JuanCarlosVejar Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Folks, Check it out: True Vintage = Non Torrified Adi Vintage = Torrified Adi For me the True Vintage wins it just sounds more organic. How about you? JC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars68 Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 I would go True Vintage myself. I liked the chiming trebles, at least based on the recording, listening through headphones. The same trait might come across as piercingly annoying in person, though. Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
62burst Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Great playing, and a great recording. The Vintage has one of those things that are supposed to keep your strumming arm from muting the top. 'Might've influenced the sound a bit. And- I thought the True Vintage didn't come with electronics? Enjoyable, though wouldn't make any conclusions about the sound by it. Thanks for posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoSoxBiker Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 1 hour ago, 62burst said: Great playing, and a great recording. The Vintage has one of those things that are supposed to keep your strumming arm from muting the top...... It took me a couple minutes. I've never seen one of those before. Is that helping the low-end come out a bit more than the TV? CJV - I liked the depth on the low end better with the Vintage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hall Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Thanks, JC. I like the Vintage, if pressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 They both sound real good, but I'm not real big on vintage guitars. I don't hear anything in the Vintage that makes me say "Wow!" when compared to the TV. To me, vintage guitars are no more than old guitars, aside from the financial value that the collectors/sellers attach to them with the aid of our sentimental feelings for tradition. Assuming the vintage costs at least as much as the new one, I'd definitely choose the new one. However, if the new one was around six grand and the vintage was no more than 1000 or so, I might get the vintage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 A lot of guitar here and they look gorgeous. Good performance, yet I don't believe we hear the same amount of acoustic vibe'n'sound. I actually tend to think the 200 is one of the more anonymous classic Gs. Timber will probably fall, , , but these Super Jumbos aren't trumpeting me back to the flock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 I liked the Vintage model better. Maybe it is the terrified top but I felt there was more clarity and better note separation although that might have been an impression based more on the fact it was the brighter sounding of the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 From these two the True Vintage, sounds more sparkly and open. The Vintage one sounded actually really tight and not particularly impressive. Weird as its meant to have the cooked top to make it looser, but it wasnt. But really, if you want to talk true vintage, get a 50's or 60's J-200. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle fester Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 11 minutes ago, EuroAussie said: The Vintage one sounded actually really tight and not particularly impressive. Weird as its meant to have the cooked top to make it looser, but it wasnt. My impression was that a torrefied top would give it a 'dryer'type of sound, but you still need to play it in order to get the 'looser', worn in characteristic... based on nothing, just how I understood it. And apologies, I don't really have a good way describe the difference between the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
62burst Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 3 hours ago, MissouriPicker said: They both sound real good, but I'm not real big on vintage guitars. . . To me, vintage guitars are no more than old guitars, aside from the financial value that the collectors/sellers attach to them with the aid of our sentimental feelings for tradition. Hey Larry- I think this comparison was the True Vintage and the "Vintage" models . . . caPitAliZation matters- the difference is thousands of _______ (enter preferred monetary unit). Even if it was lower case in the video title, it was in capitalized/embedded in the video's annotation. That would be Gibson's designation for models made with torrefied wood. The top doesn't have a mark on it, and the headstock has that buffed down (micro sanded) finish that tries to capture the look of an older guitar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Meh Not a great advert for either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 1 hour ago, blindboygrunt said: Meh Not a great advert for either Agreed. I was gonna say it also, but held back, sort of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 (edited) mI 1 hour ago, 62burst said: Hey Larry- I think this comparison was the True Vintage and the "Vintage" models . . . caPitAliZation matters- the difference is thousands of _______ (enter preferred monetary unit). Even if it was lower case in the video title, it was in capitalized/embedded in the video's annotation. That would be Gibson's designation for models made with torrefied wood. The top doesn't have a mark on it, and the headstock has that buffed down (micro sanded) finish that tries to capture the look of an older guitar. If it came right down to it, I would not take either of the two guitars used in the comparison over my wife's 1960 J-200. Neither had the saturated mids or cracklin' edge hers does. In my case I was trying to render an opinion simply on those two guitars. Comparing new versions to instruments from past catalogs is usually bad business. Edited July 11, 2019 by zombywoof Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 7 hours ago, 62burst said: Hey Larry- I think this comparison was the True Vintage and the "Vintage" models . . . caPitAliZation matters- the difference is thousands of _______ (enter preferred monetary unit). Even if it was lower case in the video title, it was in capitalized/embedded in the video's annotation. That would be Gibson's designation for models made with torrefied wood. The top doesn't have a mark on it, and the headstock has that buffed down (micro sanded) finish that tries to capture the look of an older guitar. LOL..........shows you how out-of-touch I am..........Didn't know or notice the "terrified" tops were called "Vintage." Another J200 model. Soon they'll have as many J200 models as there are J45 models.....What happens if you spend all that money on a Vintage and then some dude with a lowly Standard J200 blows your doors off?.....lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoSoxBiker Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 11 hours ago, MissouriPicker said: LOL..........shows you how out-of-touch I am..........Didn't know or notice the "terrified" tops were called "Vintage." Another J200 model. Soon they'll have as many J200 models as there are J45 models.....What happens if you spend all that money on a Vintage and then some dude with a lowly Standard J200 blows your doors off?.....lol You are not alone - I had the same understanding. Well, mis-understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbpark Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 Every guitar is going to sound different from one to another. Torrification isn't necessarily the deciding factor that determines the sound. It's the complete sum of it's parts and how they all sound when combines together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted July 16, 2019 Share Posted July 16, 2019 (edited) **** almost 10 years since i bought my Furch OM with a cooked top and I have to say the sitka top looks now vintage , almost like cedar and so does the tone. Open, cranky, retro. But it took 4-5 years to get there. Point being is that its not instant soup, takes a few years to get the true benefits of a cooked top. Edited July 16, 2019 by EuroAussie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoSoxBiker Posted July 16, 2019 Share Posted July 16, 2019 Indeed, EA! My alternatively branded Maple with the t-top took almost 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.