Sweet 16 to es 175 sound comparison

[Vanschoyck]

I've been meaning to do this for a while. While the two guitars are very different in some important ways: solid vs plywood, scale length, pickup and pickup placement, they do come up in the same category and I thought a sound comparison might be useful to someone. They were recorded the same way with the same gear. I'm hoping I got the amplitudes about the same, because that can really skew someone's impression. And the performance, as they say, is what it is.

 

-2" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedId='b60cb5907c9cb335d4a7b601f578d680' allowfullscreen=''>

 

[peterbright]

Hard to tell as the bass notes are not going to the woofer.

[FredZepp]

Hard to tell as the bass notes are not going to the woofer.

Hmmm.... My woofer is working...

 

Nice tones from each guitar and very nice playing. I thought the sweet 16 was more resonate and open, with nice note clarity. But both were quite nice.

[SofaPlayer]

Enough bass here. Great comparison! The Sweet 16 sounds much nicer, less compressed, more natural. If you have nothing to compare it to, the 175 sounds nice, too. But once you hear the Sweet 16 you know how it should sound like. Great playing also!

[soybean]

Very well done (and played). I like how you played the exact same piece for the comparison. Some of these people on youtube play completely different pieces in different tempos and expect us to learn something.

[JeffB]

Your playing makes me angry at myself.

I love your playing and it doesnt matter what guitar you use.

[Horace]

One of my fave tunes on piano. I'd love to try to learn to play it as well as you do on guitar. IMO the Sweet 16 sounds way better in this comparison. The notes are more clear and the tones ring longer. Are the strings the same gauge, make, and age? Thanks for putting this out there.

[pressure]

Nice playing. I like the 16 best. Good comparison, I could hear the differences in tone easily.

[Hfan]

Nice comparison, nice tune and nice playing. Sweet 16 all the way. Thanks for posting it.

[Vanschoyck]

One of my fave tunes on piano. I'd love to try to learn to play it as well as you do on guitar. IMO the Sweet 16 sounds way better in this comparison. The notes are more clear and the tones ring longer. Are the strings the same gauge, make, and age? Thanks for putting this out there.

Yes, the strings are the same - roughly the same mileage.

I did it on two different days; I was just recording some practice and ended up with two similar takes of the same song which inspired the side by side. I suppose the mic placement might have changed a bit but I think most of the difference is attributable to the guitars.

[barrymclark]

I liked both but I do like the S16 a bit more. I like how 'open' the ring is.

 

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

 

[thorn]

Which one is the Sweet 16? I thought we were supposed to guess which was which since the top of the head stock is cut off in each picture.

[Vanschoyck]

Which one is the Sweet 16? I thought we were supposed to guess which was which since the top of the head stock is cut off in each picture.

It's the blond. I don't really know why the photos get cut off that way when I put them into sound cloud. And I didn't even notice until you pointed it out! Some of the giveaways that the others saw were gold vs nickel hardware, fret board inlay, knob placement. Even my avatar got cut off and I don't know why. I originally uploaded a couple of different photos to fix that but it didn't work and I blew it off.

 

You can still guess if you want to!

[thorn]

Yeah, after my post I saw your avatar and called myself a dumbass. So, I'm going to go against the popular vote. So I listened to each sound track 4 times and then posted my q. After I called myself a dumbass I went out back and smoked a bowl and then listened to each track alternately 4 times each again. I then was able to concentrate and concluded that the second (gibby?) track reminded me of an old Tom Waits tune. I know they both are the same tune but the tone plus the tune reminded me of it. I, for the life of me, can't remember what that tune is but I guarantee you that at 2:45 in the morning I will jump up straight in bed and say, "Ffffcc....Yeah...That's the tune." And that will wake up the Missus and make her grumpy.

 

Anyway, I was able to concentrate on the tones of each track and the second one sounded more open. And because of this, I could hear the reverb and the pick attack better. So I listened to the first track again because I hadn't heard reverb before and sure enough I could hear it. That convinced me why I liked the second one better.

 

Caveat: I don't like Jazz. I don't like the tone knob turned all the way down, pluckin' etc. So, Maybe track one, the Sweet 16, is a better Jazz tone. I can see that it probably is. So as an Outsider, I'm telling you which one I like. That doesn't mean that if I held each guitar in my hand that I would make the same choice. I'm rambling but I hope it made sense.

[Kuz]

They exactly like they should, IMHO.

 

The 175 sounds like a Laminate vintage 175 and The Sweet 16 sounds like a solidbody jazz guitar.

 

They both sound great, but I like the solid wood tone of the Sweet 16 better.

[thorn]

They exactly like they should, IMHO.

 

The 175 sounds like a Laminate vintage 175 and The Sweet 16 sounds like a solidbody jazz guitar.

 

They both sound great, but I like the solid wood tone of the Sweet 16 better.

 

Ahhh... Okay. See I don't know these models. It's cool to have a comparison like this between the two to educate me too. Had to add that last "too."

[ScottNaylor]

Love them both and was most intrigued how the nature of each instrument came through in your musical interpretation! You are not only a fine guitar player but a gifted musician as well, and these are a wonderful example of showing how such high quality guitars reveal themselves in the right hands. Your post was a treat! Thank you

[Frank67]

I listened to it twice through good headphone. I also liked both a lot .. and the nice playing as well!

 

My vote would go to the ES175 - But not by a large margin (and the answer my vary with the specific mood of the day). As I hear it, the Sweet 16 had the faster and clearer (more 'crispy') attack and the ES175 had a bit more mellow voice in the sustained notes. Both wonderful, both great … that is why one needs to own a guitar with a carved top and a laminate as well :-)

[Vanschoyck]

Yeah, after my post I saw your avatar and called myself a dumbass. So, I'm going to go against the popular vote. So I listened to each sound track 4 times and then posted my q. After I called myself a dumbass I went out back and smoked a bowl and then listened to each track alternately 4 times each again. I then was able to concentrate and concluded that the second (gibby?) track reminded me of an old Tom Waits tune. I know they both are the same tune but the tone plus the tune reminded me of it. I, for the life of me, can't remember what that tune is but I guarantee you that at 2:45 in the morning I will jump up straight in bed and say, "Ffffcc....Yeah...That's the tune." And that will wake up the Missus and make her grumpy.

 

Anyway, I was able to concentrate on the tones of each track and the second one sounded more open. And because of this, I could hear the reverb and the pick attack better. So I listened to the first track again because I hadn't heard reverb before and sure enough I could hear it. That convinced me why I liked the second one better.

 

Caveat: I don't like Jazz. I don't like the tone knob turned all the way down, pluckin' etc. So, Maybe track one, the Sweet 16, is a better Jazz tone. I can see that it probably is. So as an Outsider, I'm telling you which one I like. That doesn't mean that if I held each guitar in my hand that I would make the same choice. I'm rambling but I hope it made sense.

 

Makes total sense. The sound of a guitar recorded is only part of the deal; it needs to feel good while your playing it - you don't want to have to fight it too much for what you want to do.

 

The tone knobs on both guitars were wide open, and the volumes were both about 8'ish.

 

Thanks everybody for listening and commenting, it was very helpful.

[peteraltongreen]

Good topic,this.I have a 575 (1988),and a Gibson L4 with a CC pup (1953).Both these sound very different through the same amp.The Heritage handles the more modern sounds better than the L4,but oh,the sound of a 61 year old carved arch top.Acoustic wise,the L4 wins,in a band setting,575 is more versatile.They are both GREAT GUITARs !

[Gitfiddler]

Good topic,this.I have a 575 (1988),and a Gibson L4 with a CC pup (1953).Both these sound very different through the same amp.The Heritage handles the more modern sounds better than the L4,but oh,the sound of a 61 year old carved arch top.Acoustic wise,the L4 wins,in a band setting,575 is more versatile.They are both GREAT GUITARs !575-L4.jpg

 

Peter~ Great comparison. Makes me wonder what a CC p'up would sound like in a 575.

 

I sure dig your L4!!!

[Vanschoyck]

 

Peter~ Great comparison. Makes me wonder what a CC p'up would sound like in a 575.

 

I sure dig your L4!!!

+1 on the L4 (drooling a little.)

[2bornot2bop]

I anticipated the deeper body of the '175 would allow for a darker woodier tone than the '16. But the clarity of the '16 was much greater, and the '175, to my ears, sounded muted by comparison. Nice playing.

[soybean]

 

Makes me wonder what a CC p'up would sound like in a 575.

—

I don't know the answer, but there is an es-175 with a CC pickup here and it sounds pretty darn good. Much different than a regular humbucker.