Difference between carved and flat top

[breakdanceattiffanys]

I've reading around the internet, and from what I've found, a flat-top guitar is more bass and low-end freq response in the tone while a carved top has a better high end. Is that it? Pricewise, there's a huge jump from a flat to a carved top, but what are the other factors?

Take a LP, for example, since it's one of the most popular guitars worldwide. There's a slab/studio version, then the standard/carved top. What are the main differences?

 

[ginormous]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

If we're talking hollow bodies, then an authentic carved top can project some low-mid frequencies a little more, much like the carved top of a violin. However, many hollow and semi-hollow bodies today have veneered tops that are bent in a steam press, which is much cheaper.

As far as LPs go, the carved top was for looks, to emulate Gibson's other electric models which were all hollow bodies. Some claim there is a sound difference because of it, but I haven't heard it.

 

[bigheadood]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

As far as LPs go, the carved top is usually maple, on the mahogany body. Adds some brightness, in most cases. Flat top LPs, (juniors, I think) are flat top, all mahogany.

I don't think there's a difference between a carved top and flat top if the wood is the same.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

I've reading around the internet, and from what I've found, a flat-top guitar is more bass and low-end freq response in the tone while a carved top has a better high end. Is that it?

No, that's not quite it. An archtop LP has more mass, and therefore more sustain & low end for the same-shaped body. It starts with a thick slab and adds to it. They get their high end from the carved top being maple instead of mahogany. If it was all mahogany, it'd be darker (like old Customs used to be).

If you have a thick flat top body, like an LP Special, it will have a lot of mass, and that's what increases bass. Carving the wood per se isn't as big a factor as having a lot of wood in the body. If you start with a thin body and carve it up, it will lose mass. If you carve a thick body it may still end up with more mass than a flat top. Depends on the design. You lose wood when you make cutaways at the neck. The type of wood is a big factor. Maple and ash are much brighter than mahogany, so a thick flat ash body (Strat) may be brighter than a thiner carved body (SG).

LP Customs, Stds, Traditionals, Classics, and Studios all have arch tops and HB's. Specials and Juniors have flat tops and P-90's. There's a lot of factors that make up a guitar's EQ, and the discussions you've been reading may not have taken all of them into account.

 

[breakdanceattiffanys]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

The type of wood is a big factor. Maple and ash are much brighter than mahogany, so a thick flat ash body (Strat) may be brighter than a thiner carved body (SG).

This is a big no-duh to me, was just curious. Obviously even in a thinner-bodied Strat a basswood body is going to seem piercing next to a mahogany or rosewood one. Seems odd to me that a thin cap would change the intonation all that much, but I guess it does makes some sense. Most tops are what, about 5/8-1"? And, that's where the pickups are mounted, so yeah, I guess I can see that.

I get the mass = sustain part, too. Is just common sense. But assuming it's all the same wood - i.e, maple with a maple top, mahogany with a mahogany top, etc - then tonally they're about the same, just less sustain?

It just seems crazy to me, since there's such the major price jump. The all-mahogany LP studios are anywhere from about $800-1300, and then there's anywhere from a $500 to four-figure jump up to just the standard with the maple cap, can be triple - or more - depending on the model.

If 5/8-1" of shaped maple costs that much, it better make one helluva difference. I know you get what you pay for, am just curious if it's more for aesthetics, or if sonically there really is that a huge difference....

 

[John_L]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

Rick Turner has some great info of carving and its affects on harmonics which he puts into practice on his model 1 guitar. Ibanez had a go at the same sort of thing back in the 0's but have since dropped it.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

I've reading around the internet, and from what I've found, a flat-top guitar is more bass and low-end freq response in the tone while a carved top has a better high end. Is that it? Pricewise, there's a huge jump from a flat to a carved top, but what are the other factors?

Take a LP, for example, since it's one of the most popular guitars worldwide. There's a slab/studio version, then the standard/carved top. What are the main differences?

That has obviously been written by people who just think "more maple == must be brighter". I seriously doubt any of them has taken a carved top and just sanded it down to flat and thin.

I think that a thin maple layer cannot do much else than just dampen the whole thing. But there are some excellent guitars that feature this, so YMMV.

I am not aware of a Gibson Les Paul with a thin flat maple cap. The juniors and specials have no maple cap.

 

[John_L]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

That has obviously been written by people who just think "more maple == must be brighter". I seriously doubt any of them has taken a carved top and just sanded it down to flat and thin.

I think that a thin maple layer cannot do much else than just dampen the whole thing. But there are some excellent guitars that feature this, so YMMV.

I am not aware of a Gibson Les Paul with a thin flat maple cap. The juniors and specials have no maple cap.

The Les Paul Personal and Professional of the 1970s had flat maple caps. These guitars were based on what Les actually played so also feature complex active electronics which make comparison pointless. However Les always had Gibson make him guitars with flat maple caps right from the beginning.
The only reason Gibson carved the top on the Les Paul was because they had a carving machine and Fender didn't. The decision was purely cosmetic.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

It just seems crazy to me, since there's such the major price jump. The all-mahogany LP studios are anywhere from about $800-1300, and then there's anywhere from a $500 to four-figure jump up to just the standard with the maple cap, can be triple - or more - depending on the model.

That huge price jump isn't driven by the modest increase in cost. How much does it cost for a 1/2" slab of maple and to pay a guy to run a router over it? They charge what they can get away with. And when that doesn't work, they have sales and price drops, and whatever else.

You have several hundred dollars worth of PU's, electronics, and hardware in a Gibson, at retail prices (they pay much less for it). That leaves you with wood, finish, and frets that they in essence charge $1,000 to $3,000+ for. These are mass-produced; their costs are nowhere near that.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

Les Paul himself used a Les Paul recording which IIRC has no maple cap or top.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

It just seems crazy to me, since there's such the major price jump. The all-mahogany LP studios are anywhere from about $800-1300, and then there's anywhere from a $500 to four-figure jump up to just the standard with the maple cap, can be triple - or more - depending on the model.

Gibson's prices are based on "what you'll pay", not what it costs.

The pricing structure doesn't rate the carved maple top very high. The Les Paul Studio, the BFG and a few others are cheap and have the carved maple top.

More-than-dot inlays, fretboard binding, body binding and figured maple top are the major price points in Gibson's scheme.

 

[brunogio]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

I'm with the consensus that it's mainly cosmetic. It might make the guitar easier to play with a carved top as compared to a flat one. But don't think the sound is affected by the top being carved or not.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

I'm with the consensus that it's mainly cosmetic. It might make the guitar easier to play with a carved top as compared to a flat one. But don't think the sound is affected by the top being carved or not.

You don't think half an inch of maple holding the bridge posts sounds different than the bridge posts in mahogany and a 1/8" inch of maple dampening the thing?

 

[Chickenwings]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

the arched top also changes the neck angle which makes a difference to playing comfort as well.
the main reason initially for building arched top guitars was to reduce the need for heavy bracing, allowing greater projection -just the same principle as a violin. with solidbodies there is no need for bracing so the tonal effect is less prevalent - its aminly for playing comfort and cosmetic reasons.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

the arched top also changes the neck angle which makes a difference to playing comfort as well.

Good point. The neck-to-body angle changes string tension, and the downward pressure forces more vibrations into the body. I don't know how much this impacts tone, but it's part of the Gibson magic.

Something that also effects tone is a whammy bar, which are famous for absorbing vibrations and not passing them thru to the body & PU's. You'll lose more tone from one of them, then a couple of body contours.

Plus using an A5 magnet, especially in a '59, will add low end. Again, there's many parts to the equation, and you can't point at one piece and blame it for everything.

 

[John_L]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

Les Paul himself used a Les Paul recording which IIRC has no maple cap or top.

The guitar Les used was a bit like Slash's it was made for him by someone and later copied by Gibson as the Personal. The Personal was a ply with a mahogany core and maple top and back. The professional was the same as the Personal but without the input for a microphone. The recording was closer to a standard Les Paul with the electronics based on the Personal. The Signature was basically a active semi as rare as hens teeth and very desirable.

 

[FuseG4]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

Carved tops sure do look good.

 

[John_L]

Re: Difference between carved and flat top

the arched top also changes the neck angle which makes a difference to playing comfort as well.

Not always, Godin countersink the tun-o-matic and have the same neck angle on their carved guitars and the uncarved ones.