posted some questions here last year about it asking advices ) because being a 1987 one it has a slimmer neck profile and smaller fretboard that aren't suitable for my hands, I absolutely love its rich tone tough, so different from the D-25, after months and months I seem to have find a set up that's not too much tiring for my hands( when I play solo or duo acoustic gigs I normally play for 3 hours..quite a long time if you're not comfortable with an instrument). I tried to find '70s and early eighties D-50 with bigger necks but even last summer visiting the USA they seemed nowhere to be seen..just sometimes on E-bay, the last chance for us here in Europe.
Anyway if you like it and need it for your recording job or playing pleasure go for an arched back D25 you won't be disappointed, remember you can find D-25s from the early eighties with arched back ( just like mine) ,maybe they're a bit cheaper than '70s models everyone is after.
By the way:it's about time you get the bug for Electric Guilds too, thye're still affordable and gorgeous!!!!

 

[Recky]

Hey Andy,

thanks for your interesting account of your D-25 acquisition. I will most definitely get one once I have recovered from my imminent purchase of an F-50! (I'm still looking...)

Talking of D-50 necks: My 1974 D-50 has a fairly narrow neck, which is very comfortable for my medium-sized hands, but I imagine someone with bigger "paddles" might feel differently. This raises the question: Was there ever a change in neck width or strength on the D-50???

Cheers,
Recky

Hi Recky
very interesting post here, and many interesting answers as usual.
I also own a 1982 D-25 that has got an arched back-keep in mind that well into the early Eighties Guild continued to build arched back D25- and I couldn't be happier with it.
It was my first Guild, bought on E-bay ,won it for an incredible price last year ($540) and I read a lot about the sonic features of the arched back and was very curious. When it arrived from the USA I was glad it was in fairly good shape, but it had very old and ultra light strings ( they must have been 0.8 or even thinner should they exist on earth) on, I strummed a chord and thought it was awful and volumeless. Of course I immediately changed the strings to Martin Sp 012-054 and ...booommm...I was blown away, I couldn't believe the projection this guitar had..the neck was very hard to play in the beginning because the guitar had been kept with the lighter strings for years, so I gave a little relief to the trussrod and after a couple of hours the guitar was playing incredibly, resonant ,lot of volume, big bass and medium tones and sparkling highs. I find the neck very comfortable as I got long fingers , the fretboard is wide enough to fingerpick at ease and when you strum it the chords are full. I find the arched back makes a great difference in sound.
After experimenting with various different strings I find perfect for my taste mounting Bronze strings on the D-25 , to give it a bit more "body" and to quieten the higher and brittle end of the sound spectrum that the mahogany produces.
I also own a rosewood D-50 that I love but have been through a lot of work with it(I posted some questions here last year about it asking advices ) because being a 1987 one it has a slimmer neck profile and smaller fretboard that aren't suitable for my hands, I absolutely love its rich tone tough, so different from the D-25, after months and months I seem to have find a set up that's not too much tiring for my hands( when I play solo or duo acoustic gigs I normally play for 3 hours..quite a long time if you're not comfortable with an instrument). I tried to find '70s and early eighties D-50 with bigger necks but even last summer visiting the USA they seemed nowhere to be seen..just sometimes on E-bay, the last chance for us here in Europe.
Anyway if you like it and need it for your recording job or playing pleasure go for an arched back D25 you won't be disappointed, remember you can find D-25s from the early eighties with arched back ( just like mine) ,maybe they're a bit cheaper than '70s models everyone is after.
By the way:it's about time you get the bug for Electric Guilds too, thye're still affordable and gorgeous!!!!

 

[Andy Hiwatt]

Well Recky
I can't tell by experience because I never had the luck to play a '70s or early '80s D-50,but I 've been told and I read that Guild neck profiles changed a lot from year to year or ,better ,from age to age. I saw many pictures ( on Hans Moust book or the nice pictures E.bay users provide) that clearly show different neck profiles , chunkier or thinner neck-body joints) that lead to the impression that generally '70s and early Eighties Guilds had chunkier necks( that I like the best for my hands). The last 2 summers I went to a lot of guitar stores while on holiday in the USA and was able to try many Guilds of different ages(never a vintage D-50 though as I said before)this summer I tried 3 D-40s from the seventies and eighties , 2 D-25 from 1977 and 1980 and they all had a neck similar to my D-25, not so slim, same thing for a couple of F50 from 1967 and 1975 and 1984, and of course many 12 strings had big necks...
The Tacoma models I found very very good soundwise and constructionwise, and the necks were perfect for my feel and hands dimensions...I really FELL in love with a Tacoma made new DV6( sitka spruce top, and rosewood back and sides) i tried in San Diego..must be the BEST Guild I ever put my hands on...absolutely incredible LOUD and BALANCED tone, stunning easy playability, perfect neck, I really compare it to the MArtin HD28V and HD 28 that are awesome instruments. The only thing I don't like of the Dv6 ( being a crazy that also gives a lot of importance to aesthetics) is the brown headstock without chesterfield pearl logo and the satin finish , otherwise I would have gone for it on the spot...I spent almost 1 hour playing it and alternating it with 2 Collings ( just for fun,,,they were wonderful but absolutely out of my price range and "moral principles" about "how much to invest in a guitar") and the difference in soundwas barely audible for a convenient $850!!!!
This forum is really a good source of info about neck differences, from people who actually owns and plays D-50 of the years we're curious about. : :shock: :shock: wink:

 

[JerryR]

My '79 D35 has a pretty chunky neck - much deeper D profile than the Epiphone.