E-minor7 Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Although we've been discussing this before, it could be time for a chat about the following : When is an acoustic guitar qualified to be called, priced and treated as 'a vintage' ? Some may argue we have to go even further back in time - let's hear what you think, , , also though you don't play oldies or have insight into the vintage world. To my knowledge, there's no official rules on this topic and remember it's just a game. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duluthdan Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 It has to be 1955 or before in my book. Because I was born in '56, and i don't consider myself "vintage" yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Eminor 7…when you wrote "The oldies"…I thought you were referring to some of the guys on the forum??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretplay Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I think they are Vintage when the old ones are worth more than the new ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorrisrownSal Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I think they are Vintage when the old ones are worth more than the new ones. Ha Winner! I voted 50 years old.... '65. That's as good a cutoff as any I suppose. I would pay a premium for an early 60s bird etc... Not for a 70s. But maybe that has more to do with Norlin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I'll go for 1965--50 years old--with the caveat that "vintage" does not always equal "better". I would rather have a Bozeman guitar than most Kalamazoo-built acoustics from 1965 or later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I'm pre 55 , which will annoy anyone with a 64 guitar , but a car from 1964 would definitely not be a 'vintage car' There is my logic. Cracked it may be . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I am in the same boat as duluthdan but for me that means you have to bump it up to pre-1951. If you are talking Gibson I can see why pre-1955 would be a logical staring point to categorize guitars as "vintage." By the same token though pre-1944 or pre-CMI if you prefer, would be just as logical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I am in the same boat as duluthdan but for me that means you have to bump it up to pre-1951. If you are talking Gibson I can see why pre-1955 would be a logical staring point to categorize guitars as "vintage." By the same token though pre-1944 or pre-CMI if you prefer, would be just as logical. That's the problem,; there's no real line of demarcation, so it is pretty arbitrary any way you look at it. Maybe you could think in terms of "modern", vs "old", vs "vintage". "Modern" might be less than 20 years old, "old" 20 to 50, and "vintage" older than 50. After that, you get into "ancient" at some point, which is where I probably fit. For Martin, you might think of "vintage" as earlier than about 1968, when I believe they stopped using Brazilian for rosewood guitars. Not so simple to find a similar line in the sand for Gibson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Vintage on Craigslist is any guitar built before 2003……apparently http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/msa?query=vintage+guitar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 That's the problem,; there's no real line of demarcation, so it is pretty arbitrary any way you look at it. Maybe you could think in terms of "modern", vs "old", vs "vintage". "Modern" might be less than 20 years old, "old" 20 to 50, and "vintage" older than 50. After that, you get into "ancient" at some point, which is where I probably fit. For Martin, you might think of "vintage" as earlier than about 1968, when I believe they stopped using Brazilian for rosewood guitars. Not so simple to find a similar line in the sand for Gibson. There are lines in the sand with Gibson. As I said the CMI acqusition but also 1950, 1960 and 1965 stick like a sore thumb. In every one of those years major changes were made at Gibson which resulted in a new way of building and selling guitars. Some certainly not for the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 There are lines in the sand with Gibson. As I said the CMI acqusition but also 1950, 1960 and 1965 stick like a sore thumb. In every one of those years major changes were made at Gibson which resulted in a new way of building and selling guitars. Some certainly not for the better. Yep, but there are almost too many points of inflection for Gibson. And, of course, there are (thankfully) a lot of good Gibsons from periods that I would consider sub-optimal because of changes made. The adjustable saddle, the plastic bridge, and the super-narrow nut are obvious changes that I don't care for, but other less obvious things--such as the changes in top bracing from the mid-1950's onward--were not always changes for the better, either. Like I said, "vintage" does not always mean "better". I'm not sure if Gibson had a pure golden age the way Martin seemed to in the late 1930's through the early war years, at least when it comes to dreadnoughts and OOO-sized guitars. Having said that, Gibson AJ's and Smecks weren't so bad in that period, either, and there are some real gems among their small-bodies in those years as well. Not to mention those funny slope-J's that took off in 1942 or so.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I voted 1975 because there are a lot of nice ones from the late 60s like Gretsch, Les Pauls, Guild and so on that are collectible vintage Dan, 1956? I have underwear older than that! You're a kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duluthdan Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Dan, 1955? I have underwear older than that! You're a kid. Thanks Dave ! "What's underwear" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Thanks Dave ! "What's underwear" ? Should we start calling you Cammando Dan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Hey ! Some of us haven't had our dinner yet ! :-/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Heck …I still see guys trying to sell 1948 guitars as "Pre-war" I guess they mean Korean War…. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Heck …I still see guys trying to sell 1948 guitars as "Pre-war" I guess they mean Korean War…. With the incredible knowledge the public seems to have of American history they might be saying pre-Civil War. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Yep, but there are almost too many points of inflection for Gibson. And, of course, there are (thankfully) a lot of good Gibsons from periods that I would consider sub-optimal because of changes made. The adjustable saddle, the plastic bridge, and the super-narrow nut are obvious changes that I don't care for, but other less obvious things--such as the changes in top bracing from the mid-1950's onward--were not always changes for the better, either. OK, I got a sure fire line in the sand. How about Vintage, in terms of Gibson, meaning pre-block letter logo guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 OK, I got a sure fire line in the sand. How about Vintage, in terms of Gibson, meaning pre-block letter logo guitars. I could live with that one. Ironically, however, that would make my May, 1947 L-7 "vintage", while another one I looked at from July, 1947 would fail the test. But it would cover a lot of great guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretplay Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Ha Winner! I voted 50 years old.... '65. That's as good a cutoff as any I suppose. I would pay a premium for an early 60s bird etc... Not for a 70s. But maybe that has more to do with Norlin. I think if we are talking Gibson acoustic then pre 69 at least but with guitars generally there are instruments made twenty five years ago seriously in demand and appreciating in price. If we don't call them vintage then they are certainly investments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flatbaroque Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 It has to be 1955 or before in my book. Because I was born in '56, and i don't consider myself "vintage" yet. I agree Dan.I'm also a '56...must have been a good year..makes you (and me) a Monkey in Chinese Horoscope..ya big ape! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluesKing777 Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Another 56'er monkey here! Good vintage! I voted for pre-75 because they have re-issued my Fender Telecaster Custom 72 as a ///////vintage....: http://www.musicradar.com/reviews/guitars/fender-american-vintage-72-telecaster-custom-500810/ BluesKing777. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I saw a mediocre Ibanez electric from 1983 listed as Vintage. Then again in the late '60s, there were collections of Oldies But Goodies that featured music from the '50s. By that estimation, Britney Spears is 'oldies' and B.C. means 'Before Clapton.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 With the incredible knowledge the public seems to have of American history they might be saying pre-Civil War. ....now that's humor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.