Oringo Posted May 28, 2008 Author Share Posted May 28, 2008 Amen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 ..And another thing! What exactly is Vintage?? My '89 Explorer?? I dont think so' date=' but its kind of looking like at some point it will be, wich to me seems ridiculous.[/quote']Here's another answer to your question, mrktwn: Gibson just introduced the "Les Paul Traditional," which is a "re-issue" of an '80s-style Lester. I guess early '80s became vintage effective today at Gibson. Ignatius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 what is collectable is due in part to people who are not musicians buying older guitars because they're old. Take 70s strats for example. From what I have read, seen and heard, most of these guitars were crap and you couldnt give them away. now GC sells them for 3,4, 5 grand a piece. Why? because people like to think that old=good= i can turn a profit. and as long as there are these ignorant people makes such purchases, then the market will continue to exist. i do agree that in the future, the home and professionally relic'd guitars will not be worth as much. but i tend to disagree on the reissues...at least with LP RIs. And there are a few reasons: 1) they are the best made guitars Gibson has to offer from this period in time. especially when compared to the negative buzz about Gibson's QC and innovations (ie chambering). 2) they are the real deal in terms of tone. They have a lot of good buzz from real musicians. 3) the R9s have amazing tops. people buy things because they are pretty. this isnt to say that in 20 years, people wont be paying ridiculous prices for the "bad" guitars of today...just look at Norlin era LPs...fetching thousands of dollars now. I think we can expect the value of all guitars to go up, but I dont think any LP made after 1960 will ever see the price tags we have on the original Bursts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrktwn Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Here's another answer to your question' date=' mrktwn: Gibson just introduced the "Les Paul Traditional," which is a "re-issue" of an '80s-style Lester. I guess early '80s became vintage effective today at Gibson. Ignatius[/quote']Yeah you're right. The traditional" swiss cheesed Les Paul. Quite superior to the '70s pancake construction and maple 3-piece neck. Wow, maybe those Norlin era guitars were actually really GREAT!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrktwn Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 ..And to kind of keep on track, I dont think there really are any undervalued vintage Gibsons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 what is collectable is due in part to people who are not musicians buying older guitars because they're old. Take 70s strats for example. From what I have read' date=' seen and heard, most of these guitars were crap and you couldnt give them away. now GC sells them for 3,4, 5 grand a piece. Why? because people like to think that old=good= i can turn a profit. and as long as there are these ignorant people makes such purchases, then the market will continue to exist.[/quote']FennRx-- The problem with what we heard about the '70s Fenders and Norlin-era Gibsons is that it was wrong! Just as people blindly today assume one of those vintage-era guitars on the wall is good, people in the '70s blindly believed all of them were bad. In point of fact, what happens over time is that the dud guitars are the ones that get modded and repainted and beat up and so never make it to the vintage market. In turn, the ones that are left intact often are the good ones. Then of course, there is the whole mojo/wearing-in thing: except for the complete garbage at the bottom of the barrel, most other guitars often seem genuinely to get better with age, especially if they've been played a lot. Necks feel better, parts settle down and start working together rather than against one another, wood becomes more resonant, pick-ups mellow out, etc. This is as true of '50s era guitars as it now is of '70s era guitars. The mistake is to trust the perception of the moment rather than to try out the guitars head to head and to learn how to listen to and feel that a guitar is good. I'm personally not convinced that the '70s only produced lackluster guitars just as I'm not convinced that every '50s era Gibson and Fender is worth its weight in gold. GC probably is right that the ones that come in are overall better and so worth more (although GC typically is wayyyy overpriced for vintage). The other problem with Fenders in particular, by the way, is that many people seemed not to like the '90s incarnation of the Standard series guitars, which immediately bumped up the value of previous decades. Now, with the redesign of the Telecaster just this year, I am hearing people say, "Well, those '80s and '90s Teles had that great bridge on them, and all they've got now are a modifed Strat bridge. I don't know what I think of this new model. I guess those ones a few years back weren't so bad after all." I think I see the market for '80s and '90s Standard Teles suddenly on the move! I guess we'll just have to see about the reissues. The long-term market tends to gravitate to the standard models, and of course, the continued selling of reissues undermines their own value increase; the '50s guitar are expensive not only because they are good but because they are rare. If Gibson and Fender don't stop making reissues of certain models, then the used ones always must have a ceiling below the cost of new reissues unless the newer ones are not made as well. I've already seen sellers trying to claim that Gibson's quality on the 335 reissues has slipped so they can claim their older reissue is worth as much as a new one. As far as I can tell, that is a seller realizing that the reissue market has a low ceiling unless Gibson stops doing reissues of certain models. Ignatius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 ..And to kind of keep on track' date=' I dont think there really are any undervalued vintage Gibsons.[/quote']I think I have to agree with you completely on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I forgot to add that this whole vintage value question is very real for the reissue market. The first Fender reissues of the '52 Telecaster were made in 1985. That's twenty-three years ago. By most vintage standards, that reissue is set to become a vintage model of a vintage reissue in the next four or five years if not sooner. What is the REAL value of a reissue of a vintage guitar when the reissue itself is vintage, especially now when some people say that Fender has improved the quality of its reissues substantially in the last ten years? How this question is answered probably will impact greatly how the Gibson reissues are treated as they too become older. Ignatius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrktwn Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I forgot to add that this whole vintage value question is very real for the reissue market. The first Fender reissues of the '52 Telecaster were made in 1985. That's twenty-three years ago. By most vintage standards' date=' that reissue is set to become a vintage model of a vintage reissue in the next four or five years if not sooner. What is the REAL value of a reissue of a vintage guitar when the reissue itself is vintage, especially now when some people say that Fender has improved the quality of its reissues substantially in the last ten years? How this question is answered probably will impact greatly how the Gibson reissues are treated as they too become older. Ignatius [/quote'] Pure ridiculousness that those are considered anything other than what they actually are. On a side note... I know a guy who worked on those first Fender re-issues. Prior to his employment he worked for Peavey, and helped design the T-60. His little inside "joke" for that first run of Fender reissues, was to use the same neck profile from the T-60 on those guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Prior to his employment he worked for Peavey' date=' and helped design the T-60. His little inside "joke" for that first run of Fender reissues, was to use the same neck profile from the T-60 on those guitars. [/quote']That's too funny! On a side note, I've heard good things about some of the T-60s. What do you and/or your friend think of them? Ignatius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrktwn Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Well, I think if Fender or Gibson made a similar guitar( think mid '70s Tele Deluxes and L6-s) as vintage guitars they might be worth thousands of dollars. As guitars, I dont like them. The electronics are WAY to futzy and really dont sound good. My inside information is justifiably proud of his work at Peavey. And Fender, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oringo Posted May 30, 2008 Author Share Posted May 30, 2008 Well guys, I'm sorry I started this thread. Guitars make me happy. Gibsons make me happy, and old Gibsons make me particularly happy. After a long day at the conservatory teaching, or in the studio recording or editing, I look forward to picking up one of my guitars and playing some blues or jamming with my kids. After I discovered this forum, I enjoyed logging on every few days and reading what other enthusiasts had to say about their guitars or helping each other out with questions or problems. When I started this thread I was kind of hoping we'd get into a discussion about "I've played or owned a such and such model, and I like this I don't like that, it's good value, it's not..." Instead I feel like it's been one huge gripe session. Old, vintage or just plain used Gibson's are all over-priced, over-hyped, don't make you play better, it's all a rip-off, people who buy them are suckers... Well, I'm gonna just go play my old guitars and leave you folks to hash this out. If I keep listening to you, I'm worried I won't enjoy enjoy my guitars as much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrktwn Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Sorry. I hate sugar coating things, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 When I started this thread I was kind of hoping we'd get into a discussion about "I've played or owned a such and such model' date=' and I like this I don't like that, it's good value, it's not..." [/quote']Hey Oringo-- I do feel bad if you feel your thread has been hijacked. It's probably because of the title and your first post: you specifically asked about the monetary value of specific vintage guitars. You did not say that you wanted to talk about the quality, the joy of playing, or the experiences that we have had with vintage Gibsons. I'd encourage you to post the very question you imply in the quote above in a new thread. I think that you'll get a lot different answers than the ones here. By the way, I don't think it's a gripe to say that Gibsons in and of themselves don't make you play better. What we were saying is that the player makes the guitar when the player is gifted, but I will be the first to say that I do play better with a particular instrument. I also think it is just wrong to think that any and all players would play better with Gibsons (I know you're not saying that, but I just want to be clear). My goal is to make sure the right people get the right guitars for their needs. But I do know that I myself play better and enjoy my musical experiences the most with my ES-125. If those are the sorts of stories you wanted, why didn't you ask? In a near-recession economy in the United States, now ain't the time to be asking if the vintage market is undervalued, you know? Ignatius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 The L-6S is a undervalued guitar at this time. L-4's are always under valued and I love my old 47 L-4. What about the Gibson Sonex? You can pick them up dirt cheap right now. They are as bullet proof as a Tele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rscott4079 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I think what is healthier about the guitar world' date=' is precisely that professionals, young or experienced, don't feel they have to have a '58 Les Paul to sound good, so that leaves the "vintage" market basically to collectors and amateurs[/quote'] Here's an amateur playing my favorite overvalued vintage Gibson. Looks to be a gorgeous late 40's early 50's J-45. I think if you look around carefully and your lucky, you can get one in the $4k range in a guitar shop. Maybe a little cheaper on Ebay. Overvalued? - on a musical basis compared straight across with J-45 made in Bozeman today - absolutely, it's overvalued. The new one is musically every ounce the guitar that the vintage one is for less than half the price. But you know what? If I had the bucks, I'd buy the 40's J-45 anyway. Old Geezer playing a J-45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.