Guitar question

[GH85Carrera]

I have what I think is a simple question. I did not want to hijack Slodave's guitar build thread so I started this.

I hear over and over how the old electric guitars are somehow better than a new guitar. I can see that with an acoustic guitar or fiddle the wood and varnish can make a big difference in the way it sounds. But a solid body guitar should (in my simple mind) sound pretty much the same using the same amp and strings.

With all the computer designs and CNC machining available today and learning from how it was done in the past why can't a guitar maker of 2011 make a guitar that sounds and plays better than anything old?

Look and bicycles, cars or computers. That all are vastly superior to something from the 40s or 50s.

I know a Ferrari GTO from the 60s is mega million dollars because many people want the few available cars. But put it on any track and a new Cayenne Turbo SUV would kick it's butt with the air conditioning running and with three passengers. Don't get me wrong I would prefer a GTO to any SUV as an object to own.

Is the value and the lust for the old guitars the rarity of them or are they a Stradivarius compared to everything else in sound?

I know nothing at all about playing any instrument. I can play my radio, CD player and iPod but I can't carry a tune in a bucket. What makes the old guitars so desirable? How can an old electric guitar be worth 300 grand?

[Rick Lee]

Well, the technology today does get you a real nice guitar for an incredibly low cost of entry. Starter guitars when I was a kid were around $150 and they were absolute crap. Let's say that's $300 in today's dollars. $300 will get you a nice Mexican Strat, perhaps a slightly used one. I bought my last one around 1998 for $318 new.

But older guitars that have been played a lot do sound and feel better. Look at a new Les Paul next to one that's been played so much that all the paint is worn off the back of the neck. Those old pickups get better the more you have power running through them, sweat dripping on them, your belt buckle scraping the back of the guitar and your hand rubbing the neck down to bare wood.

Check out Fender's new Road Worn line. I visited a buddy who had one of their Road Worn Telecasters and I thought it was an old vintage guitar. It's a little cheesy, like putting tears in your jeans and then trying to bleach them. But sometimes they get it right and it improves playability.

Also, you always play better when you love the way your guitar feels and sounds.

[GH85Carrera]

I was really thinking about the high end designed for professionals guitars. I presume the pros can go find a new professional grade saxophone that is clearly better in every way that some low end beginner high school band sax.

Can a professional go buy a brand new professional grade guitar that sounds as good or better than some old war horse Gibson?

Again, I am completely ignorant of it all. I was just curious why the old guitars are so sought after. I can understand the desire to have a guitar that was once played by a famous person. That is just a rare collectible, it does not make it a better instrument than a new one.

[scottmandue]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

I was really thinking about the high end designed for professionals guitars. I presume the pros can go find a new professional grade saxophone that is clearly better in every way that some low end beginner high school band sax.

Can a professional go buy a brand new professional grade guitar that sounds as good or better than some old war horse Gibson?

Again, I am completely ignorant of it all. I was just curious why the old guitars are so sought after. I can understand the desire to have a guitar that was once played by a famous person. That is just a rare collectible, it does not make it a better instrument than a new one.

For the most part the pros are sponsored and there guitars are hand built in a custom shop... not an off the shelf guitar.

Think of pro athletes and shoes.

[Rick Lee]

I don't think a lot of pros go to a shop the day they get some money and then buy their main battle axe. Guitars are not really that expensive and, if you're playing for a living, sort of like a mechanic having Snap-On tools, you probably have a decent guitar already, probably several.

I've heard Keith Richards hands a new guitar off to a roadie to break in for him over a few mos. And I heard when EVH designed his Ernie Ball signature guitar, they used a laser to measure his old Frankenstrat's neck so the new guitars had necks that felt already broken in and worn. Ed says he got invited to play with Black Sabbath while all his gear was still in air freight en route to England and so Ed went to a local music store to borrow a guitar. He said the new in box Ernie Ball guitar felt identical to his personal main one. Who knows? The technology today is amazing and you really get a great bang for the buck.

[LWJ]

I think it is a load of crap. New guitars are fine. Musicians are the most whacked out bunch of fools you can find and will sell their soul for their tone. (ref: Robert Johnson)

Now, it may be that old pickups sound better due to magnets degrading but other than that, a new axe should do the trick.

I do want to hear what Wolfe says on this.

Larry

PS - I do have a 1941 Epi archtop that sounds KILLER as well as a 1920's supertone that has some real mojo as well. Course, those are both acoustics.

[GH85Carrera]

OK, so the reason the old 300 grand guitars are expensive is because they are rare, not necessarily better. That I can understand. Like an old vase or rare bottle of wine.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

OK, so the reason the old 300 grand guitars are expensive is because they are rare, not necessarily better. That I can understand. Like an old vase or rare bottle of wine.

A $300k guitar is indeed rare. I think those prices are insane, but they got that way after the dot.com boom when young, suddenly super rich men were looking for new hobbies.

[scottmandue]

Just to qualify what I said,
I like the comparison to a professional mechanic... that is his bread and butter... he spends thousands for top quality tools.

And my comment about sponsored musicians... it is free advertising for the manufacture... muti-million dollar rock star seen up on stage or TV playing brand "X" guitar and a million kids are going to run out and but a brand "X" guitar, but they don't get the exact guitar because the rock star has his speced out with custom pickups, frets, etc. to fit his/her taste.

Having said that we used to follow a local blues player (Randy Rich) he played in small bars and noticed we kept coming back so he would talk to us on breaks. My friend and I used to peruse pawn shops back in the 70's & 80's and picked up a lot of weird guitars. We would bring them to Randy and he would play a set with them and make the old piece of krap sing.

So bottom line it is more in the player than in the guitar.

IMHO you can get a fine playing guitar for a couple hundred bucks (Mex Strat) then there is some stuff that is art work (see nostatics bass/guitars) that is worth thousands, and some is collectible/historical that just gets crazy prices (much like "classic" cars).

Ok I'm rambling and will stop the rant.
Carry on.

[crikett]

I think there are many issues at play.

In terms of cost/value... the vintage instruments are what they are and they are not making anymore (yes, there are reissues, but like reprints and other recreations, they are not considered the same). As such, a genuine '59 Gold Top will always be sought after and will command a premium price.

In terms of quality, while the myth of all hand made instruments and how everything was better in the old days persists, the fact is that these instruments were very much dependent on the hands that made them, and even when in very high quality hands, much of that skill was often used to compensate for issues in the quality of the specific wood, etc. Compared to modern production quality, I don't think the good old days were really as good as some think (I am still amazed when I think that PRS manufactures their wrap around tailpieces with no intonation adjustment as their manufacturing tolerances are so tight it's not needed; high claim, but also one I've found true on all the examples I've played)... but...

There are two considerations about those good old days. First, because there were so many more instruments all hand made, there were many more highly skilled workers putting these together. Even if not all were expert luthiers, the finished instruments were professionally setup to a better degree than you find in off the shelf instruments today. And then there is the wood!

Vintage instruments finished in nitrocellulose have been aging and improving all this time, and they have great tone. Add to this fact that Honduran mahogany is rarer and more costly now, or Brazillian rosewood is so severely limited now, and you have a better picture of desirability.

Still... on a high end modern guitar, you are often dealing with aged tonewoods, with modern manufacting tolerances, assembled and finished by highly skilled luthiers. It may lack the perceived "soul" of some vintage instruments... but,

My two favorite guitars that I play and record with most often are far from vintage: A Parker Fly and a Taylor T5. Both amazing instruments with fantastic tone (and alot more flexible in their tones than vintage instruments).

[sammyg2]

If I played a $300 guitar and then a $3000 guitar, I prolly wouldn't be able to tell the difference and it wouldn't sound any different.
But in the hands of an expert that might not be true.

But mostly, Old is cool, worn is cool, rare is cool, cool is $$$$$$$

[nostatic]

The short answer is, yes - you can go buy a new guitar that is every bit as good or better than most/all "vintage" instruments. It has less to do with CNC (that is what has helped with consistency of builds, especially on the low end), and more with experience. There are guys doing fretwork now that are ridiculously good. And you can get most any electronics you want, including old-spec alnico, etc. There certainly are some vintage instruments with mojo - whether it is the amount of finish, particular pieces of wood, moisture content, phase of the moon...whatever it is it works. But the same can be said of new instruments.

Vintage guitars/basses are mostly hype and style. Right now 70's Fender basses are climbing in price - mostly because guys want a "vintage" axe. I was alive and playing in the 70's. The guitars just frankly weren't that good. There were exceptions, but most were average to dog status. But now they're cool. Frankly, Fender right now is making guitars and basses as good as they've ever made, and certainly with more consistency. You still have to search to find "the one" but they are pretty solid.

[GH85Carrera]

Thanks nostatic, that is what I was looking for. The reality is it is the "cool" factor and rarity that makes them so sought after. Much like a GTO, rare and wonderful, but in the end a modern version is as good if not better.

[fritzgator]

Nobody has mentioned wood. vintage guitars are built with better quality wood.Old first growth wood is about gone.New guitars with modern man. techniques are more consistent,where as old tech,handwound pickups, old capacitors and pots were higher quality. Newer stuff doesn't last as long. I change newer pots and such,much more often in newer guitars, where vintage still have the originals,most of the time.
Not all pros have custom guitars built,but they do have guys like me to keep them set up to their preferences.I find most new from factory guitars need additional set up work as well
They just don't build em like they used to. You know, like 911's.

[slodave]

I can only add what I've learned during my Les Paul build, specifically the 1950's through 1960. The wood really does make a difference. Funny to think how the acoustics of wood relate to a signal that is generated by the pickups, but it does. As Gator mentioned, wood is a big factor in how an instrument will sound, as is the case for the Stradivarius. Turns out the wood he was using happened to be really dense, the climate had been such to promote "good wood", he didn't know this at the time though. The Honduras Mahogany used for the vintage LP's were, as mentioned old growth. Very dense stuff. While you can still buy old growth today, it's rare, very expensive and usually hoarded. Same goes for the Brazilian Rosewood that was used for the fretboards. The 2nd neck in my build is true old growth, you make sure to make careful cuts and make the most out of the wood, even scraps that may usually end up in the trash. The Honduras Mahogany on the market today is the same species, but usually grown in Asia.

Old growth V. new.... Not only does climate have an effect on the density of the wood, but the old growth stuff had huge, dense canopies. Light was not able to penetrate deep to the forest floors, so the trees grew very slowly. Today, the climate is different and the canopies are much lighter, allowing light down to the floor and letting the trees grow fast. If you can find all the old materials, you can make a guitar today, sound like a true vintage. In fact, there are stories of replica LP's being sold as the real thing, fooling many people at first, only to be found out later that it is a fake, disappointing the owner.

I think one reason the '59 Les Paul became a collectible item is do to the change in finish. All the previous LP's except 2(?) before that, had been solid colors and most hiding the maple tops - which were plain at that point. A lot of the LP's previous sound really good too. Gibson was on to something with the use of two main woods. Another famous trait of the LP is it's sustain, which can be attributed to the neck glued to the body, rather than Fender's bolt on style. There were maybe 1,700 LP's finished to the Sunburst specs from about mid '58 to mid '60 and a lot of those were destroyed and some still are hiding in the backs of closets. The reason the 58/9's are even more sought after has to do with the dyes/tints that were used and faded. This made each 'Burst completely unique.

Looking at sound/tone, there is something magical about them. But I don't think age has too much to do with it. The albums that are suggested listening to understand the tone, were all made about 10 years after the guitars left the factory. As was mentioned, the pickups were not wound as efficiently as they are today (when mass produced), so they also added character to each LP as well.

Also mentioned were how the magnets in the pickups degrade. This can happen to any guitar at any time. Leaning an axe against an amp will do it. Playing the guitar itself, causes the magnets to degrade. Any disturbance in its field. Magnets also degrade quickly at first, then at some point, they really slow down.

Small correction... "Power" isn't really running through a guitar. The strings, being steel, disrupt the magnetic field in the pickup, this field generates a signal that passes through the cable and into the amp. The amp takes the signal, boosts it and passes it to the speaker. The speaker, vibrates back and forth, creating the sound waves that turn into music.

The player and amp also contributes to the sound.

Great stuff. Listen to some of the other vintage guitars as well.
YouTube - 1959 Gibson Les Paul 2 00976

P.S.: The '58-'60 Les Paul's are rare, so the value has really gone up. They also happen to sound really good and are getting better with age. The fact that they were hand made also affects the value. The type of craftsmanship doesn't exist these days and there would be no way to mass produce them by hand anyway. Each LP has a slightly different shape to the top/arch. Based on who did the top, what the condition of the sandpaper was and pressure applied to the slack belt. Even if you could apply the same pressure to the sanding belt each time, the tops would vary as the grit wore down. Today's LP's are carved via duplicators with almost no variance to the shape, only the wood properties.

[WolfeMacleod]

Originally Posted by LWJ

I think it is a load of crap. New guitars are fine. Musicians are the most whacked out bunch of fools you can find and will sell their soul for their tone. (ref: Robert Johnson)

Now, it may be that old pickups sound better due to magnets degrading but other than that, a new axe should do the trick.

I do want to hear what Wolfe says on this.

Larry

PS - I do have a 1941 Epi archtop that sounds KILLER as well as a 1920's supertone that has some real mojo as well. Course, those are both acoustics.

Degradation of magnetics is only part of the equation. At some point, the formulas for the plain enamel insulation removed benzene and lead changing the dielectric properties of the insulation, changing the tone of the pickups. I also feel that part of it is due to the Alnico being made in China rather than the US.
Old growth wood has a lot to do with it, too. Tighter grain structures. The banning of Brazillian rosewood....comes from India now. Different species of Mahogany, maple... you name it.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by slodave

P.S.: The '58-'60 Les Paul's are rare, so the value has really gone up. They also happen to sound really good and are getting better with age. The fact that they were hand made also affects the value. The type of craftsmanship doesn't exist these days and there would be no way to mass produce them by hand anyway.

I totally disagree. That type of craftsmanship exists today in spade. You just don't look to Gibson or Fender to find it. Go check out an instrument made by Grosh, Sadowsky, Lull, Roscoe, Rob Allen, Mike Tuttle, etc. Some are CNC, some are all by hand. All of them have ridiculous workmanship. In addition, many of these builders have stashes of wood that have been aging for a long time. Wood is key, but it is just part of the equation.

[slodave]

You're right. I was referring to the big guys, just didn't articulate that correctly.

[nostatic]

Gotcha. But even still, the Fender P-Bass that I just bought is amazingly good. Better than the three pre-CBS P-Basses at my local shop (that are price betwen $7-10K each). I've seen guys complain about Rickenbacker variability, and not every Fender is as good as the one I picked up, but imho they are making far better instruments than they did in the 70s-90s.

I can't speak for Gibson - never been a Gibson guy. This is a sweet bass though:

[slodave]

Honestly, I don't know too much about Fender.... When I start my Tele w/B-Bender project next year or so, I'll read up on their history more. I do know that since a lot of Fenders are solid colors, it was easy for them to use laminates, even pre-CBS. Not like plywood, but up to 3 blocks glued together to get the width for the body. Your new P-bass could very well be a better made, solid body.