TommyK Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 A time machine is all right, as long as you can take today's money with you. Trouble is I think you'd have trouble passing today's 20 dollar bills back in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinh Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 Having heard how ridiculously cheap LP's were back in the height of the glam metal period, I wish I could go back to that time and pick up a few keepers. This I can actually remember. LPs were a bargain pre-Slash. I also remember "big headed" Strats being worth only a couple hundred bucks. Look at the prices now! Agreed: I bought my Sunburst 72 Les Paul in a pawn shop in New York City in July 1982. I paid somewhere betwen $250 and $280 with the case. That's between $550 and $625 adjusted for the CPI. Of course, on the other side of the coin, I also sold a big headstock strat for $200 in the early 80's and swapped an Explorer for a 1X18 Cerwin Vega bass cab, value around $250. Hindsight is always 20/20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinh Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 We didn't know how good we had it; You guys realize how much $250 was back then, right? Today wise? $2,131.68 This does raise an interesting issue that has been aired a few times on the board. For $2,100, one could buy a Les Paul that was largely hand made and finished, without the benefit of CNC machines, using ”traditional” techniques, made in very small batches. Sounds a lot like today’s “custom shop” output. Although the cost of wood and labor will likely have increased in real terms, hardware and electronics will be cheaper because of increased industrial efficiency and productivity. Why is the likely ‘Custom shop” re-issue version of this priced in the $4-5K range? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 This does raise an interesting issue that has been aired a few times on the board. For $2,100, one could buy a Les Paul that was largely hand made and finished, without the benefit of CNC machines, using ”traditional” techniques, made in very small batches. Sounds a lot like today’s “custom shop” output. Although the cost of wood and labor will likely have increased in real terms, hardware and electronics will be cheaper because of increased industrial efficiency and productivity. Why is the likely ‘Custom shop” re-issue version of this priced in the $4-5K range? Some would argue that some of the machines we have now to make guitars allow them to play better/last longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlashPerryBurst Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 The better part is debatable. What might be a dog of a guitar to me could easily be a beaut to someone else. As for the benefits of machines versus handmade, you could say that with the precision of the machines, there's less chance of some small defect that could eventually warp the neck for example. However, the gibsons that are still around from the 50s and 60s have proven themselves over time. So build and longetivity are again subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 In a sense the 1950s were great for some exceptional guitars that were at the time quite innovative. They also had the advantage of an almost entirely new marketplace for a new kind of guitar and various sorts of amplification systems. OTOH, honestly I think today you get far more bang for your buck with the working musicians' type of instrument. I know at times I sound like I glow over the value of Epis, but if you could see some of the horrid, horrid crap at the low to mid range of guitars in the early 1960s as the folk and rock era came full blown into flower, some the young guys really would gag. I swear some of the low end guitars were made from orange crates - and if not, from stuff that wasn't much better. Cockeyed necks on some of that stuff was almost a given. Harmony/Stella had decent for the price stuff, but it was IMHO horribly over engineered to handle the lower quality woods. But that wasn't entirely uncommon for a lot of the available instruments that had baseball bat necks. My guess is that if 9 out of 10 low-mid range guitars are worth owning by any criteria, they're doing exceptionally well given the price and designs. One could not say that in 1963. Epi has a $100 "street price" dread that beats anything I remember at roughly that price point in non-adjusted dollars in '63 and ditto for some of the other brands today that didn't exist "back then." I also can tell you I couldn't afford a 335 and Bandmaster in 1965. Probably could have in 1975, but there weren't any in stores anywhere close enough with that sort of stuff for me to justify travels to get there. Oddly I got into an argument with a guy the other day who stated flatly that the 1950s and early 1960s were a horrid time in our collective history - yet I recall more roadbuilding, more live music and more people making a decent living for the available material possessions than today. Yet... I wouldn't give up my central heating and air conditioning for a coal stoker furnace and a window fan. Back to guitars, I have a hunch that one reason Leo Fender followed the banjo style in making bodies and necks separately is that there wasn't that much available aged wood at the end of "the war." But here were lots of surplus switches and pots and lots of radio tube manufacturing for the new world of shrinking tubes and the new video version of radio that certainly would kill the local movie theater... m <grin> m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted April 3, 2012 Author Share Posted April 3, 2012 In a sense the 1950s were great for some exceptional guitars that were at the time quite innovative. They also had the advantage of an almost entirely new marketplace for a new kind of guitar and various sorts of amplification systems. OTOH, honestly I think today you get far more bang for your buck with the working musicians' type of instrument. I know at times I sound like I glow over the value of Epis, but if you could see some of the horrid, horrid crap at the low to mid range of guitars in the early 1960s as the folk and rock era came full blown into flower, some the young guys really would gag. I swear some of the low end guitars were made from orange crates - and if not, from stuff that wasn't much better. Cockeyed necks on some of that stuff was almost a given. Harmony/Stella had decent for the price stuff, but it was IMHO horribly over engineered to handle the lower quality woods. But that wasn't entirely uncommon for a lot of the available instruments that had baseball bat necks. My guess is that if 9 out of 10 low-mid range guitars are worth owning by any criteria, they're doing exceptionally well given the price and designs. One could not say that in 1963. Epi has a $100 "street price" dread that beats anything I remember at roughly that price point in non-adjusted dollars in '63 and ditto for some of the other brands today that didn't exist "back then." I also can tell you I couldn't afford a 335 and Bandmaster in 1965. Probably could have in 1975, but there weren't any in stores anywhere close enough with that sort of stuff for me to justify travels to get there. Oddly I got into an argument with a guy the other day who stated flatly that the 1950s and early 1960s were a horrid time in our collective history - yet I recall more roadbuilding, more live music and more people making a decent living for the available material possessions than today. Yet... I wouldn't give up my central heating and air conditioning for a coal stoker furnace and a window fan. Back to guitars, I have a hunch that one reason Leo Fender followed the banjo style in making bodies and necks separately is that there wasn't that much available aged wood at the end of "the war." But here were lots of surplus switches and pots and lots of radio tube manufacturing for the new world of shrinking tubes and the new video version of radio that certainly would kill the local movie theater... m <grin> m Thinking about the 50's and 60's, it's easy to look back on them as better times, because we know the out come...50 years from now this will be the good old days for those who are the age we were back then..the things we fret about will have been put to rest. But like you, I remember the air raid sirens every monday at 11am and having to crawl under our desks and pretend we would survive a nuc attack. As humans we tend to remember the good, but there was a lot of unrest. The race riots of the 60's, the unrest in the cities, the fear of the USSR and everything we can look back on now and think ot it as no big deal was a big deal then. But we sure had some cool cars and nothing will replace mini skirts and hot pants (grin) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 Jax... I reeeeally shouldn't write this one 'cuz there may be kids listening, but... Mini skirts never were that functional without hotpants anyway. <chortle> m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 My '64 Strat was $289.00 w/case, back in '64! Now... CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaysEpiphone Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 Some would argue that some of the machines we have now to make guitars allow them to play better/last longer. I'd say that the massive jig/copy machine's that Gibson use's now to cut many body's at once make's them all practically identical. The old way, a person with experienced hand's cutting each body one at a time (mostly free handed on a band-saw) give's a good chance of getting that one body (every so many bodies made) that was cut just right to give a unique sound. Or maybe I'm just blowing hot air!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinh Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 OTOH, honestly I think today you get far more bang for your buck with the working musicians' type of instrument. I know at times I sound like I glow over the value of Epis, but if you could see some of the horrid, horrid crap at the low to mid range of guitars in the early 1960s as the folk and rock era came full blown into flower, some the young guys really would gag. I swear some of the low end guitars were made from orange crates - and if not, from stuff that wasn't much better. Cockeyed necks on some of that stuff was almost a given. Harmony/Stella had decent for the price stuff, but it was IMHO horribly over engineered to handle the lower quality woods. But that wasn't entirely uncommon for a lot of the available instruments that had baseball bat necks. Fully agree. I know first hand that the budget instruments available in the 60's /70 were truly horrible. We do live in a golden age of cheap gear. Todays $200 Squire strat is a far better instrument than the Teisco or Silvertone that occupied a similar place in the market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 Well, a lot of the "Silvertone" stuff, wasn't THAT bad....it was, either Harmony, or Danelectro made, with the Silvertone brand logo, on theheadstockk. Some folks, of all ages, still enjoy the particular sounds, they generated, with those lipstick pickups, and the DeArmond versions, as well. The very first "electric" guitar I ever played on, was my best friend's Harmony single coil, solid body...(same model, shown below). But, yeah...entry, or "student" level instruments now, are generally a LOT nicer, better constructed, and with much better materials, overall. CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The RandyMan Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Theoretically, if we knew then what we know now, we all would have acted differently, thereby changing history. As such, we would not be the same individuals we are today. Would it be worth the change now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonzoboy Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Of course I wouldn't mind going back to the late 50s when gold was about $25 an ounce and bring a couple of pounds or more back to the present with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted April 4, 2012 Author Share Posted April 4, 2012 Of course I wouldn't mind going back to the late 50s when gold was about $25 an ounce and bring a couple of pounds or more back to the present with me. I remember other stuff that was like $10.00 a ounce and $125.00 a kilo.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted April 4, 2012 Author Share Posted April 4, 2012 Jax... I reeeeally shouldn't write this one 'cuz there may be kids listening, but... Mini skirts never were that functional without hotpants anyway. <chortle> m Not true,,grin, they functioned best when worn without errrrr....undergarments... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Jeewhiz... Never woulda thought of that when I was livin' back then. <chortle> m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted April 5, 2012 Author Share Posted April 5, 2012 Jeewhiz... Never woulda thought of that when I was livin' back then. <chortle> m High heels and minskirts...mmmmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.