software

Hey guys.. I was just wondering because everyone seems to love vintage guitars and their pickups 'n' stuff... Do you think guitars back then were built with more love and care?

Some were and some weren't.
For all the BS about quot;pre-factoryquot; PRS guitars, '57 Strats were built in a factory on an assembly line. I believe other brands were probably constructed with greater craftsmanship. That's not a slam on Fender 'cause there are some wonderful vintage Fenders out there. I'm just saying that Leo was as interested in making things easy to build as in making things sound good.

Depends 100% on the company and the Time period we´re talking about, I cannot answer with so little information

And Leo was an Engineer, not a luthier....His ONLY goal was to create an affordable electric guitar that could be manufactured in large quantities. He just got lucky and they happened to sound pretty good as well

It all depends about what companies we're talking about. I think some of the vintage guitars sound the way they do today because of the richness that aged woods provide.

I love modern production guitars. It's all about going to a good guitar company. Don Grosh makes AMAZING freakin' guitars and my Bent Top Custom is unbelievable. Try finding something that good in the past. There's so much sickeningly good boutique stuff out today that I think beats vintage guitars: Lentz, Suhr, Baker USA, Thorn, Tyler, Chapin are just a few.

It goes both ways and a lot has to do with the end of the spectrum- You can get a good playing mexican strat for the amount that we had to pay for dog one offs in the 70s- Quality is overall much better on average-

That average probalby extends to the midline, but in the past you could have a dog LP custom or a grat one- There was a lot of varibility-

On the other hand, today you have Anderson and Zion, and even PRS, at the top end and practically any of these are hihger quality on average than practically anything made before the 90s.

So IMHO, it's a bit of 'the more that things change..quot; Ie you can get really high quality (for the price) on the low end or the top end, the middle is a bit of a shot in the dark, and vintage (from a performance POV) is a major shot in the dark to me and the stanards change all of the time-

Case in point, I had a 61LP (SG style) that was one of the best palying thin necked gtrs I every owned- In the early 90s I had a $5000 offer- It was a hot gtr and a bit of history as well-

Today it's probably not worth $1500- machines are grovers, the old push down vibrato was replaced by a basass and it was refinshed- So it doesn't qualify as mint rarebird and this is where the market has shifted-

But if you played my 61 up against a mint, you wouldn't keep the mint in your hand for 2 minutes-

You get the idea, some old instruments are top of the line, and some are worth a lot of $ but the 2 aren't locked together, and when you consider the quality/cost trade off, a lot can be said about going for the bottom of the new market or the top instead of a vinatage. I've practiced what I preach and my last 2 strat types were a zion on the high end and a used nitefly on the low end and both are exactly what I needed.

Hope this helps

No. Companys like PRS make just as good a guitar today as Fender or Gibson did back in the day.

So basically its just that some companys have gotten quot;lazyquot; on their productions and unintended gave other brands the chance to shine... hmm
Another question... while I know that Gibson does have some quality issues lately... what about Fender? Or were they just always the same because of beeing more of a mass productionwhere the human luthier isn't as important as for example for Gibson?

here's so much sickeningly good boutique stuff out today that I think beats vintage guitars: Lentz, Suhr, Baker USA, Thorn, Tyler, Chapin are just a few.

While it has its good sides...I really think that most quot;boutiquequot; stuff frankly is way to nice and overdone.
I know what I would prefer if I was handed a nice old strat and also handed one of the new wonderstrats, I would take the old one in a heartbeat, you cannot beat vintage stuff that has a good solid history, maybe the new stuff is easier and perhaps is working better in some ways, but it really is two different things.

I think it's much more a matter of luck with vintage guitars. The combination of good wood (conservation was not really an issue), less environmental concerns with regard to finishes, and less machinery. Craftsmen learned a skill, and held the same job for 40 years. Things were done by hand....and on a good day with all of the other factors, brilliant instruments were made. If the same guy had a hangover, a fight with his wife, couldn't pay the bills, today might be a ****ty guitar day. So it was hit or miss....but the hits were really big, and over time the misses don't seem as bad. There are ****ty 59' Les Pauls out there, but try getting someone to admit that when they just dropped $175k on it. That's where the urban legend factor comes in.

Theorietically, todays CNC machines should be able to produce the EXACT same shape, size, dimension piece EVERY time....thousands of pieces at a time. However, we can't use (in all cases) the same type of old growth wood and the same type finishes. Things have been streamlined, and pieces don't get as detailed attention as they used to. I think it also comes down to how much the employee cares. People in general today do not care as much about doing a good job. It's about getting through the day....no pride in workmenship, again...generally.

I also think old growth wood is a serious factor. When forests were dense, tree's had to compete for sunshine and water. This made them grow more slowly, with more density in the wood. The re-forested area's that can now be harvested do not have this competition....because it would take too long to replenish. Therefore wood is less dense. Just my brief research and take on that.

I think that the mass produced guitars today are probably just as good, and in many cases better than vintage, because technology is better (wood argument not withstanding). I think if you want to get a guitar that is equal to a GOOD vintage Les Paul, Fender, Gretch, Martin...whatever, you need to go to a quality custom builder, or custom shop of one of the biggies. I think what these builders know today can get you a guitar that is equal or better to the original....less the old wood factor.

I don't know if that answers the question or not. I guess the answer is, some older stuff is better than newer stuff, and some newer stuff is better than older stuff. You SHOULD be able to get a better guitar today, but you can't quantify MOJO.


Originally Posted by StringmachineNo. Companys like PRS make just as good a guitar today as Fender or Gibson did back in the day.

I don't know about that...
but something thats pretty funny is when people talk about the way 50's les pauls were built and say how they had to have worked some kind of magic, they were made with the most premium supplies, almost a mystical thing to it. While all this is true as these guitars have proved, in reality les pauls really weren't gibsons focus in the slightest. They used all the highest quality maple for the backs of the jazz boxes, all the most premium would too, and put the most effort into the construction of those. The les paul wasn't very popular at all back then and the factory treated them as lower grade guitars than the jazz boxes they were making. The jazz boxes were gibsons main thing, its pretty funny how the les paul that wasn't popular at ALL when they were in contruction and were treated as second grade by the factory became the holy grail of guitars and the companies trademark...


Originally Posted by KommerzbassistDo you think guitars back then were built with more love and care?

I think everything was made with more quot;love and carequot; in the past than today. Corporations, machines, and focus groups kill quot;love and care.quot;

Having said that, all it takes is one or two people on the assembly line that are real craftsmen and are devoted to really doing a job that they can be proud of. If you get one of these guitars (or TVs, cars, refrigerators, whatever) that were touched by these people, count yourself lucky. And I think that quality can be every bit as good today as it was yesderday.


Originally Posted by Jeff_HI also think old growth wood is a serious factor.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner!!!
Take old growth wood (virtually impossible to find today), age it for half a century and what do you have? MOJO.
It doesn't hurt that a lot of the vintage guitars that weren't magical got routed for Floyd Rose trems back in the 80's.

I think guitars today are made just as good if not better.
Heck, even the budget brands have great playing guitars.
My Hondo II was no where near the quality of todays, Agile, Nelsonic, Malden, etc..

As for the vintage stuff.
As mentioned there are great pieces, and there are horrible pieces.
Factories are more efficient nowadays.

I think what people that are into vintage gear like are the features of older guitars.
Obviously many things have changed in the production of many of these guitars today compared to back then. Some are improvements. Some cost effective measures. Some materials are just not as available anymore.
I think another thing that attracts them is the aged-ness of those guitars.
The tones they create now compaed to when they were new.
Think about how good your 2005 LP sounds now. Then much greater those tones will
be on it 20 years. The woods will have dried more, the finishes will have ageds, the guitar in whole will have settled and broke in.

Overall I think there are more quality instruments out there today than back then.

I think there is no better time than these days to get a quality guitar.
At every price point no less. Many more brands, styles, types, to choose from now.
Back then it semed if you wanted a quality guitar, you bought Gibson or Fender.
Now you have Jackson, ESP, Carvin, BC Rich, Schecter, Ibanez, Yamaha, Brian Moore, PRS, Hamer,Parker, as well as
customshop guitars from
Heatley, Shamray, McInturff and more.

You just have so much more choice nowadays.
Whether it be $299 or $2999,
You can find a guitar that plays, feels, and sounds great.

I don't think it's a matter of if a guitar is good or bad,
but more whether it
fits your personal preferences.
We have been given the luxury of being more picky these days.

Kent


Originally Posted by Jeff_HI also think old growth wood is a serious factor. When forests were dense, tree's had to compete for sunshine and water. This made them grow more slowly, with more density in the wood. The re-forested area's that can now be harvested do not have this competition....because it would take too long to replenish. Therefore wood is less dense. Just my brief research and take on that.

There are still some very old forests in China for instance. What's more, conservation has probably not become an issue there yet. There are numerous cheap chinese brands that have appeared during the past years. This whole thing implies that you might find some gems routed out of old-growth wood among the cheapo copies. Then you only have to take the body and mod it to hell. That's only my experience. I've seen a lot of baaad chinese guitars recently, but two or three of them had a body made of dense, straight-grained, and completely flawless wood to die for. I bought one of them, modded the hell out of it, and now it's my main axe. I'd never trade it for a real Strat just for the brand name because I know that mine has some serious mojo-potential that only needs time to develop, LOL.

It is not the age of the wood, more like how has been dried??
Too much wood is being dried out way too fast.
It really shows on the necks here at wintertime.
Frets are pointing out in all directions.

I think it's because only the best guitars of the 50's have survived to today. The rest have been disowned and forgotten.

The thin Peterku mentioned is quite interesting because my I think my Squier Strat was made in China and it's wood really sounds good...


Originally Posted by theboatcandreamI think it's because only the best guitars of the 50's have survived to today. The rest have been disowned and forgotten.

That's a very good point.

I wonder how many did get tossed and are laying in some land fill somewhere.

Every company has their good and bad.