It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
*yes i know he didnt play vintage.
There are plenty of 90s guitars that are turd. But the ones made pre 97 are officially 'vintage'.
I would argue and could make quite a good case that there were more good guitars made in the 90s than the 60s. There was more consistency and the *overall* quality across the industry was higher.
However we are all told that 60s guitars are somehow 'better' by dint of them being made in this so-called golden era. And that by-and-large is bullshit perpetuated by those seeking to profit from the values of all old guitars being 'better'.
Ive played some amazing 60s guitars but I've also played some worn out crap and also some utter junk. Just the same as any era of manufacturing.
What I would say about the 90s is that it was the time that the general quality of manufacturing started coming on leaps and bounds, plus consistency became key. Even cheap guitars started gaining reasonable pickups, better woods started to be used and hardware quality was improved.
With all the above,I'm actually talking about the run-of-the-mill guitars - look at the advances in mid-range guitars during that period and you'll see what I mean. As someone who was selling this stuff during this period I saw it first hand - the first Mexican Strats were terrible in the early 90s... we sent them all back, but by the end of the decade....
No doubt someone will pipe up about 90s Strats (US) being "rubbish" based on Internet twaddle or the fact they have swimming pool routes or similar. Well, tbh, I've not played a genuinely 'bad' one. And I probably sold more than most have played during my time in retail. I've owned a few recently and aside from that shitty two post trem (still fitted to the new guitars) they aren't 'bad'. Yet I've played a few toneless and non-resonant late 60s guitars that according to internet wisdom are "bargains".
Gibson arguably were making guitars that are perceived as better than they are today. Certainly the fit and finish of them was good, the weight relief that some seem to blather about wasn't quite so prevalent and the woods used were good. I read all sorts about Studios of that period being the next big 'thing' in the collecting world - I can see why, the ebony board Studios were superb.
PRS was making superb guitars - it's when he built his reputation. So they must be great. No first hand.
So the 90s... a 'vintage' decade? I'd say so - the last hurrah for British guitar based music I'd argue too. Britpop gave guitar based bands credibility and frankly we sold shitloads as a result. The music and musicians were inspirational - ok the older guys will Bang on about Clapton etc but I've met plenty that site Bernard Butler or Graham Coxon as the reason they picked up guitars. Whilst Bernard thrashed around on a vintage 355 live, in the studio most of the nude album was recorded and written on a 1990s reissue Les Paul. Graham played 52 reissue Teles made in the 90s... etc etc. They are just two examples.
I can totally see why 90s guitars are interesting. Do I understand why someone would pay more for one over a more recent guitar? No but then I'm not into this notion of older guitars being 'better'. A good guitar is a good guitar irrespective of when it was made.
I agree not all old guitars are good - and many aren't - I agree there are many fine guitars from the 90's which musicians wish to buy, but on the basis that after 20 years then a guitar is now vintage I don't buy - As that will surely make all guitars vintage one day and regardless of the build quality, tonal character and playing performance then there has to be some separation between a golden era Fender/Gibson/Ricky etc and a 90's LP Std
Then we all have to accept it is of course a matter of opinion
It doesn't mean there is no demand or collectability for 80's, 90's or 21st century guitars as that is obviously not the case, but I struggle to see them as a 'vintage guitar' both now and in 20 years time
You are confusing the term vintage IMO.
Vintage is all about the year, in this case twenty or more years old, nothing to do with the quality.
A vintage '59 LP will always be worth more than a '90's version but both are vintage.
I'm not sure it is easy to 100% define a term vintage as other factors come into play, especially if you are trying to describe vintage in one sentence, or phrase, but IMO I can define it far easier to define what isn't vintage
All decent wine has a vintage, it is merely the year it was made.
Some more recent vintage can be better than older vintages. It is just a year it doesn't denote quality.
The term vintage in cars denotes anything prior to 1930 which none of the modern '50's electric guitars fall under so the using word vintage in that respect is probably a misnomer anyway.
I think personally Classic is a better term for '50's - '60's guitars and again is a term used in the motoring world.
A Watkins Rapier with a squiffy neck is a "vintage" guitar because it is a 1960s instrument. It doesn't matter that its not playable or wasn't great in the first place.
But a 1992 PRS with a 10 Top signed by Paul in perfect nick isn't and can never be?
Or a 1963 SG with three headstock repairs, replaced pickups, a refret and a refinish is a vintage guitar but a 1993 ReIssue of the same guitar but totally stock and mint isn't and can never be?
Doesn't make sense.
The term "vintage" isn't being used as a descriptor for anything other than age in the OP's post.
I imagine that your view on 80s onwards guitars was shared by many people concerning the so-called "post-CBS" Fenders in the 1990s - the shop I worked in did. I remember a time when anything post 65 was seen as just an old guitar and nothing particularly interesting - no demand etc - but oh how that has changed.
Using furniture as an analogy - I remember when so-called "mid century" stuff was landfill. Now it is in demand by "retro" enthusiasts - the old school antique dealers don't understand or 'get' it and there is a lot of snobbery from them about this movement. I can see similar happening here...
For example: those who were young during the rise of Britpop are now those surfing the nostalgia wave of the late 30s into the late 40s and as such now have the funds and wherewithall to finance their fantasies, unlike when the music was current. So I can forsee that certain guitars that were "big" as part of this scene becoming quite prized and so prices rise - we've already seen the huge rises in the value of Epi Rivieras from the "golden years" as played by Bonehead and Noel. These young players aspired to the guitars played by *their* peers not those of the past - 1960s guitars of course played their part in that, but the majority of bands weren't using them...
Will these guitars ever be worth the same as the 1950s/60s guitars? Probably not. But I'd wager there are *A LOT MORE* truly good 1990s guitars than there are of this so called "golden era". And certainly a lot more genuine ones!!!!! I predict that certain flavours of Les Paul and Strat will become quite sought after (the LP Classics and Strat Plus Deluxes for example).
But back to the use of the word "vintage" - when used as a descriptor for age, its totally valid to describe something of that age.
I agree vintage does not endorse in any way the guitars ability to perform in a required way - And I have certainly never endorsed vintage means quality and or a certain grade of goods - I'm not 100% sure as to what the correct ingredients are, certainly with regards to trying to put it into a simple phrase - For the record I'm a big PRS fan but I would not endorse one of my own PRS Guitars that is over 20 years old as vintage
I would tend to agree that a term 'over 20 years old' could simply endorses any guitar as vintage, but I don't agree with its concept - And as I have said a few times above that I could not write down in one simple sentence what exactly is vintage
@neil - I do tend to use the word 'classic' more than vintage when discussing the shape or model of the guitar like a Strat
Sellers will always want to dress up whatever item they're selling in the best way they can think of even if that involves sprinkling glitter on a turd.
I do agree that each guitar, regardless of what it is, needs to be judged on its own merits and what it means to you
In 1983 I bought a '63 Strat. A bona fide 'vintage' guitar - pre-CBS, original Custom Colour finish, mostly original in every other respect. It was a magnificent guitar to play.
In 1994 I bought an American Standsrd Strat, which I still own. That was not magnificent then - and is not magnificent now - but it is older than my '63 was when I acquired it. For this reason, 'vintage' has to take into account 'quality' - rather than just 'age'.
My American Standard Strat is a used guitar from the '90s - no more - no less....
of high quality and lasting value, or showing the best and most typical characteristics of a particular type of thing, especially from
the past:
If you look at the definition from the wine trade there can be good and bad vintages :-)
Formerly TheGuitarWeasel ... Oil City Pickups ... Oil City Blog 7 String.org profile and message