X series Archtops unplugged

[waterpolo.dude]

How are the "X" series archtops unplugged volume wise? Are they loud enough to play just noodling around without amp? I am talking especially of the thicker ones--X 500, 700, and 175. I'm looking to buy but no one around has Guilds.

 

[The Guilds of Grot]

I have a thin bodied T-50 that is my work-horse guitar from learning new songs for the band. I can play it all night long in the basement and nobody hears it. The X bodies are slightly louder but not great sounding acoustically as they are meant to be amplified.

 

[Walter Broes]

Are they loud enough to play just noodling around without amp?

Yes, of course, but unless you live in a factory or under an airstrip, so is a telecaster, isn't it? They're louder than an unplugged solidbody, but otherwise nothing to write home about unplugged.

 

[waterpolo.dude]

I was wondering because I have tried a few jazz boxes that sounded utterly dead unplugged and a few that actually sounded fine, albeit quiet, unplugged. The guitars that sound better unplugged also sounded better amplified.

 

[Walter Broes]

I guess that principle would really work for solid top, acoustic archtops with a floating pickup - and beyond that, it's probably a matter of taste, and what kind of music you want to play on them.

I have a '59 X175 with a very thin top that is suprisingly loud acoustically, much more so than my beloved '62 X175, but it's just too light and sensitive for the volume levels I usually play at . the plugged in tone of both guitars is remarkably similar btw, main difference being that the slightly less resonant and stiffer '62 has more sustain and tighter lows, the '59 a little more woolly (but pretty) midrange.

'59 X175

'62 X175, same amp, same band, different but similar song

 

[kakerlak]

My X-700 sounds great unplugged, though it's not super loud. It sounds like a real guitar, though. They're pretty good bargains compared to comparable instruments from other manufacturers. There aren't a ton of them out there, but they do seem to come up from time to time.

The X-700 is the only X series with a solid carved top, so, if you do a lot of around the house, unamplified playing and are less concerned about stage volume amp feedback, I'd recommend one over the others.

 

[twocorgis]

I guess that principle would really work for solid top, acoustic archtops with a floating pickup - and beyond that, it's probably a matter of taste, and what kind of music you want to play on them.

I have a '59 X175 with a very thin top that is suprisingly loud acoustically, much more so than my beloved '62 X175, but it's just too light and sensitive for the volume levels I usually play at . the plugged in tone of both guitars is remarkably similar btw, main difference being that the slightly less resonant and stiffer '62 has more sustain and tighter lows, the '59 a little more woolly (but pretty) midrange.

'59 X175

'62 X175, same amp, same band, different but similar song

I love my '59 X175, but it's certainly no acoustic cannon. Great for late night stuff though. Loved the clips!

 

[Steve Hoffman]

My 1978 Artist Award is surprisingly tuneful unplugged. In fact, John Pisano (previous owner) said it had the best acoustic tone of any archtop he ever played.

Still, it's not a Super 400!

 

[yettoblaster]

My bottom-of-the-line X-150 full thick hollowbody is loud enough to woodshed with and even sounds nice, if diminuitive, acoustically.

The Godin Kingpin II has a thinner top and lighter pickups screwed on. Louder, and quite sweet sounding with the right strings (I liked TI "Swings").

The Gretsch archtops usually have soundposts under the bridge (as do Guild X-170's): more "ES-335" sounding.

 

[waterpolo.dude]

quote="yettoblaster"]My bottom-of-the-line X-150 full thick hollowbody is loud enough to woodshed with and even sounds nice, if diminuitive, acoustically.

The Godin Kingpin II has a thinner top and lighter pickups screwed on. Louder, and quite sweet sounding with the right strings (I liked TI "Swings").

The Gretsch archtops usually have soundposts under the bridge (as do Guild X-170's): more "ES-335" sounding.[/quote]

I played a Kingpin II as well and was pleasantly surprised with the volume and tone unplugged. The shop had phosphor bronze strings on it, which definitely gave it leg up in that department.

 

[yettoblaster]

...I played a Kingpin II as well and was pleasantly surprised with the volume and tone unplugged. The shop had phosphor bronze strings on it, which definitely gave it leg up in that department.

With TI "Swings" on my Kingpin II it sounded sweet plugged or unplugged, but the 60 hz hum got to me with only one pickup on.

I'm happier about that with the Guild.

I put bronze strings on an old '39 Epiphone Spartan I had once long ago. It was awesome!

 

[jmac]

I play my X-160 unplugged all the time. That's how I usually practice.

 

[walrus]

The 1965 X-50 (steel strings) I had sounded just about as good unplugged as a 1963 A-50 (bronze strings) I also had. Very much like an acoustic guitar, a little thin when playing chords, but very nice for solo riffs.

Too loud and clear to play "for late night stuff", i.e. *much* better than a solid body, or a thin hollow body.

walrus

 

[bradk]

I practice with my X150 unplugged at times...lets just say I can hear it but it's not very inspiring. Acoustic tone is not really its thing though.

 

[matsickma]

I rarely play un-amplified but when I do I perfer a '50's era CE100. It has a thin plywood top and the construction of the guitar is very light with minimal bracing.

If it is late at night when even the volume of an unamplified CE100 is too loud I use the X170.

I don't even have an acoustic guitar these days, all electrics. How sick is that? One of these days...

M

 

[yettoblaster]

I practice with my X150 unplugged at times...lets just say I can hear it but it's not very inspiring. Acoustic tone is not really its thing though.

I have found that mine sounds better the more quietly I play it. If I play it as I would a normal acoustic guitar it sounds dreadful, but if I just coax the tone out with bare fingers it can have a nice breathy quality.

 

[guildzilla]

I have a minority taste for putting phosphor bronze strings on archtop guitars to get the maximum unplugged potential out of them.

You get far more useful acoustic volume with medium gauge PB's, compared to lighter electric or flatwound strings on the same instrument. So I think it's a significant issue in this discussion. Are we making the comparison with strings designed for acoustic play or electric play?

Walrus and I had a shared experience with the X-50 he references, as I sold him that guitar. I put medium PB's on that guitar and thought it had gorgeous tone and plenty of volume without an amp.

Both the X-50 and the A-50 had the same size, shape, and laminated maple top. The only element distinguishing the X-50 was the pickup. While the A-50 was designed to be a student acoustic archtop, as opposed to a professional carved top jazz masterpiece like an Artist Award, it was an acoustic archtop.

 

[bradk]

Yes, very good point about the strings. Just for reference I use 13 flat wounds...I'm going for that classic Kenny Burrell/Grant Green electric tone more than a good acoustic tone.

 

[yettoblaster]

Agreed.

I had an A-50 once!

I wish I still had it.

 

[walrus]

Yes, zilla has a good point. The bronze strings on my A-50 definitely made it sound better - very nice in fact. I put steel strings on the X-50 because I played it plugged in quite a bit as well - I thought the steel were better when it was amplified. I agree with zilla that the X-50 would have sounded very sweet unplugged with bronze strings.

So, to go back to the original question of the thread: The A-50 and X-50 are very nice guitars for acoustic playing...

walrus