Do you beleive it?

[Kimbabig]

Well, I know we all have different opinions on the subject I'd just like to hear yours.

[DennisMiller]

Whether true or not, I've always been a bigger fan of nitro. I guess part of that is because I'm much more into acoustic guitars and the maturity of the guitar, based on the capability of solid woods and applied finishes to age, is more of a subject with acoustics than electrics. Knowing what we know about any given guitar we play, I think sometimes our ears convince us to hear certain things, but I, for one, have never been able to break out of that.

[pippy]

It depends on whether we are considering acoustic and solid-body guitars together or as separate issues.

 

As far as solid-body instruments are concerned;

 

I'd have preferred it had there been an "I Genuinely Don't Know" option.

 

I'm not a believer in the "Old Wood Sounds Better" nor in the "Solid-body Guitars Will Sound Better As They Age" arguments.

 

I personally have neither seen nor heard any empirical evidence that either will be the case.

 

Nor have I seen or heard anyone else be able to prove, absolutely and without a shadow of doubt, that either statement is an undeniable truism.

 

Whilst the finish applied to a guitar may have a short- or long-term effect on the tone produced by any one individual instrument it would be almost impossible to quantify; both finishes being 'tested' would have to have been be applied to this one individual instrument for any comparison to have any real merit. Without finishing; testing; recording; stripping to the exact same starting point; refinishing; testing; recording results from one individual instrument any comparative results would be a complete waste of time. Even then; all one could say would be that on one guitar one finish sounded better in some respects than another finish on the same instrument. Hardly conclusive proof.

 

The only 'Vintage' guitar I've played long enough for any long-term evaluation/judgement to be of value was a Strat from Jan '64 that I owned for 24 years.

As far as I can recall it sounded exactly the same on the day it was bought by me (when it was already 16 years-old) and the day I sold it. That period also saw it being subjected to a full re-finish, BTW. No discernible change.

 

Having said all that, however; it must be added (and it's interesting to note) that the best four Gibson Les Pauls that I've heard/played date from 1991, 1993 and two from 1995.

Whether those 15 - 19 years they have had to 'age' have resulted in this tonal superiority is purely speculative.

 

I'd like to play my favourite LP back-to-back with a genuine '59 'burst; purely for the advancement of science, you understand...

 

P.

[DennisMiller]

As a very frequent participant in the Acoustic Guitar Forum, (highly recommended), the subject of wood maturation comes up frequently and I'd say the general consensus is that the tone of an acoustic guitar can change over time. Tone being subjective, the change may, or may not, suit the person playing it.

 

In all the time I've participated there though, I honestly don't think I've heard anyone say the tonal change was something they didn't like, which to me just adds to the mystery and hype.

 

I also don't think I've ever heard anyone move the question to the realm of electric guitars, hollow body, solid or otherwise.

[pippy]

As a very frequent participant in the Acoustic Guitar Forum, (highly recommended), the subject of wood maturation comes up frequently and I'd say the general consensus is that the tone of an acoustic guitar can change over time. Tone being subjective, the change may, or may not, suit the person playing it.

 

In all the time I've participated there though, I honestly don't think I've heard anyone say the tonal change was something they didn't like, which to me just adds to the mystery and hype.

 

I also don't think I've ever heard anyone move the question to the realm of electric guitars, hollow body, solid or otherwise.

 

Your post raises a couple of very interesting points, Dennis.

 

Clearly, as I said, the points I made were all concerning solid-body electrics. As far as acoustics go I've very little to go on.

 

I bought my Dreadnought (Martin D-45 copy) at about the same time I bought the Strat I mentioned in my previous post; that is to say 1980.

In the 30 years I've had it I cannot, in all honesty, say whether it sounds any different - for better or for worse - from when it was new. It may, indeed, sound more mellow but I'd be lying if I were to swear this to be the case.

I'm not much of an acoustic player and play so infrequently that my 'ear' isn't attuned to it's nuances in the same way as it is to my electrics. Evey set of strings it's worn has qualified for at least a few birthday cards I'm ashamed to say...

 

But I certainly am open to the suggestion that repeated and prolonged playing can have enough of a physical effect on the fibres within the wood of an acoustic's sound-table to alter, over time, the overall tone it produces.

 

What I find interesting is that no-one has said "The tone has changed over time and I preferred the way it sounded when it was new"...everyone prefers the new ('old') sound!

 

What? Not one instrument has changed for the worse???

 

Hmmm...........

 

As far as the debate about Old/New wood on a solid-body electric goes; a couple of years ago there was a thread here that ran to about 18 pages (if my memory serves me well) with a great many people stating with utter certainty that older guitars sound better. Absolutely no-one offered any substantiated reasons as to why this may be the case. If it was older, so the reasoning went, it must therefore be better.

 

Again; Hmmm...........

 

As I said earlier; I Genuinely Don't Know.

 

P.

[DennisMiller]

Good Morning Pippy...

 

Everyone else must still be asleep. We're having a private conversation here.

 

The lack of admission that someone doesn't like an evolved tone is simply something I've never read and I guess I've been a large participant in the AGF for around 10 years. Honestly, I think we are indoctrinated to believe we must like it.

 

I tend to think of tone as something like watching your wife on a diet. You can compare where she is now to how she was then, but the day to day change is very difficult to see because it's so small.

 

There's just so much involved that unless someone is REALLY anal about things like humidity, which strings they use, which pick they use, How weak or strong they may feel at a given time... I could go on and on looking for the "perfect" circumstances and never prove a thing.

 

As an aside, I received a Les Paul Studio Satin yesterday. A comment made in the Gibson website about the satin finish is that it lets the wood breathe. As long as it doesn't eat my Captain Crunch, I'll keep it.

[The RandyMan]

Gentleman,

Some thoughts to consider. Much research has been done to determine what makes a Stradivarius violin a Stradivarius. To the best of my recollection, it was discovered that 1.) the species of wood used made a difference, 2.) the age of the wood used made a difference, and 3.) the formula of the varnish (finish) used made a difference. They are all direct factors of the tone that an instrument of this type produces. As this correlates to an acoustic instrument, so it can be applied to a solid-body electric guitar. Even though the sound of an electric guitar is highly manipulated by the electronics involved, there still must be a direct correlation of the vibratory resonance of the strings themselves to the guitar body, which will affect the final sound that the guitar produces. Two guitars which are identical in all aspects except for the wood they are constructed from, will produce two different tones under "uncolored" amplification. I would be inclined to think that, given all of the variables involved in producing the sound from an electric solid-body guitar, most people would not be able to single out what specifically causes a particular change in tonal structure. In other words, most peoples' ears (mine included) are not good enough to detect some of the very subtle differences in tone caused by slight changes in body shape, finish composition, etc. I can't help but thinking that a lot of the opinions that stem from this are borne of hype and self-perpetuating legend.

 

But that's just my opinion, and should not be construed as anything but . . . .

[The RandyMan]

Actually, the wood is going to breathe the same, be it an electric or an acoustic. On a cellular level, a solid body is obviously going to take longer to dry out completely than an acoustic with thinner wood. The drying out of cells in the wood is what gives the wood much of its resonant quality. And while an acoustic guitar exploits this quality more than a solid body, due to its open construction (i.e., envision a regular speaker cabinet with its open spaces versus a cabinet with the speaker mounted in a solid block of wood), a solid body is going to react the same way when aged. As you pointed out, the electronics in a solid body have a big influence in the final sound. But the finish on a solid body can, theoretically, affect the duration of the vibration of the strings (through the wood's ability to transfer resonant vibrations), and it can and will affect the sustain value of a solid body. Whether this is effected by milliseconds or minutes is something I cannot quantify right now. Suffice it to say, it can make a difference. But if it does, it will be to someone with superhuman ears . . .

 

To the rest of us, yeah, it probably doesn't make any more difference than we choose to make of it . . . .

[cookieman15061]

ugggghhhh Just play boys. Man we get so hung up in these things. These subtle changes are part of owning a wooden instrument. It will never be a constant. I frankly don't think ones better or worse than the other.

 

I've read some articles on finishes and it's funny because over the years people complained about their guitars finish cracking or checking so they tweaked formulas to combat this. Now folks want that vintage look and will pay to have it done.LOL

[Kimbabig]

Interesting opinions guys, the questions are so general because I wanted to get you guys thinking.

[Versatile]

Interesting and very subjective subject...lol...

A never ending debate about instrument ageing regarding improved tone

Both from a wood and varnish perspective...

 

IMO a nitro finish adds an air of quality to a guitar...it will breath in it's own way and colour age pleasingly to most eyes

This harks back to the days before synthetic resins like Urethane were available

So nitro has a 'vintage' feel to it...although in truth it will be less durable than urethane...and more labour intensive to apply.

 

Wood is a parallel issue...heavy vs light etc. All wood instruments will lose moisture with age more or less and many people believe that tone is bound to improve with age (for whatever reason)

Some people are seeking out early Strats, Teles, LP's, archtops etc for various reasons..whether for tone or 'vintage' appeal.

 

The debate will continue...but hopefully it will never be scientific

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jeff-7]

Someone from another forum once said that the only 2 things you will find after the nuclear holocaust will be cockroaches and poly finished guitars.

[Versatile]

Someone from another forum once said that the only 2 things you will find after the nuclear holocaust will be cockroaches and poly finished guitars.

Nicely put...will the cockroaches have mutated into guitar virtuosi ? :unsure:

 

 

 

[ShredAstaire]

ugggghhhh Just play boys.

 

That's what I was thinking!!

[MrNylon]

A good poll, way to go.

[milod]

Actually, as I recall one other factor in the Strad being a Strad was the use of woods from certain years of trees.

 

As has been mentioned, not two "identical" guitars, acoustic or electric, will "play" the same way. Neither in terms of tone nor of overall playability. The wood from different boards "moves" differently even if from the same tree. At least a tiny fraction.

 

As for humidity... I figure Brits have an awful lot more than where I live - and ditto Memphis. The degree to which more humidity in an older guitar rather than less might bring a difference in tone is, as has been mentioned, perhaps up to question.

 

One problem to me is the question of what is "better" tone. Is it more mids? I dunno.

 

Now to the poly type of finish. I don't know of any acoustics that ever had much finish on the interior. Even the poly must function to a degree with the expansion and/or contraction of the wood whether it's a solidbody or an acoustic.

 

Nobody's mentioned the laminates, either, used in many hollows and semi hollows and increasingly in acoustics. I've a hunch that finish makes little or no difference except in terms of aesthetics on those.

 

I mentioned a while ago about listening to a couple of 50+ year old Gibsons that sounded wonderful. I think they probably sounded wonderful when new and lacking mini-cracks in their bodies, too. In fact, perhaps better. Perhaps not. But as excellent instruments regardless, they sounded wonderful.

 

Many "old" guitars are excellent instruments. My 35-y-old "collection" is an example. Four guitars all sound as good as they did in the 1970s. Better? I doubt it. But they were fine instruments then and they remain so. Two are first-generation A-E Ovations, steel and nylon, one a full hollow laminate top and one a solidbody.

 

One factor unmentioned may be an increase in quality of strings, though. I dunno. But a guitar that sounded great half a century ago and has good strings on it today probably will still sound great.

 

m

[The RandyMan]

One problem to me is the question of what is "better" tone. Is it more mids? I dunno.

 

 

As far as the Strad wood, you are absolutely right. Wood that was from trees that grew in a specific area of the world during a specific time period.

 

But (IMHO) as far as "better tone" goes, I believe it is all subjective and in the ears of the listener. If something sounds "better" or "worse" to me, then that's what I work with. There's the science, and then there's the aesthetics. Like the old saying goes, "I may not know art, but I know what I like."

 

 

[milod]

I find it interesting that I read somewhere that Segovia would get a new guitar almost every year to play.

 

I'm not entirely certain what that might suggest in terms of quality guitars, old and new.

 

m

[The RandyMan]

Maybe he was looking for his own personal "perfect tone," searching for the Stradivarius of classical guitars. How cool would it be to be able to sit down and talk with him in person about this now and get his take on tone and playability? Of course, one of the few things better than that would be to talk to Antonio Stradivari . . .

[milod]

I have a hunch there was more involved than tone and playability for Segovia, but that's just me. Imagine a shot at having a guitar played in concert by the master...

 

Strad... yeah, but I'll also wager that he was looking for good woods for his violins from available supplies as opposed to considering what years and what the climate conditions were, etc.

 

In fact, in another thread there was a "gripe" that Gibsons cost X amount and a small luthier could build the equivalent for less. Perhaps, but consider the quantities and the time involved in aging and other factors for a large firm such as Gibson or Martin (I s'pose you could get a total "custom" D28 for less, too). Meanwhile a small luthier buys X amount of wood for X projects pretty much ready to go. More may be paid for the individual pieces, but there should be no loss involved as in longer-term purchasing.

 

m

[Versatile]

I wonder how Gibson and Fender etc go about sourcing their woods for guitars and mandolins? I visited a small furniture business where all the wood (oak) had been matured on the premises, some for decades.

I presume there are specialist wood suppliers to the musical instrument trade.

 

 

This might be of interest...The Mouseman of Kilburn....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pippy]

I've mentioned this here before but here it is again anyhow;

 

Going off at a slight tangent but in the world of violins the Stradivarius was not thought to have the finest tone in it's day. Both the Guarneri and Amati families crafted instruments that, at the time, were considered to sound 'better' (apparently).

 

What Strad. brought to the party, by virtue of his improvements in violin design and construction, was an increase in volume which, when coupled with exceptional tone, made his instruments the ones to choose. As the concert halls grew in size to accomodate the growing number of people who wished to see the vitruosi perform this increase in volume was an essential development as, of course, there was no P.A. system to amplify the music to fill the halls...

 

P.

[Jeff-7]

This doesn't have anything really to do with the thread but seeing Strads mentioned made me remember this:

My link

 

Man playing a multi million dollar Strad in a subway station and being pretty much overlooked by passers-by, many of whom probably paid to see him play later on in a concert hall (according to a different story on the same subject).

[Tman]

As far as the Strad wood, you are absolutely right. Wood that was from trees that grew in a specific area of the world during a specific time period.

 

I read it was trees grown during the "mini ice age" of the middle of the last millenium. I guess it resulted in denser wood?

 

 

All I know is that I recently acquired my first guitar with a polyurethane satin finsh including on the neck. It is amazing (the finish and the feel that is).

[milod]

Mention of the strad...

 

Besides that, at the National Music Museum in Vermillion, S.D., USA, here's a list of some of the instruments on display or in the collection.

 

I watched closely almost "from within" as the Shrine to Music was founded in the 1970s. It later evolved into the even larger collection and change in name.

 

Instruments from Europe, the United States, and Japan:

Checklist of Epiphone Guitars

Checklist of Fender Guitars

Checklist of Electric Guitars by Gibson

Checklist of Instruments Designed by Lloyd Loar Along with Their Amplifiers and Speakers

Checklist of Guitars by Semie Moseley (Mosrite)

Checklist of Vivi-Tone Instruments

 

Full listings are on line at http://orgs.usd.edu/nmm/collect.html

 

m