would you really notice any difference if you could afford to buy a vintage guitar?

mikeyrob73

The masses can piss off @Bridgehouse and I won't pander to them 

Bridgehouse

mikeyrob73 said:

The masses can piss off @Bridgehouse and I won't pander to them 

Ooh you big rebel, you

Gassage

I can't think of anything I'd want more than this particular strat




https://www.vintageguitarboutique.com/collections/fender/products/1963-fender-stratocaster-lake-placid-blue

Voxman

Strat54 said:

I agree with @peteri ,acoustic resonance and neck shape/feel are the major differences for me too. I can't remember which top relic tele builder it was (could have been Nacho Banos) but he recently and honestly said 'sure I can make a guitar that looks identical to an original but not one that feels like one'. There's something about those old necks, I'd guess the worn in bit is the bulk of that feel. Good and bad of both old/new. Still not found a new Esquire that sounds like this one....

Well, maybe its me - its nice but I don't think that sounds anything particularly special - sounds like a Tele. My Tele's nothing special - just a modern USA 1988 Standard with a rosewood neck.  I've just plugged it into my Laney VC30-210, with a nice acutronics spring reverb, & I could get it to sound very similar as makes no difference even with no pedals.  

rossi

Grumpyrocker said:

Vintage doesn't necessarily mean better - but that doesn't mean there's no reason to want one.

Take the E-type Jag. It's a thing of beauty. And I'm sure it'd be a lovely car to own and drive. A hot hatch would leave it standing, and the brakes would be shit. But that doesn't mean the E-type isn't a wonderful experience.

  I do wonder about old cars in a crash .no protection ,heavy ,lousy brakes ,fire risk etc .my brother in law ,may the lord smite his nasty grabbing soul, swore by old Rovers .He would quote the solid chassis and I would quote the fact it would carry on ploughing into the other car or worse  rather than bounce off .He scoffed but it did and sadly he survived ...just .

Strat54

Voxman said:

Strat54 said:

I agree with @peteri ,acoustic resonance and neck shape/feel are the major differences for me too. I can't remember which top relic tele builder it was (could have been Nacho Banos) but he recently and honestly said 'sure I can make a guitar that looks identical to an original but not one that feels like one'. There's something about those old necks, I'd guess the worn in bit is the bulk of that feel. Good and bad of both old/new. Still not found a new Esquire that sounds like this one....

Well, maybe its me - its nice but I don't think that sounds anything particularly special - sounds like a Tele. My Tele's nothing special - just a modern USA 1988 Standard with a rosewood neck.  I've just plugged it into my Laney VC30-210, with a nice acutronics spring reverb, & I could get it to sound very similar as makes no difference even with no pedals.  

Can you hear the difference between an MP3 file and a FLAC file? Going to give it another go, here's old v new with Eric...

jimmyguitar

The fact is that if you can't tell the difference you're lucky! Unfortunately I am obsessed with vintage guitars and it costs me a lot of money and a large proportion of my free time scouring local ads and eBay.

A good vintage guitar is properly played in and there's a darker tone to these heavily gigged guitars, possibly due to better woods used at the time or slightly demagnetised and/or microphonic pickups. 

thebreeze

I think I'll chime in at this point (the thread is at least 2 yrs old after all!) and share some of my thoughts as this is a decision I recently made.  I bought Jimmy's 1965 Stratocaster that he had up for sale on here.  A player's grade vintage guitar but all original apart from a refret and a 5-way switch.

I love the Fender CS guitars but wanted to know what the difference was between them and "the real thing" (if there were any) and if I preferred one or the other.  I also generally like the relic thing too.  However, I thought it might be nice to own something from the era. 

I took my favourite CS Strat to A/B and have been doing a few comparisons since.

i)  They look a bit different.  When something is genuinely old and played for 50 years I don't think you can capture the same look by relic'ing.

ii)  I was surprised that there was a noticeable difference in the sound.  The '65 was more appealing to my ear.  It sounds bigger, more dynamic and has a "woodier" tone.

iii)  The CS was just as nice to play in terms of feel of the neck, weight etc. although I haven't had the '65 set-up for me yet.

I decided to go for it because I loved the way it sounded and played.  If I'm honest I think the differences are really small but as Eric Johnson says in the clip, taken together they add up to something bigger.  Finally, I took a gamble financially (which may go tits up - but I wanted to ensure I had a guitar I would always be happy to play) - the gamble being that I couldn't see CS guitars going up in value/holding their value because more are always being produced whereas maybe the vintage guitar will hold it's value as they can't make any more of them.

In summary, I agree that a good guitar is a good guitar from any era or any production line model.  Vintage guitars may (probably do) acquire character over time.  

pintspiller

I like a feel of a guitar in my hands and against my body over appearance or sound.  I generally prefer a guitar that scores high in the former if I have to make a choice.

However. I had a Drivemaster and a MkI Guv'nor and wanted rid of one. I held onto the Guv'nor more so out of coolness than anything as I think the Drivemaster sounded 5 - 10% better.

slacker

I have a 52 ES125 it's the only one I,ve played. It might be good cos it's old, it might be good cos its good. I've got a 04 LP Classic that I tried to trade for a CS 58 59 etc. I played everything in Coda including Redeye, Donna and a Duane Allman and put Lollars in mine. 

Anything mass produced is made to tolerances. Sometimes something is made that is way better than the others on the production line. Sometimes small differences make a difference to different people. Sometimes peoples tastes match your own and sometimes not. 

IMHO a good production or reissue is going to be better and cheaper than a poor real vintage. The good ones are way too much money. 

artiebear

Had a 56 LP Custom, now use a 57 reissue ( I know , not quite the same model  ) sold 54 LP  a couple of years ago, bought beat up 54 reissue to replace. The originals were beautiful but I use the RI's. Def lighter, more resonant (originals)  but not enough to make me regret the financial upside. 

musicman100

If your lucky enough to own a nice vintage that's great but there certainly not the be all and end all. 

Strat54

For those with FB.....https://www.facebook.com/wildwoodguitarsofficial/videos/1397904703565508/

PhilKing

I have a lot of vintage guitars, varying from some 60's Silvertones through to a 55 LP Custom.  I've also got a 1917 Washburn parlor guitar.  To me the difference is in the woods and weight.  The grain is closer and they are all much lighter than newer guitars.  However I'm not a purist with them.  Most of them were bargains because they are either players guitars or had been changed in some way (my 57 Strat was refretted and had lost the original scratchplate and pickups.  Bare Knuckle made me a set of Apache's and aged them with an aged single ply scratchplate and most people can't tell).  This is one of the points that I want to make.  Some original pickups sound great and some don't, but if you put good after market pickups on an original vintage guitar, it seems to bring out the best in the pickups.  

I also have new guitars, because some of the vintage ones got to valuable to take out to a gig.  When you are playing live, I defy anyone to be able to tell if it is a vintage guitar or a new one.  One of the coolest and best sounding guitars I have to gig with is the WezV double cut with the Mojo Blade P-90.  It rings like a bell and sustains forever.  The pickup is more like the 55 Alnico than a P-90, which gives it a lot of versatility.  I was using my 64 Firebird III in rehearsals a few weeks ago, but that was because I had just fitted an old Gibson Lyre tremolo to it.  It did sound awesome, but I was worried about catching the headstock all the time.

The Washburn is one of the best sounding acoustics I have, and still plays great.  I think that as the wood ages on an acoustic, it beefs up the tone.   I played a 1930's Martin D-28 one time and it was really loud and amazingly dynamic (but was a lot of money too).  The other thing to realize is that some newer guitars will be vintage one day.  My 1998 Martin 000-28 sounds nicer now than when I got it, and I think that is true of any guitar that uses decent woods.

TTBZ

I'd never buy a proper vintage guitar. Such a waste of money, but then I think that anything over about £700 is steep for a guitar. 

Bridgehouse

This thread is now officially pre-CBS

mark123

Phil Harris  done one of his last articles in guitar and bass ,he hired a 80sUSA vintage reissue strat with montys pick ups in ,hired it out to abbey Rd, he'd normally send them an all original 50s strat down but sent down this strat and awaited their reply ,and the reply when sent back "one of the best sounding strats they'd had"and Phil even commented he'd rather have a good guitar and £250,000 to emigrate abroad than the other way around ,and this is the man who has dealt with vintage guitars all his life,so goes to show a good quality strat with good pick ups and pots save yourself £1000000 !!!!Now where was that USA standard for sale in the classifieds ! Ha !

Danielsguitars

I played a 58 burst against my hand made replica and it was close enough for me not to want the 58

The guy had a 54 too and that was lovely but it all comes down to if you can afford them, they're nice but you'll get close enough if it's built right imo