Soft Arch and Hard Arch Soloist

[Richard W]

Please correct me if I'm wrong but is this a soft arch?


And is this a hard arch?

[charvel750]

They both look like the modern "hard" arch. The archtops from about 1996 and sooner had a much more soft contour, but after that, the arching is harder and more abrupt.

[murkat]

looks the same with the "PRS aircraft carrier flat top in the middle" look...

[shreddermon]

Both are hard arches, sometimes called "carved tops", too. For the soft arch look, think Les Paul.

[ralph]

Look in this thread, the early JA's are mostly all soft arches:

http://www.jcfonline.com/threads/78568-Jackson-Archtop-Soloist-Gallery-Archive?highlight=ja+archtop

[audiophile]

I'll chime in on this.

In reality, there are 2 distict arch styles that are obvious.
The original and the SLAT style.

At some point the terminology became soft and hard, and didn't specifically refer to original vs slat, but could be inferred. That being said, there are hybrids that have features of both and blurs the distinctions making the true definition confusing.

I would say the soft-arch is a direct match to the originals.
Imperceptable flatness anywhere, smooth arching, no arch at all on the horns (fairly flat)

Hard-arch, as a descendant of SLATs, would have a noticable flatness in the core. In some extreme cases, they have a huge bevel-ish factor that has been lightly sanded to remove the distinct transitions. The transition remains obvious though from a central 'plateau' to the arching edges. An additional major difference from the original arch is each horn has their own arch sculpting.

Comparing the OP's pics above, I'd call the first a soft arch, or moreso a hybrid, flatness in the center, but no horn arching. Flat/Arch transition noticable here http://a248.e.akamai.net/origin-cdn....oist-C9-9T.jpg

The 2nd is definitely hard, due to the horn arching.

Some examples for viewing pleasure.

1987 original (soft) arch
Note the bridge reflection has a curve, so definitely no flatness there. Flat horns.



2000 Custom (pre-SLAT)
Earliest known predecessor to the SLAT or hard? arch style. Can see the flat/arch-bevel transition line, horns are arched.





2004 SLATQH
Arched horn emphasis, central flatness obvious.




2006 Custom
Lotta flat, and very bevelish




That's my best interpretation from research.
At least soft-arch = smooth curving/no flat and hard arch is plateau with bevels.
Whether or not horn arching is tied to hard arch, or the 1st pic is truely a hybrid is unconfirmed.

LOL @ "PRS aircraft carrier flat top in the middle" I like it.

[audiophile]

Oh and one thing I missed is almost every soft-arch I have seen do not have the cutouts. (Or whatever they are called)
Just the same, every assumed hard-arch has the cutouts.

So the OP's 1st pic again leans toward hard-arch, but is still missing arched horns, I'd say it was requested that way and is still a hybrid.

[Richard W]

I'd like to say thanks to everyone for clearing this up, and especially audiophile for going into complete detail. JCF has the best guys ever.

[GeneticWeapon]

2006 Custom
Lotta flat, and very bevelish

Shit that is so beautiful. It looks like a stormtrooper.

[bratfink]

Isn't that '2000' custom, the guitar from the 93 catalouge?

[audiophile]

http://thedeadbodies.free.fr/Instruments/DKAT/GreenCatalog.jpg

That's an Archtop Dinky, also in the 94-95 catalogue

[Richard W]

Would this be a true soft-arch? I thought it was a traditional soloist, but I don't see a forearm cut.

[audiophile]

Would this be a true soft-arch? I thought it was a traditional soloist, but I don't see a forearm cut.

Body: Alder with 1/8" Quilted Maple Flat Top, White Binding
Just a beautiful custom shop soloist.

[Richard W]

Body: Alder with 1/8" Quilted Maple Flat Top, White Binding
Just a beautiful custom shop soloist.

I didn't even see where it said Flat Top, my fault.