62burst Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 Given two similarly spec'ed guitars of the same model, how much of a higher value would you place on the guitar with the more eye-catching wood selection? Case in point: the Iron Mountain Advanced Jumbo linked below. Nice choice of rosewood for the fretboard and bridge, maple back/sides, and some of the barkiest Adirondack seen on a top in a while. One could easily take the righteous high road and say it's all about the tone. The more practical-minded guitarist might keep in mind: should the guitar ever need to be moved along, the easier sell would be with a guitar that sells itself. Or perhaps, on a more emotional level, just taking a great looking guitar out of it's case might get the juices flowing. And along those lines, there is the idea of "just get the basic specifications in the model- it's the guitar operator who's more responsible for how it sounds". Iron Mountain AJ on eBay (no affiliazione)
slimt Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 Just Brazilian would be worth paying a premium for..
MissouriPicker Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 I doubt I'd knowingly pay for the upgrade. Bought a Koa AJ last spring from a guy here. It's a 2011, like new, and gave him 1650 for it. He got it from Sweetwater and they told me the guitar was from a run of 50. It's got an Adi top. That's about as fancy as I get. Don't know if the koa was from a magic tree or not...lol....Seriously, a lot of woods are gorgeous. I just can't see paying a premium price.
BigKahune Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 Ever pay a premium for wood selection? Interesting topic Jeff. . . Yes, I have - actually an Adi topped AJ Red Spruce to name just one of several. I'm a sucker for looks - bling, grain, figuring, hardware . . . Playability has to be there, but I've taken in at least one looker with closed down sound and waited for it to open up. Haven't seen the backside of the IM AJ before - the dark stained figured maple looks great and the adi top is a stunner. I would prefer the original gold Grovers over the chrome. The limited run doesn't do anything for me - Bozeman cranks out limited runs all the time, sometimes repeatedly. Comparing to standard AJ specs and cost, I'd be willing to pay more for the adi top, but not for flamed maple over rosewood. Let's not forget the rarity and availability of the wood has a lot to do with the price. .
Lars68 Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 I think I comes down to tone preference and whether you are a traditionalist or not. AJs originally had adi tops and rosewood back and sides. I have an AJ that I bought cheap a few years ago that has an adi top and Madagascar rosewood back and sides. It sounds great! It had suffered a broken headstock that wad nicely repaired which kept rhe price down. I have never played a maple AJ so I have no idea what that combination has to offer. The guitar in the link sure looks great! Lars
jannusguy2 Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 I paid a premium for this adi/madi Martin. worth every penny!
slimt Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 I paid a premium for this adi/madi Martin. worth every penny! Thats worth the bucks right there.. Nice Martin..
zombywoof Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 Nope, especially when I am going to shell out a bit more of my hard earned money to replace the pickguard. It is really all about aesthetics though. Some will pay more while others do not give a hoot. I know guys who restore vintage guitars that say what you want to see with Adirondack tops is dark streaked grain lines. While most would say it is not as nice looking as wood that does not display that trait it is supposedly an indicator of a stiffer wood. The top on my 1942 J-50 Here though is the back of an old Bruno parlor guitar. What you got though was just luck of the draw.
Mafy31 Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 While most would say it is not as nice looking as wood that does not display that trait it is supposedly an indicator of a stiffer wood. I read somewhere that thiner lines indicates older tree, and results in stiffer wood. I don't know about it, however it was more about sitka than adi (on adi i guess we always see larger figures). If i compare the AAA top sitka spruce that i believe comes with 2015 hummy, the lines/figures are thinner than on the AA sitka top on 2016 standard hummy. However what i just wrote is nothing to trust, i don't know anything and just report what i read here and there ! Beauty of woods sure makes a huge difference for a sale, even if only sound/tone should be the real choice. Koa wood is so amazing.
stein Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 Given two similarly spec'ed guitars of the same model, how much of a higher value would you place on the guitar with the more eye-catching wood selection? Case in point: the Iron Mountain Advanced Jumbo linked below. Nice choice of rosewood for the fretboard and bridge, maple back/sides, and some of the barkiest Adirondack seen on a top in a while. One could easily take the righteous high road and say it's all about the tone. The more practical-minded guitarist might keep in mind: should the guitar ever need to be moved along, the easier sell would be with a guitar that sells itself. Or perhaps, on a more emotional level, just taking a great looking guitar out of it's case might get the juices flowing. And along those lines, there is the idea of "just get the basic specifications in the model- it's the guitar operator who's more responsible for how it sounds". Iron Mountain AJ on eBay (no affiliazione) I would, but not really that much more for this one. The wood is nice, no doubt, but it isn't so nice as to make the guitar any different, to me anyway. I guess if by "premium" regarding price, meaning top dollar vs average price, I might do that based on how much I LIKE the guitar, the color, etc. But I can't see myself doing that based on pics, it would have to be in person. And haw it sounds, feels, plays, is really, you know. But, for certain guitars that have REALLY outstanding wood, or wood that's inherently more expensive (that actually effects the $$ value), or a combination of both, yea, of corse. But then they are actually worth more, aren't they?
zombywoof Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 I guess you could say you are paying a premium for old growth Adirondack as it is generally only found on guitars made before the end of WWII which at least in terms of Gibson and Martin ain't cheap.
stein Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 ...... paying a premium for old growth Adirondack...... Yea, that IS a "premium" wood that generally would be used on more expensive models. I guess I'm a little confused on what is considered "paying for premium". If the guitar sells new for 4k vs a guitar that sells new for 2k, supposedly for using "premium woods", I don't think that's always the case. That's different, than say, 2 guitars that are the same and sell for the same, but one has "nicer" wood.
aerohead Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 1442097359[/url]' post='1693315']I did on this one I would on that one too! Yooooowsa!
slimt Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 I did on this one I think I would step up for one like this as well.. Beautiful back..
retrorod Posted September 17, 2015 Posted September 17, 2015 I figure that anytime I buy a vintage guitar, I am paying a premium for the wood selection.....no?
Jesse_Dylan Posted September 18, 2015 Posted September 18, 2015 I don't know if I'd pay a premium for cosmetics, but I have made more for a certain tone (I got Italian Alpine spruce on my M-36... and years later, kind of wish I'd just gone with sitka!) That said, I've also paid extra (same guitar) for a sunburst, and that is definitely cosmetics... but not wood... I think it would be fun to own a red spruce guitar, and I would pay a couple hundred or a few hundred extra for that if I thought I'd like the tone. I guess I figure I won't see the back of a guitar much, so I've never been that fussed about fancy-looking wood. :) It is all darn good-looking anyway. I just love wood.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.