Tonic difference between a wider guitar and a thicker guitar?

[Jonathan K]

Hi, folks!

I'm finding an affordable Gretsch 16' hollowbody, but the one that caught my eyes has a 15.75 inches lower bout width. Instead, the depth is 3 inches deep, which is slightly deeper than the normal ones. So, I'm curious, does that difference in depth compensate for the difference in width? Any opinions are appreciated!

 

[Synchro]

I wouldn’t be too concerned about the 15.75” vs. 16.00“ width. 3” deep should give a nice, warm sound. I’ve heard some thinner archtops that seemed to have a bit more midrange, but that’s not a hard and fast rule. My Guild is only 2” deep, and sounds about the same as any deep-body archtop.
“

 

[Shock]

I find that others can hear the difference in my guitars that I don't pick up on. My 3156 apparently does not have the twang that the 6120s have. that comes from multiple people. Both are 16" bouts with just less than 3" of depth. Unamplified, centerblocking and bracing does make a difference perhaps. Maybe the cat's eye does twang less than a f hole? My ear tells me the 3156 is the best unamplified acoustic sound I have ever heard. But we already know that my opinion can be a bit sketchy. It is also the 3156 is the only hollow body I know of that has a neck joint at the 17th fret, rather than the 15th. Could that be the difference?

The biggest difference sonically with the Gretsch hollow bodies, IMO, is the pickups. The 3156 has TVJ C/C+, one 6120 has Filtertrons and the other TVJ BS. IMO, I would not consider the TVJ Classics a vintage sound. They are full spectrum, well balanced, clear and clean. The TVJ BS sound just like Setzer. Lots of twang. The Filtertrons are the vintage sound. I did have the stock K2000 Dynas (also very vintage) in the 3156. I was happy enough with the sound, but very happy with the TVJs. The single coils just didn't work out play in small rooms with multiple instruments. They howled too much. I should say that I use 10 nickel strings. Throw a set of brass 13s on them and that would all change dramatically. That would really bring out the twang. But I am not going for twang usually. So if I am, I grab the 6120 with the Setzers.

I have not had any success with the Gretschbuckers. I cannot get a sound out of them that I want.

I suggest that the body does make a difference, but what really makes the whole package are the pickups in the final wash. Decide what you want it to sound like and match the PUs. And figure what strings you use in the mix. You will come out of it with a guitar that sounds like no other. So with the right plan, you can have a one off guitar that sounds just like you want. You find the Gretsch you like and make it into the one you love.

 

[loudnlousy]

I `guess that the type of bracing has a bigger effect on the acousic tone of guitars than 0,25` difference in width.

 

[Synchro]

I `guess that the type of bracing has a bigger effect on the acousic tone of guitars than 0,25` difference in width.

Undoubtedly.

I find that others can hear the difference in my guitars that I don't pick up on. My 3156 apparently does not have the twang that the 6120s have. that comes from multiple people. Both are 16" bouts with just less than 3" of depth. Unamplified, centerblocking and bracing does make a difference perhaps. Maybe the cat's eye does twang less than a f hole? My ear tells me the 3156 is the best unamplified acoustic sound I have ever heard. But we already know that my opinion can be a bit sketchy. It is also the 3156 is the only hollow body I know of that has a neck joint at the 17th fret, rather than the 15th. Could that be the difference?

The biggest difference sonically with the Gretsch hollow bodies, IMO, is the pickups. The 3156 has TVJ C/C+, one 6120 has Filtertrons and the other TVJ BS. IMO, I would not consider the TVJ Classics a vintage sound. They are full spectrum, well balanced, clear and clean. The TVJ BS sound just like Setzer. Lots of twang. The Filtertrons are the vintage sound. I did have the stock K2000 Dynas (also very vintage) in the 3156. I was happy enough with the sound, but very happy with the TVJs. The single coils just didn't work out play in small rooms with multiple instruments. They howled too much. I should say that I use 10 nickel strings. Throw a set of brass 13s on them and that would all change dramatically. That would really bring out the twang. But I am not going for twang usually. So if I am, I grab the 6120 with the Setzers.

I have not had any success with the Gretschbuckers. I cannot get a sound out of them that I want.

I suggest that the body does make a difference, but what really makes the whole package are the pickups in the final wash. Decide what you want it to sound like and match the PUs. And figure what strings you use in the mix. You will come out of it with a guitar that sounds like no other. So with the right plan, you can have a one off guitar that sounds just like you want. You find the Gretsch you like and make it into the one you love.

A couple of years ago, a friend stopped over and we jammed on some songs. I lean him a Squier Tele and plugged it into my Winfield Tremor. Hearing that guitar from across the room was revelatory, because by being 10-15 feet away from the amp, I could hear the sound as it projected and filled the room. I already knew that there was a difference in the sound, but hearing it from across the room made a big difference in what I perceived. (As a side note, that relatively inexpensive guitar has become a favorite for a unique, beefy, but not overwhelming, sound.

The G3156 is pretty much a typical archtop, with parallel bracing, and the cat’s eye sound holes would favor a fairly warm, ‘soft-focus’ sound, compared with the more tightly focused sound that small F holes tend to deliver. I had a Historic Series G3161, and I used to call it my “stealth Byrdland”, because it was a wonderful sounding Jazz guitar, even though the thin body and orange finish sort of screamed Rockabilly. Some of that was the construction (parallel-braced, no soundpost), but the Gretschbuckers were very much slanted towards a big, warm, jazzy sound.

But, I wanted a twangy sound, like Brian Setzer, and I ended up with a 6120, which had parallel bracing and a soundpost, plus the much more focused sound of Filtertron pickups. Later on, I got trestle braced guitars, which are more focused, more twangy, and less acoustically strong. There’s a trade off on the acoustic side, and another trade off on the electrical side of things.

(Let me get on my pet-peeve soapbox. Electric guitars, for the most part, do not have any electronics. The line between electrical and electronics is very definite, and that line is drawn at semiconductors. If you have a guitar with active electronics, which require either a battery or an external power supply, then your guitar can be said to have electronics, but if you are not supplying power to some sort of internal preamp, it is, by definition, electrical. Even the Varitone switch on some Gibsons is a strictly passive electrical system.)

Pickups are passive electrical devices and depending upon the inductive reactance, can favor lower frequencies or higher frequencies; upper harmonics. Another factor is the spacing of the coils on humbucking pickups. The wider the coils are spaced, the more difference in the harmonic spectrum detected by each coil of the humbucker. The more widely spaced the coils, the less defined the resultant sound. Filtertrons are basically mini-humbuckers and tend to be a bit more focused. They are also lower inductance pickups, which tend to preserve upper harmonics to a greater degree than higher inductance pickups, such as Gibson Humbuckers.

Gretschbucker pickups are fairly large footprint pickups and I would venture that they have a fairly high inductive reactance. You can shape the output with equalization, but that will never fully compensate for the fact that the physical and electrical characteristics of such pickups, which will not detect the upper harmonics as effectively as a smaller, lower inductance Humbucker, or a single coil. No signal processing can compensate for harmonics which are not detected in the first place.

Shortly after I bought my G3161, I saw a video of Brian Setzer and realized that he was getting the sound I had been seeking for the Rock side of my playing. That sound, IMO, was very much a product of trestle bracing and Filtertron pickups, played into an early ‘60s Bassman and a Roland Tape Echo.

It seems pretty simple, but getting a twangy sound is not confined to Gretsch guitars. Teles can twang like nobody’s business. I once heard an Instrumental Rock band that sounded great, and the lead player was using an ES-335. There are no hard and fast rules.

 

[whiskeyjack]

Hi, folks!

I'm finding an affordable Gretsch 16' hollowbody, but the one that caught my eyes has a 15.75 inches lower bout width. Instead, the depth is 3 inches deep, which is slightly deeper than the normal ones. So, I'm curious, does that difference in depth compensate for the difference in width? Any opinions are appreciated!

I have a Gretch G5120 two-tone tobacco burst with a Bigsby. She's 2.5 x 16. I'm really an acoustic fingerstyle player but I've played enough semi-solid and hollow body electrics over the years to tell you that guitar weenies like us get too wrapped up in details that don't amount to anything except fodder for forums like this. A good example of this is demonstrated by acoustic forum discussions about bridge pins: how they may or may not influence tone, projection, sustain, etc. (The Guitar Weenie factor is strong with this one). A few players will tell you that they notice a huge difference between tusk and rosewood pins. Others, like myself, don't hear it even after reading pages and pages about it. (String gauge is a far more relevant metric than bridge pins . . . and most everybody can hear and feel the variations between string gauges.)

I have to smile when you ask "....does that difference in depth compensate for the difference in width?" "Compensate for what?" is my first question. Tone? Projection? Sustain? Will that small volume differential create bigger, better tone than a slightly smaller box? Unless you're concerned about its acoustic performance, any and/or all of those parameters can be manipulated by the pickup, the amp or a combination of both. There was a time when the size of the box was important but, these days the size of the box doesn't really mean that much to the signal chain. The Ibanez George Benson series is proof-positive that a box doesn't need it's own zip code to sound like an electric jazz guitar.

So, my humble answer to your question is another question: "Which guitar would you find more comfortable to play?" After playing the 25" scale Gibson and Epiphone ES175's and other monster body guitars, I decided I didn't need something that big: 2.5" x 16" is my limit to playing comfortably. I don't see, (or hear), where I sacrificed any tone for comfort. I just wanted to sound the tiniest bit like Chet Atkins. . .

 

[Pops]

Dude, you should visit a violin forum if you want to learn how materials and soundpost placement affect tone! There’s as many opinions as there are players.

That being said, I noticed my Electromatic was less resonant than the Streamliner I traded for it, but the Electromatic sounds better when amplified. I think that’s from a difference in the pickups.

 

[Highroller]

Hi, folks!

I'm finding an affordable Gretsch 16' hollowbody, but the one that caught my eyes has a 15.75 inches lower bout width. Instead, the depth is 3 inches deep, which is slightly deeper than the normal ones. So, I'm curious, does that difference in depth compensate for the difference in width? Any opinions are appreciated!

"Tonic difference?" I prefer Schweppes personally, but that's just me. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

But if you don't mind, I am curious ... What exact model are you looking at that has a 3" body depth? That strikes me as a bit unusual, but I'm no expert. The typical measurements are 2.25 thru 2.75 on the hollow bodies.

As for an answer to your actual question, I agree with most others here that say while it could make a difference in how the guitar sounds acoustically, once you plug it in it won't make much of a discernible difference sonically. By that point, it's the pickups, pedals and amps that are running the show.

 

[afire]

But if you don't mind, I am curious ... What exact model are you looking at that has a 3" body depth? That strikes me as a bit unusual, but I'm no expert.

That had me wondering too. Maybe vintage? The early Streamliners and some other archtops had a 15.75" lower bout and depth just a little over 3",

 

[Highroller]

That had me wondering too. Maybe vintage? The early Streamliners and some other archtops had a 15.75" lower bout and depth just a little over 3",

Gretsch has made so many different things over the years, nothing's impossible. That's why I'm curious. Truth is ... a big extra fat archtop? Hmmmm, sounds like something I'd like!

 

[swivel]

I have no conclusion on thickness and size after having various acoustic guitars from 4.25 deep to about only 3". The 3" models I had were big lower bout of 16". Sound great, still have one.
The smaller lower bout models I've tried were like almost parlor size bout but deeper. They sound good too.
Real deep body seems a bit more mid scooped.
But add that electrics are less influenced by all that and I wouldn't worry.

Interestingly a '59 ES225 I had with P90's had terrible feedback standing in front of an amp, even at very reasonable volume levels.... to the point where it was difficult to gig. And they are what, maybe 2" deep?

A 3" deep Guild F5CE acoustic with a minibucker pickup installed in the soundhole fed back much less than the ES225 for some reason.

 

[Jonathan K]

"Tonic difference?" I prefer Schweppes personally, but that's just me. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

But if you don't mind, I am curious ... What exact model are you looking at that has a 3" body depth? That strikes me as a bit unusual, but I'm no expert. The typical measurements are 2.25 thru 2.75 on the hollow bodies.

As for an answer to your actual question, I agree with most others here that say while it could make a difference in how the guitar sounds acoustically, once you plug it in it won't make much of a discernible difference sonically. By that point, it's the pickups, pedals and amps that are running the show.

Hey there. It is a Gretsch 6186clipper with single dynasonic pickup model. The question is mostly for the overall tone acoustically, which is why I focused that much on the body size. It is sort of a give and take post. I really prefer the acoustic sound of an archtop but retains some fullness in EQs. And apparently, after hearing a 17inch archtop I just cannot struggle with it. While the comparison between a traditional archtop and a gretsch is quite senseless. So, I quit making decision on a gretsch guitar.
Heres that particular gretsch guitar model.

 

[Ricochet]

Dude, you should visit a violin forum if you want to learn how materials and soundpost placement affect tone! There’s as many opinions as there are players.

That being said, I noticed my Electromatic was less resonant than the Streamliner I traded for it, but the Electromatic sounds better when amplified. I think that’s from a difference in the pickups.

I got a big chuckle seeing some guys going at it(online) over the tone of the rosin they used. Some of those guys use rosin cut with moondust or gold particles.

 

[gretsch-to-go]

Depth for a hollow body makes a huge difference for projection. I have an Applause by Ovation Super Shallow. Compared to Mid Bowl & Deeper bowl Ovations unplugged there's both volume & tonal differences. I preferred the Super Shallow though, it was loud and deep enough because of the shape of the Lyrichord bowl enhances. Gut feeling the deeper the body, the threshold before for feedback is at a lower volume plugged in. You'll most like prefer the Gretsch with a deeper hollow/semi-hollow when you play it unplugged, it's probably closer to an acoustic guitar. Ted Nugent's Byrdland for Stranglehold is epic sound/tone.

 

[Shadowy_Man]

I'm still trying to articulate the difference in sound between a hollow and solid or semi-solid guitar. Someone asked me what the difference was recently and I couldn't tell them.

For instance, I have a fully hollow guitar with floating bridge, P90s and B60. I have a semi-hollow with fixed bridge and a B70. Both have P90s.

The semi-hollow has more bass, but also more zing in the low notes. I think the additional bass comes from the tension bar and increased angle of strings behind the bridge. I think the zing is from the steel saddles (the hollow-body has brass saddles).

The hollow body has a nicer (better attack, more even response) sound using the bridge pickup - I think because the bridge pickup is closer to the bridge than the semi. Or maybe it's the saddles? The semi-hollow has a nicer neck pickup sound - maybe because the pickups are slightly hotter? Maybe the neck pickup is marginally closer to the strings?

I feel like I would need to remove all the variables between the two guitars to figure out what actually is the difference with the fully hollow guitar vs semi-hollow. Like same bridge, same Bigsby, same pickup position and height, same materials, etc.

I feel like the hollowness of the guitar is contributing something, but it's so hard to articulate. I think a lot of the "archtop sound" is a result of that floating bridge and length of strings behind the bridge at a relatively shallow angle - but I don't think that's the only thing contributing to the "archtop sound"

 

[Seamus]

I'm still trying to articulate the difference in sound between a hollow and solid or semi-solid guitar. Someone asked me what the difference was recently and I couldn't tell them.

For instance, I have a fully hollow guitar with floating bridge, P90s and B60. I have a semi-hollow with fixed bridge and a B70. Both have P90s.

The semi-hollow has more bass, but also more zing in the low notes. I think the additional bass comes from the tension bar and increased angle of strings behind the bridge. I think the zing is from the steel saddles (the hollow-body has brass saddles).

The hollow body has a nicer (better attack, more even response) sound using the bridge pickup - I think because the bridge pickup is closer to the bridge than the semi. Or maybe it's the saddles? The semi-hollow has a nicer neck pickup sound - maybe because the pickups are slightly hotter? Maybe the neck pickup is marginally closer to the strings?

I feel like I would need to remove all the variables between the two guitars to figure out what actually is the difference with the fully hollow guitar vs semi-hollow. Like same bridge, same Bigsby, same pickup position and height, same materials, etc.

I feel like the hollowness of the guitar is contributing something, but it's so hard to articulate. I think a lot of the "archtop sound" is a result of that floating bridge and length of strings behind the bridge at a relatively shallow angle - but I don't think that's the only thing contributing to the "archtop sound"

I've been wondering this same thing. For me, it's trying to choose what kind of guitar I want to have Dynasonics in. But the questions are the same. It feels like a "know it when you hear it" thing that's really subtle in most ways.

But the big one for me is: how does hollow/semi/solid affect sustain? The other differences seem like things that are usually easily adjusted via amp and EQ.

 

[Back in Black]

Hi, folks!

I'm finding an affordable Gretsch 16' hollowbody, but the one that caught my eyes has a 15.75 inches lower bout width. Instead, the depth is 3 inches deep, which is slightly deeper than the normal ones. So, I'm curious, does that difference in depth compensate for the difference in width? Any opinions are appreciated!

Hey Jonathan,

Old school common sense would dictate that the larger the sound chamber the greater the tone and richness of the instrument.

Then again, you can take a plank and stick guitar, like a Telecaster, add the right PU combination/effects/modeling amp...

And...have it sound like anything you want.

If I was in your place, my choice would be more based on personal preference, color/shape/playing comfort/parts preference/available with case/warranty...with little to no concern as to what the guitar sounded like...because, I know, I can get it to sound however I want.

I have purchased a lot of my guitars on-line/sight un-seen, with absolutely no concern whatever as to what the guitar sounds like.

They all sound different...and that's one of the best things about them.

The attached is my most recent acquisition, ordered new, on-line from Sweetwater, a stick, two pieces of Masonite, and plywood.

I had no idea what it was going to sound like. I installed new Labella flat-wounds, because I like Labella flat-wounds, tuned the bass, plugged it into my VOX amp/two 12'' Celestion speakers,

And...the bass sounds fantastic...with never a thought as to what it sounded like, whether or not the sound chamber has ''trestle bracing'', or if there even was a sound chamber.

Best,

BIB.

 

[Emergence]

Tonal differences? Tonal is the right word. Do millimeters, or fractions of inches matter? Do they affect tone?

Small dimensional differences affect comfort and playability. The guitar that’s comfortable to play will sound better because you’ll play it and bond with it. Get the one that fits.

Tonal differences? The biggest tonal difference I’ve ever experienced on a guitar came when I removed the space control bridge from my 6118T Anniversary and replaced it with a Compton chambered titanium bridge. Higher order harmonics just shine now. The acoustic tone is dramatically better. And it just sounds amazing through my amp. Small dimensional differences don’t affect tone like that.

 

[General_Lee]

Antonius Stradivarius could probably have given you a definitive answer. I can only say...yes.

 

[Emergence]

But the big one for me is: how does hollow/semi/solid affect sustain? The other differences seem like things that are usually easily adjusted via amp and EQ.

As the user of an equalizer as my only always on pedal, I urge caution in thinking about what equalization can and cannot do. The equalizer sits between the guitar and amp I use mine for tone shaping and to minimize the dreaded mud. An equalizer doesn’t add anything that’s not coming from the guitar to begin with. It divides the full frequency spectrum of the guitar into overlapping bands which can be boosted or suppressed. That’s it. An equalizer can’t add harmonics that aren’t present in the input signal. It can’t make a Gretsch sound like a Les Paul or a Telecaster sound like a Gretsch. It can get you somewhat closer, maybe close enough in a noisy bar, but that’s the limit.

Sustain is different. Resonant guitars get their resonance from transduction of energy from the strings into vibrational energy in the guitar body. Since energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it must come from somewhere. Energy transferred to the guitar body can’t add to sustain. Guitars with the greatest sustain are necessarily the least resonant. It makes sense when you think about it. There’s a pedal that gives the illusion of sustain, a compressor, which borrows energy from the attack to add back as the note fades. This isn’t the same thing as sustain from the guitar but it’s close enough after two or three drinks and unnoticeable after four.