Once a vintage guitar becomes a commodity, what's the point?

designerseye88

Bridgehouse said:

Young people will grow old. 

As they do, some nostalgia will kick in, but they will discover older music, gain disposable income, and a share will get into vintage.

I doubt today’s antiques nuts we’re into antiques when they were 18.

I think its more about what this instrument represents. many of the buyers (not all) of current vintage guitars are people in their late 50's or are at retirement age. They often like to buy guitars that remind them of their teenage selves. Now they can afford that Les Paul that they saw Jimmy Page play etc (or at least a copy). i know theirs a lot of generalisations here but current buyers are buying guitars that they generally feel a connection with usually from their youth.

There are still young people(myself included) that were brought up listening to the same stuff my dad liked and yeah i like that too but I'm one of a few, and one of even fewer that want to play it on the guitar. my point is that yes their will always be a vintage guitar market but I just don't see it being as popular in the future, Especially 50's 60's 70's guitars. As i say this we are starting to see a revival of guitars that were made popular in the 90's. 

As always just my opinion but it will certainly be interesting to see how it plays out. 

designerseye88

richardhomer said:

I’m not sure I buy the ‘once the old guys are gone, no one will care about vintage guitars and prices will plummet’ argument. There are plenty of collectables  (cars, watches, art for example) where buyers weren’t around when the things were made.

That said, I’m about to sell a vintage guitar, so it’s understandable that I’d marshal an argument in favour of price maintenance.... 

Their will always be a vintage guitar market, i think it will just change. More focus on other models. We are starting to see that with 70's and 80's Les Pauls and 90's Fenders. The advantage popularity of collectables likes cars, Art, watches etc is everyone can generally drive a car, wear a watch and look at art. Not everyone can play a guitar. 

P.S What you selling?  

richardhomer

designerseye88 said:

P.S What you selling?  

This:

http://www.es-335.net/335/66202.html

designerseye88

richardhomer said:

designerseye88 said:

P.S What you selling?  

This:

http://www.es-335.net/335/66202.html

Wow she's a beauty! 

p90fool

Bridgehouse said:

Young people will grow old. 

As they do, some nostalgia will kick in, but they will discover older music, gain disposable income, and a share will get into vintage.

I doubt today’s antiques nuts we’re into antiques when they were 18.

Exactly. A lot of people seem to think it's all about nostalgia, but I'm in my 50s and was gigging guitars which were older than me when I was in my teens. 

I obviously couldn't remember any golden era, they were just cooler and sounded better. 

James Bay isn't a baby boomer trying to recapture his youth any more than all those Japanese hipsters on prewar Harley Davidsons are. 

The vintage market isn't going to die with us old farts, not when you have new generations coming through who think nothing of spending a grand on a phone.   

Bigsby

p90fool said:

Bridgehouse said:

Young people will grow old. 

As they do, some nostalgia will kick in, but they will discover older music, gain disposable income, and a share will get into vintage.

I doubt today’s antiques nuts we’re into antiques when they were 18.

Exactly. A lot of people seem to think it's all about nostalgia, but I'm in my 50s and was gigging guitars which were older than me when I was in my teens. 

I obviously couldn't remember any golden era, they were just cooler and sounded better. 

James Bay isn't a baby boomer trying to recapture his youth any more than all those Japanese hipsters on prewar Harley Davidsons are. 

The vintage market isn't going to die with us old farts, not when you have new generations coming through who think nothing of spending a grand on a phone.   

Well, they might be collecting vintage phones instead...  

Guitar collectors over 50 grew up sometime during the 50s to 80s - and only by the end of that period was the guitar just beginning to lose it's central role in popular culture, but it was still central. Much less so today for a generation that have grown up with DJs and singers getting all the limelight.

But there are other sides to it too - that smart phone is the greatest distraction tool ever created. It gives instant access to all of human knowledge (and ignorance), all friends and family social networks, an endless supply of games, and so on. Some researchers in the USA found the current generation of teenagers had difficulty recognising the feeling of boredom - it's so alien to them as they're permanently attached to something that is endlessly calling for their attention. 

Now, think how us 'oldies' grew up in a world where home entertainment consisted of a few TV channels, a stereo, books or a sibling to fight with.... We didn't just have the time, we also had the incentive to learn an instrument. Take a listen to the music that 18 year olds are into today - few are listening to guitar heroes - so where is their inspiration to put down their phones and pick up guitars? Because they'll have to do that in order to develop an emotional attachment to guitars. In 50 years they'll be approaching 70, and I suspect granddads guitar collection will be history, rather than a family heirloom.

My Dad played piano. He got hold of one in the early 60s, back then you could find pianos being given away to any one willing to pay for removal. A once in-demand instrument was now just taking up space in many people's homes. I have a clear recollection of one becoming a Guy Fawkes night bonfire.

Right now there's a peak in demand for guitars of all sorts, as the baby boomers and subsequent generations get to a point where they're not struggling to pay for the kids, etc., and have free time from retirement, etc., and hit a mid-life crisis where they want to recapture their youth (and so on). The effect on the vintage market is that supply of good quality guitars is drying up (collectors hold onto the best examples, and circulate the less good ones). This pushes up prices of more recent models, and modified guitars that might have been ignored by collectors in the past. But for many of these instruments it's a bubble, (perhaps not so for the very rarest of desirable guitars, like a late 50s Les Paul).

designerseye88

Bigsby said:

p90fool said:

Bridgehouse said:

Young people will grow old. 

As they do, some nostalgia will kick in, but they will discover older music, gain disposable income, and a share will get into vintage.

I doubt today’s antiques nuts we’re into antiques when they were 18.

Exactly. A lot of people seem to think it's all about nostalgia, but I'm in my 50s and was gigging guitars which were older than me when I was in my teens. 

I obviously couldn't remember any golden era, they were just cooler and sounded better. 

James Bay isn't a baby boomer trying to recapture his youth any more than all those Japanese hipsters on prewar Harley Davidsons are. 

The vintage market isn't going to die with us old farts, not when you have new generations coming through who think nothing of spending a grand on a phone.   

Well, they might be collecting vintage phones instead...  

Guitar collectors over 50 grew up sometime during the 50s to 80s - and only by the end of that period was the guitar just beginning to lose it's central role in popular culture, but it was still central. Much less so today for a generation that have grown up with DJs and singers getting all the limelight.

But there are other sides to it too - that smart phone is the greatest distraction tool ever created. It gives instant access to all of human knowledge (and ignorance), all friends and family social networks, an endless supply of games, and so on. Some researchers in the USA found the current generation of teenagers had difficulty recognising the feeling of boredom - it's so alien to them as they're permanently attached to something that is endlessly calling for their attention. 

Now, think how us 'oldies' grew up in a world where home entertainment consisted of a few TV channels, a stereo, books or a sibling to fight with.... We didn't just have the time, we also had the incentive to learn an instrument. Take a listen to the music that 18 year olds are into today - few are listening to guitar heroes - so where is their inspiration to put down their phones and pick up guitars? Because they'll have to do that in order to develop an emotional attachment to guitars. In 50 years they'll be approaching 70, and I suspect granddads guitar collection will be history, rather than a family heirloom.

My Dad played piano. He got hold of one in the early 60s, back then you could find pianos being given away to any one willing to pay for removal. A once in-demand instrument was now just taking up space in many people's homes. I have a clear recollection of one becoming a Guy Fawkes night bonfire.

Right now there's a peak in demand for guitars of all sorts, as the baby boomers and subsequent generations get to a point where they're not struggling to pay for the kids, etc., and have free time from retirement, etc., and hit a mid-life crisis where they want to recapture their youth (and so on). The effect on the vintage market is that supply of good quality guitars is drying up (collectors hold onto the best examples, and circulate the less good ones). This pushes up prices of more recent models, and modified guitars that might have been ignored by collectors in the past. But for many of these instruments it's a bubble, (perhaps not so for the very rarest of desirable guitars, like a late 50s Les Paul).

Couldn't have said it better myself. Completely agree with your point 

jaymenon

Just stumbled upon this thread...

I find it difficult to understand how all our guitar heroes from yesteryear - each and every single one of them - had a very special instrument (Les Paul, Tele, Strat whatever). 

By the law of averages surely some of them had pieces of crap.  Surely it was the player and the songs, rather than the instrument...

In the same breath guitar magazines write in awe about the wondrous phenomenon that 'whatever instrument he plays. he still sounds like himself...' 

Them there's pickup technology: I sold two of my Collings guitars after reading that they now offer Throbak pickups for an upcharge (on the basis that Throbak own the original Gibson winding machines and 'make them like they used to').

There are a lot of very talented modern pickup makers who add their own 'ingredients' to pickup recipes - and come up with great results (and I'm happy to pay for that).  But the technology involved in a 1950s pickup is 70 years old. Replicating that today and charging sky high prices?

And all these claims about old/vintage instruments being far superior to modern offerings - and the tonal superiority of ‘old wood’- logically, each guitar is made a of few pieces of wood - which may work synergistically or antagonistically with each other (and with the pickups, bridge, tuners and all the rest) to make a good, bad or indifferent instrument...

Just because (insert whoever) can play guitar well, it doesn’t make him an expert on wood. And of course if I'm a famous guitarist and I happen to own a 59 Les Paul, I'm going to prattle on about how wonderful it is - because that's going to increase it's value, in case I might need to sell it some day...

Now I love the idea of (and drool over) a '59 'burst as much as anyone else - but sometimes I think we guitarists are collectively a bunch of idiots (and that very much includes me).

I really liked what SteveRobinson said:

Luckily there are lots of modern guitars, better made than vintage ones, that we can play instead.

jaymenon

Sorry if that sounded like a rant - but over the past couple of days I've been ogling at a couple of Les Paul VOS guitars, and though I tell myself I'm an idiot, I still keep drooling (and they aren't even vintage)

thegummy

jaymenon said:

Just stumbled upon this thread...

I find it difficult to understand how all our guitar heroes from yesteryear - each and every single one of them - had a very special instrument (Les Paul, Tele, Strat whatever). 

By the law of averages surely some of them had pieces of crap.  Surely it was the player and the songs, rather than the instrument...

In the same breath guitar magazines write in awe about the wondrous phenomenon that 'whatever instrument he plays. he still sounds like himself...' 

Those contradicting ideas are repeated by people depending on what they're trying to achieve by repeating it.

Often the idea of the "very special instruments" will be repeated by those wanting to sell it or, more commonly, sell something based on it that claims to perform like it and have the same special quality.

The "he still sounds like himself" is used, IME, by people wanting to sound clever as if they know the truth and everyone who even thinks twice about gear are delusional.

I'd think any reasonable person would agree that any of the classic guitar heroes would sound different playing a Strat through a Vox than they would playing a Les Paul through a Marshall. And also that they wouldn't sound like each other even through the same gear, unless they were deliberately trying to and had studied/practised the playing style of the person they're trying to simulate.

octatonic

I know a few young (under 30) professional guitarists that use Mexican made Tele's and Strats (albeit with pickup upgrades) and they play really well.
They cannot afford to get into the gear beyond a certain level and one chap has had the same guitar in the 10 years I've known him and owns no other.
He works hard at the craft though and is playing better than ever.

If you've got the money then it is easier to buy a new guitar than it is to push yourself up the playing development hill.
For some that isn't a problem- it is a hobby/pastime/whatever that requires no justification or explanation.

But if it bothers anyone, or turns out to be an obsessive pursuit of 'the perfect guitar' then a possible way around it is to set playing goals and use a new instrument/pedal/amp/whatever as a reward for achieving those goals.

peteri

A familiar topic, there are wonderful guitars being built now - no argument there.

But they are not the same as vintage, no criticism, not better, not worse but they are different.

For some players and styles it will make no difference at all, or maybe a vintage will actually be worse - but for some it will be the other way around.

Vintage prices have two main drivers - supply and demand, to a degree that becomes self-fulfilling - previous historic price rises attract investors, since 2008 and the Lehmans crash people are looking to invest in physical assets, they like something 'real' and it helps if they are attractive and cool and guitars (even for a lot of non-players) fall into that.

The other driver is new guitar prices, look at the prices Fender Custom Shop or Gibson Custom Shop is charging.

I have a Fender 1964 Strat, wonderful, wonderful guitar - it's be refinished, but extremely well - you'd never know really. Cost me maybe £2000-2500 more than the custom shop equivalent, that's excellent value - the real thing vs the copy.

Plus remember, they're not making 64 strats any more - and every year the number gets less, due to natural damage and loss.

There will be models that have a fashion element, but the core products from the core manufacturers will over a reasonable period always hold value.

I've bought and sold a lot of guitars over the last few years, enough that I feel I'm getting close to being a bedroom dealer! (Which I don't want to be) - some I've made a nice little profit, some I've made a small loss. But overall the key thing has been a nice honest guitar from the right era will always get a lot of interest and demand.

I'm 49, I don't remember the 'golden age' I remember Kramers and Floyds - I've sold mainly to people younger than me, who like me - like them as instruments.

The higher end bursts (I was lucky enough to play two back to back recently) are amazing guitars, but you need to play them for a bit, initially I was a little bit 'so-what' but once you hold and play them for a while and play a little differently - they are amazing. Were they worth the money? Well if I had that level of cash as 'spare' absolutely, but I don't and never will - but it was on the merits not the harking back to a golden age.

All of us have different levels of 'spare' cash, for some people that's a little and for some it's a lot - we're really lucky that there are old and new instruments at every price point.

You could equally say PRS, or Huber or Gibson Custom Shop are doomed (they're not that much better than a £500 guitar). Or in the watch world whatever the high-end producers are there (since my iPhone and my £50 watch do the same thing) - but people like nice things and they like nice, 'exclusive' things more - so the markets will always exist.

FastEddie

Back to the OP.
I would never buy a guitar as an investment. Too i-liquid and like gold, doesn't give an income. Pure capital gain.

If I am investing I buy liquid assets with low trading and holding costs. Guitars, watches, cars, art all fall out of that for me.
I do however buy land which does go against my first statement but it's what I do now.

The good thing about buying a really old guitar is that you can play it. You gain utility from playing it. How you do that is up to you.
It might be you have a rare guitar and amp and enjoy a jam at home whenever the fancy takes you. Safe, clean, and no fear of theft or people gagging for a touch and play. 
I would do that and in fact had a guitar of similar ilk a few years back. Not vintage but highly desirable in left handed circles. Sounded awful in my hands but Gary Moore played it (upside down I might add) and it sounded as it ought to have done. 

Buying the same asset over and over is a sign of investors crystalising profit at a level to suit themselves.

I've no truck with those who want to do that. In fact it does support prices further down the line. So long as you look after a piece, treat it with care and respect, you could, over time, negate any depreciation. Some brands don't follow that line but those with a strong vintage market will tend to do so. 

It's good for all, in different ways.

ICBM

peteri said:

I have a Fender 1964 Strat, wonderful, wonderful guitar - it's be refinished, but extremely well - you'd never know really. Cost me maybe £2000-2500 more than the custom shop equivalent, that's excellent value - the real thing vs the copy.

Or you could argue that the CS is better value - cheaper, likely to play better, not have any issues with worn frets or pots, and no worries about not having to change anything on it for fear of damaging its value.

peteri said:

Plus remember, they're not making 64 strats any more - and every year the number gets less, due to natural damage and loss.

Or gets more, due to faking and parts swapping...




Intentionally playing devil's advocate here by the way . I'm sure your '64 is a great guitar. I have a friend who has several pre-CBS Strats - the best of them is also a '64.

But in all honesty for the price - even given that it's very much a 'player grade' one - I'd rather have a new one and a huge amount of change.

On the other side of the fence, the best electric guitar I've ever played is a 1956 Les Paul Custom. It just had something special that no modern Les Paul I've ever played has - and I think it's audible on the recording I made with it too.

TeleMaster

I’ve got a 64 Strat. I bring it to practice, play it at home all the time. I’d even bring it to gigs if I wanted to. I had it re-fretted recently. 

It will keep its value, and I want to play it, so I do. No worries here about any of that. 

Stuckfast

There are similar things going on in the world of studio equipment and vintage keyboards as well. I sold my Roland Jupiter 8 for £3k about ten years ago, thinking prices had peaked and the bubble was about to burst. You'd be lucky to find a working one for £10k today. Yet there are new analogue polysynths that are miles more powerful and flexible, with no maintenance issues, available for a fraction of that price.

As far as guitars go, the boring truth is that I could make a much bigger difference to my sound by practising for an hour a day than I could by spaffing tens of thousands on a vintage instrument.

darthed1981

Stuckfast said:

As far as guitars go, the boring truth is that I could make a much bigger difference to my sound by practising for an hour a day than I could by spaffing tens of thousands on a vintage instrument.

Well don't bring common sense into it

I like these threads, as personally I think that nobody will be convined away from their entrenched positions.

We all know you can 90% of the way to an actual 59 burst with a £400 Epiphone, or arguably a £250 Vintage.  However, some will always be convinced that extra 10% is worth spaffing (a word I plan to use more from now on, thanks @Stuckfast ) all the money on...

octatonic

peteri said:

The other driver is new guitar prices, look at the prices Fender Custom Shop or Gibson Custom Shop is charging.

I agree, especially with Fender prices- they'll seem to be on track to be the new Gibson.

If I was looking at a £5k+ new Fender Custom Shop master built vs a player grade vintage instrument that I knew the provenance of then I'd buy the vintage instrument.
I simply won't pay that much for a relic.

Provenance is a real concern now- some very experienced guitar techs I know are now saying they cannot always tell when a take is shown to them.
Some of them are really that good.
I'm kinda glad I never got the vintage guitar bug for that reason.

Henrytwang

SteveRobinson said:

Luckily there are lots of modern guitars, better made than vintage ones, that we can play instead.

I agree.l know that players like the sound feel and mojo of old guitars but there are some great instruments being made today and they can be bought for a fraction of the price being asked for the old ones.

ICBM

octatonic said:

If I was looking at a £5k+ new Fender Custom Shop master built vs a player grade vintage instrument that I knew the provenance of then I'd buy the vintage instrument.

I simply won't pay that much for a relic.

You can buy a 'team built' for a lot less than that and get a better guitar in my experience. And far less than you would have to pay for any original in anything other than totally wrecked condition.

octatonic said:

Provenance is a real concern now- some very experienced guitar techs I know are now saying they cannot always tell when a take is shown to them. 

Some of them are really that good.

Which is precisely another reason why a CS reissue may be a better buy.

I've also never played a bad 'team built' CS guitar. Plenty of bad originals... as well as a few great ones.