onewilyfool Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Apparently......on Craigs's list, "vintage" means anything before 1998.....Vintage is one of the most overused and mis-applied words in the guitar world. Is there actually an agreed cut-off point for what constitutes a so-called "vintage guitar??? For example, in the "antique" world, it is generally considered antique if over 50 years old. Just wondering..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 For me anything from 1969 and older ... 70's were just too Disco to be labelled vintage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 . "Vintage" was originally a term used in wine making, in recent times the meaning has been spread out over more subject matter - - in relation to wine making: the year the product was produced - in relation to the past: a product of a past time - in relation to the word antique: a product produced in or belonging to an earlier time; some folks tend to associate it with being at least 25 years old - in relation to quality: a high quality product of a past time - in relation to product significance: a product of a past time recognized for enduring interest and importance I evaluate the usage of "vintage guitar" using the above list - the further down the list the guitar matches up, the more expensive it will be, with an extra bump up if it is a rare model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimt Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 For me... pre 1964.. Thats when it becomes a Vintage piece.. To me.. it will always be that way.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 With guitars and amps, there could be a valid argument the sixties (and MAYBE early seventies) and what means a vintage guitar or amp. It was really the 70's that caused poeple to seek used guitars as opposed to new guitars, because they had qualities that the new ones did not. Pre Norlin for Gibson, and pre-CBS for Fender. In the case for Fender, it could be said that only those are original, as not only did it change owners, but those who made the products were mainly different people. The same can be said about the Norlin years and the change from closing the Kalamazoo factory. If we look at what products are made and bought now, they are nearly all the same products that were created during that time. Either attempts at improvements or attempts to recreate, it could be said they are nearly all recreations of they originals from that time. The other factor of technology may be a major factor as well. Tooling that became available like CNC routers and more automation. Printed circuit boards for amps. It affected the quality of all products, and all guitar and amp makers seemed to adapt the same qualities. So, a lot of it may be coincidental along with the change of owners and employees, but it definitely guaranteed things were built different. So, specifically the reason and the meaning of referring to something as vintage, is to mean the ORIGINAL production of whatever it is. And as far as a time period, loosely based on the time of the 60's as these are when they changed for most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 What "vintage" means to me is different from what I'm told is technically "vintage" for guitars..... My understanding is that means 40 years........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I guess for me it's the 60's and earlier. I don't feel that a new guitar with "vintage" somewhere in the name is vintage. This is not a comment on the guitar's value or quality. Pleaae, those with a True Vintage model, don't misread what I'm saying.... To me, "vintage" also has its own mojo, and that comes from being around for a while. That said, a True Vintage would be a nice guitar to grow old with and then it would truly be "vintage." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Pretty much 1969 & earlier because: -Norlin's influence on Gibson products takes over big time after that. -Brazilian rosewood Martins are gone as of 1970. -Gibson made Epis are gone as of 1970. -Build quality takes a dip at both Martin and Gibson throughout the '70s. Exception: Guilds made in the '70s, or high quality independent builders such as Gurian & Mossman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 It's a murky world, but I'd say anything pre 68-69 was able to be called vintage without too much criticism to be levelled at you for it, 70's equals 'Bad and overbuilt' broadly speaking and 80's seemed to be more interesting when looking at guitars made elsewhere. As far as Gibsons go, I'll go out on a limb and say todays model are 'golden age' guitars, while this may not be the trend given the lust for old models, I would add that a lot of old models were jigsaw jobs given the scarcity of good woods due to the war efforts and demands on resources/materials. We all know why the sunburst finish came about, this is not the case today, the fact that although there are many great modern designs they are now producing more and more models with the older designs is a great thing too. The only difference is in the age, people taking greater care than was ever taken with genuine vintage models too, so perhaps if we all stop humidifying and babying the guitars, then in 40 years time people will be waxing-lyrical on how great the nineties, naughties and onwards guitars were. The most common argument is that new guitars don't sound like the old vintage recordings, well, those guitars were new at the time, some probably tight and not yet opened up either, so again I'd say in recording terms, mics and recording equipment from that era will make almost any guitar sound more vintage. The genuine vintage market has a lot of great guitars out there, but far more many duds than today, in my opinion. I've played a few real high-dollar duds from the glory days where the real value lay in the description of the guitar not the sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Vintage refers to guitars that were rightly made, prior to build compromises and corporate takeovers. 'Post-compromise' guitars are old, not "vintage." The cut-off date varies from from brand to brand. Here's a few benchmarks. Gibson Flattop. Some would say '55, last year for scalloped braces, intro of adj. bridge). There's creeping compromises through the 1960's: 61: thick laminated bridgeplate; 65: narrow neck, thicker pickguard; '68, still thicker bridgeplate and larger braces. In 69, Gibson was bought by Norlin, squared off the slope jumbo and finally made a unit no one can pass off as vintage! Martin. 1946-48(?) last year for scalloped braces. 1948-66, still very good. 1967-69, enlarged bridgeplate. Post-1970, heavier bracing overall, bye to brazlian r/w and, I believe, a change in the finish. Fender. 56, last year for maple fretboard. 1965, CBS takeover (big strat headstock, glassier amp sounds). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Something like this http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/topic/125021/FS-46-SJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearbasher Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 People use the term "vintage" when they are trying to get 25-50% more than the guitar is worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danner Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Anything older than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Anything made before I graduated Highschool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
croth Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Vintage refers to guitars that were rightly made, prior to build compromises and corporate takeovers. 'Post-compromise' guitars are old, not "vintage." The cut-off date varies from from brand to brand. Here's a few benchmarks. Gibson Flattop. Some would say '55, last year for scalloped braces, intro of adj. bridge). There's creeping compromises through the 1960's: 61: thick laminated bridgeplate; 65: narrow neck, thicker pickguard; '68, still thicker bridgeplate and larger braces. In 69, Gibson was bought by Norlin, squared off the slope jumbo and finally made a unit no one can pass off as vintage! Martin. 1946-48(?) last year for scalloped braces. 1948-66, still very good. 1967-69, enlarged bridgeplate. Post-1970, heavier bracing overall, bye to brazlian r/w and, I believe, a change in the finish. Fender. 56, last year for maple fretboard. 1965, CBS takeover (big strat headstock, glassier amp sounds). Your post is very good and points out many significant changes, many of which I don't personally know of by heart but which do represent milestones in guitar manufacturing which impact upon perceived value. The only "correction" I'll make to your information is that Martin's last year of scalloped bracing was 1944 (ie. 1945, 46, etc guitars do NOT have scalloped braces). With all of that said, I am of the school of thought that feels that a large part of defining "vintage" when it comes to guitars has something to do with an emotional attachment to an era. Thus, the 1960's as a decade was a huge "guitar-centered" era. A '69 Strat, for example, can readily be considered a "vintage" Strat, regardless of its changed headstock, because Jimi Hendrix used one. Combining that along with the changeovers from small, private company ownership to big corporation ownership that introduced mass-production techniques/shortcuts, if I had to choose a single, general cutoff date for "vintage" guitars, I would side with the people who said "pre-1970" (ie. 1969 and earlier). While it's true that CBS took over Fender in early '65, the guitars being built by Fender well after that remained uninfluenced by CBS for a couple of years after that and used pre-1965 parts from their storage bins for quite some time. I have a '65 Strat that is indistinguishable from a late '64 and a '65 Tele with a script logo headstock, completely indistinguishable from its pre-1965 bretheren. If we try to choose a different year defined as "vintage" for every manufacturer, and based on every small change made to their guitars, we would be creating an impossible task to define. Martin stopped scallop-bracing its guitars after 1944. Does that make 1945 Martins not vintage? They did away with the herringbone binding work after 1946. Does that then make 1947 Martin not vintage? Gibson changed its tailpieces on its archtop guitars from "pin" to "wraparound" in 1924. Does that, then, make any archrop Gibson guitar made after 1923 not vintage? Of course not, and the list would become uncontrollable. Does "40 years" make a guitar vintage? I can't see most guitars from the 1970's and beyond as being classified as "vintage" no matter how hard I try. Not just because they are thought of as having not been made well (in general they weren't), not just because they were now being made by big corporations more interested in profit than quality (in general they were), not just because they were manufactured in much larger numbers (very much so), but also because the 1970's have no solid emotional attachment to the guitar either. I would be surprised if you'll ever see guitars past the 1960's rising much in value or being sought after by collectors. They may become "antiques", but never "vintage" imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 ..... Does "40 years" make a guitar vintage? ....I would be surprised if you'll ever see guitars past the 1960's rising much in value or being sought after by collectors. They may become "antiques", but never "vintage" imho. Unfortunately, regarding guitars, the word "vintage" has different meanings to different people, as I clumsily tried to point out in my comment above. It's also the point of Wily's topic - "What does "Vintage" mean to you????" From reading your comment above, it appears you pretty much have a definition in mind, and that's the point. Most members here would likely be thinking pre-60s and/or possibly pre-70s (pre-Norlin). BTW - Wily - interesting topic. B). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 To some of us, a guitty from the 60s or 70s may have been the "guitars of summer" but the fact remains that those are the units that sent the original vintage hounds out sniffing for P.A.F.s, pre-War Martins and pre-CBS Strats. What's sad is folks who over-pay for something from the 60s or 70s because they just have to have a "vintage" model. Especially when the new ones coming out are as good as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 To some of us, a guitty from the 60s or 70s may have been the "guitars of summer" but the fact remains that those are the units that sent the original vintage hounds out sniffing for P.A.F.s, pre-War Martins and pre-CBS Strats. What's sad is folks who over-pay for something from the 60s or 70s because they just have to have a "vintage" model. Especially when the new ones coming out are as good as they are. I think you're really on to something here. I suspect that the average J-45 coming out of Montana today is as good or better than most "vintage" j-45's, particularly if the vintage instrument comes from the 60's or, perish the thought, the 70's. There are plenty of great older J-45s, and some from the late 40's through the mid 50's really have extraordinary character, even if instruments from the period in general are uneven in quality and condition due to their various histories of ownership. All it takes is one bad owner in a guitar's life to ruin it as both a musical instrument and a collectible. Buying one from the 60's or 70's and expecting great sound is going to lead to disappointment in many cases. Buying one from the "classic" years prior to that is in many cases best left to those who: 1) really know what they are looking at, 2)are willing to gamble that they are finding a diamond, and 3) have money to gamble with. I recently passed on a one-owner 1948 SJ that had big chunks out of the neck from a home-made capo, a complete overcoat that looked like an eighth of an inch of lousy varnish, and the normal assortment of loose braces and a few cracks, even though it didn't have much real play wear. To bring it up to good player standards would have cost another $1500 or so on top of the purchase price, and I still would have had a neck that was barely playable due to the capo damage. To fix that would have destroyed any vintage value. And I'm convinced that the thick overcoat had compromised the sound, although it was difficult to tell with 10-year-old strings. For the $3K+ I would have had in the guitar to make it stable and playable, I could buy a really nice "new" Gibson. "Vintage" doesn't always mean better. I have a "new" '59 Nashville Historic ES 335 that is a joy to play, and sounds to my ear pretty much like the real Kalamazoo '59 that would cost $25K or more, rather than $5K. I also would be terrified to take the real '59 anywhere to play outside the house. It is safe to say that my "new" '59 is a whole lot better than almost any ES 335 from the late 60's through the 70's, at similar cost, although I do have a near-mint '68 ES 335-12 that has a seriously hot pair of early non T-top patent number humbuckers. I do like some aspects of that vintage stuff, but as Dirty Harry would say "Do you feel lucky?" At the risk of being burned as a heretic, anyone who is looking for a great-sounding Gibby, and who has to pay attention to what he or she spends, is likely to be better off with a "new" one from either Montana or Nashville. I'll reserve judgment on instruments coming out of the Memphis shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-1854Me Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I think "vintage" means "go get the NICE cheeses and meats, and get some EXPENSIVE crackers!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I think the standard with guitars is 30 years but I have trouble thinking of my 1972 Guild as "vintage." Then again I also have trouble thinking of my 1960 J-200 as vintage maybe because it was built after I started playing and so was something I could have obtained new (assuming I actually had any money). I still see them as just used guitars. In terms of acoustic instruments, for me it is pre-1942 because nothing that has been done since has shown more Yankee ingenuity or had more impact on what came after than the birth of the 17" archtop, steel body resonators, slope shoulder jumbo, the 14 fret dread, the Loar snakehead and F mandolins, and so on. Not saying that guitars made after that were not fine instruments but they have not changed the world like those early ones did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 R -E -S -P -E -C T-...! V -I -N -T -A -G -E... I'll tell you what it means to me....Sock it to me, sock it to me, sock it to me................ Hey ...When its VINTAGE, You know its vintage....Nuff said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 First thought was pre-1970. My '68 SJ definitely appears like a vintage and very precious guitar. But caught in my large corner, I could accept a 1973/74 (Norlin or not) as V. To me a lot of it comes with the feel, , , the way the thing is present between my hands. Still most important is the sound. When that certain indefinable extra flavour begins to sing from the wood and strings, the instrument starts to speak vintage. My dear Martin is from '84 and cannot be considered vintage. The looks points in that direction though. The top is darker/yellower now, so are the bindings. The nut and saddle has changed hue too – and at times I see a vague greenish touch over what seems like lighter coloured back'n'sides. Oouuh and the voice has clearly grown. This Dread knows what it's talking about and keeps something between the lines. It is softer and understanding - capable of fulfilling my needs. Gentlemen - I have to compare the D-35 to a mature woman. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 With Gibsons I know lots of folks who draw the line at 1966 - the year Ted McCarty went a walking and was replaced by two outside "management specialists" who were not Gibson people nor even guitar people. The argument is that quality started to drop off as the bean counters who were now calling the shots started to place more emphasis on getting out more guitars while cutting costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluesKing777 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Apparently......on Craigs's list, "vintage" means anything before 1998.....Vintage is one of the most overused and mis-applied words in the guitar world. Is there actually an agreed cut-off point for what constitutes a so-called "vintage guitar??? For example, in the "antique" world, it is generally considered antique if over 50 years old. Just wondering..... Glad to see you back 'onewilyfool'. Vintage was supposed to be thirty years, wasn't it? I was reading a guitar mag article about a re-issue of a vintage Fender Telecaster Custom. I am now so, so,so old - I bought the said Fender Tele when it was brand new..... BluesKing777. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Glad to see you back 'onewilyfool'. Vintage was supposed to be thirty years, wasn't it? I was reading a guitar mag article about a re-issue of a vintage Fender Telecaster Custom. I am now so, so,so old - I bought the said Fender Tele when it was brand new..... BluesKing777. Hey, BK. When I bought my 1948 J-45 in 1966, it was only 18 years old (I was 19). That's like buying a 1993 J-45 today. Hang onto that mid-90's J-45. If you live long enough, people will drool over it as a relic from Gibson's "Golden Age". And yes, I still play that '48 every....single....day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.