|
|
Joined:
January 2004
Posts: 627
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ | I've played my O 1619 CL for about 20 years, at Sunday church music. A few years ago I cheated on my main squeze and used a Taylor 514CE. Although, this is a quality guitar, it sounded tinny, whenever I used a capo. I soon went back to the 1619. I purchased an LX 1777, back in Feb. This LX was much lighter then the 1619 (granted it doesn't have the beautiful mother of pearl binding and carved walnut bridge of the LX)but it is so much lighter, and brighter sounding than either guitar. The fact is that, the folks at the mother ship have put a real winner together and I understand it. Someone put a good explanation of the X bracing and less mass of the LX top on a thread, awhile ago that explains it very well. Less mass more vibrations./
Tommy | |
| | |
Joined:
July 2003
Posts: 1922
Location: Canton (Detroit), MI | Tommy, glad to hear you got a good one. I've tried some 1777 LXs I didn't care for.
My take on the LX is not that it is brighter sounding, IMHO, but that they have a more "open" sound, like some all-wood acoustics. This is not always what I personally am looking for, but the LX is directionally correct for the market as it is right now, and it is justifiably successful saleswise. I may buy one for my next guitar---the Balladeer LXs have a sound that I really like.
Roger | |
| | |
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | The aLeX was the right move for this time. Thank God the factory was moving in this direction and was able to say, "Here you go, this is what is needed now" | |
| |
|
Why the LX