• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Why are vintage guitars considered to sound better than modern ones?

P

Pennywoloz

Banned
Joined
Oct 17, 2019
Messages
2
Hey everyone,
Since technology has improved over the last several decades, shouldn't modern guitars sound better as well? I understand the concept of limited supply = higher prices but that doesn't explain why so many people claim that their guitars from the 60s or 70s have a superior tone to their modern counterparts (Les Pauls, Stratocasters, White Falcons, etc). [MOD EDIT] Spam link removed

What do you guys think?
 
Last edited:
deytookerjaabs

deytookerjaabs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
1,594
Probably meant 50's/60's. Guitars of the 2040's will rise above all once we get molecular printers to clone the best of the best.
 
Tom Wittrock

Tom Wittrock

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
42,567
Why are vintage guitars considered to sound better than modern ones?

Because most people believe they do sound better. :ganz
 
marshall1987

marshall1987

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
3,278
First of all...the "golden age" of electric guitar manufacturing in the U.S. ran from the early 1950s through about 1964. Guitars built during this period are considered the most desirable vintage guitars. After about 1965 Gibson and Fender implemented many cost cutting changes to the specifications of their guitars that diminished the overall quality, playability, and appearance. It didn't help that both companies were sold to large corporations with little or no prior guitar manufacturing experience. Toss into the mix a cadre of "Ivy League" MBAs with their slide rules and pocket protectors, and you have the inevitable consequence of mass produced instruments with questionable QA/QC.

In general.... Gibson, Fender, and even Martin guitars from about 1972 and later have a less than stellar reputation among many players. Clearly there are a few exceptions, but overall QA/QC suffered. During this period many large corporations were more concerned with maximizing profits vs. producing high quality products. So they cut corners and figured nobody would be the wiser. This is when the vintage guitar phenomenon gained momentum among informed guitar players.

The guitar manufacturing decline during the 1970s follows the trend seen with American manufacturing, especially automobiles from the "Big Three" headquartered in Detroit.
 
Tom Wittrock

Tom Wittrock

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
42,567
Pennywoloz said:
Hey everyone,
Since technology has improved over the last several decades, shouldn't modern guitars sound better as well? I understand the concept of limited supply = higher prices but that doesn't explain why so many people claim that their guitars from the 60s or 70s have a superior tone to their modern counterparts (Les Pauls, Stratocasters, White Falcons, etc).

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Just to point out, we basically don't discuss 60's or 70's era guitars here.
That might be a great question in the Sunburst Pub and the rest of the Forums that talk about those.
Of course, if you include other brands than just Gibson, there's the Back Stage Area.
If you really want to know, you'll get serious discussion, I think. :salude
 
Texas Blues

Texas Blues

Active member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
4,641
Pennywoloz said:
Hey everyone,
Since technology has improved over the last several decades, shouldn't modern guitars sound better as well? I understand the concept of limited supply = higher prices but that doesn't explain why so many people claim that their guitars from the 60s or 70s have a superior tone to their modern counterparts (Les Pauls, Stratocasters, White Falcons, etc).

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

What do I think?

I think you have never played a guitar.
 
Big Al

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,541
Everybody thinks thier guitar sounds better. Different eras do sound different. First half 70's decade Kalamazoo guitars sound different from latter half 70's decade Nashville guitars, which all sound different from 80's with 90's early Henry era different from end of Henry Era with all sounding different from Custom, Art & Historic guitars which all sound different from ....


DIFFERENT


Back in the late 60's early 70's guitarists noticed that the slightly older pre conglomerate guitars and amps felt, played and sounded better. Electric Gibson guitars from 1950-65 became sought after with 50's instruments, especially 1957-1962, held up as benchmarks of tone and build for electric solidbody guitars.

There were not modern, new guitars available that were comparable. Just different and not made the same and certainly not sounding the same. So the perception was that these "Vintage Era" guitars represent highest quality of build and tone. A correct and fair deduction.

The problem is the chuckleheads confusing Vintage Era with simple age. Vintage. The mere fact that a guitar has age does not imbue it with tone. A 47 year old Les Paul sounds no better now than it did in 1977. And in '77 they were not considered as good as a 57. Beano was 5 or 6 years old when the Bluesbreaker LP was made.

Now they do make 'em like they did in the Vintage Era and, in general, they play and sound as good. The rest sound different and have thier own compelling voice. But some just assume older is better. Some are very mistaken.
 
musekatcher

musekatcher

New member
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
135
In some cases, the designs and features fell out of favor, but may now provide relief from modern conventions. I remember when P90's were old-fashioned, and undesirable. Now they are all the rage. In other cases, there may actually be some aging factor, such as magnets in pickups weakening, and accidentally improving the pickup balance and response, or perhaps wood transform in some way (I don't buy that btw), or other factors that occur over time that aren't readily understood, or possible to build into a new guitar.
Amplifiers are more interesting. Given a circuit, we should be able to build an exact, interchangeable 5e3 that in everyway sounds exactly like the originals. However, amps sound different. Even from the same vintage year. The same is true for guitars. Time is an indirect factor, in that over the years folks have traded various examples, with expert player/collectors acquiring the better examples - "culling" might be a better term.

As a result, those special examples get in the right hands, after being selected from thousands of examples of the decades. The same happens with flattops, saxes, all kinds of products that have production variation. I personally think this is the primary factor in "vintage" items being more desirable.
 
sonar

sonar

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2003
Messages
3,589
And AGAIN, a single post user starts a thread, but this time reposts/edits, and adds his bullshit link.

People, the LPF is trying to be conned into something by these stupid hacks.
 
marshall1987

marshall1987

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
3,278
Pennywoloz said:
Hey everyone,
Since technology has improved over the last several decades, shouldn't modern guitars sound better as well? I understand the concept of limited supply = higher prices but that doesn't explain why so many people claim that their guitars from the 60s or 70s have a superior tone to their modern counterparts (Les Pauls, Stratocasters, White Falcons, etc). [MOD EDIT] Spam link removed

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...


Here's what I think.....Pennywoloz, whatever .........

 
A

agogetr

Active member
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
451
vintage guitars are better for many reasons, they have 'settled in' its just common sense.
 
Big Al

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,541
agogetr said:
vintage guitars are better for many reasons, they have 'settled in' its just common sense.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, not common sense and shows the kind of lazy thought process and fantasy reasoning that gets tossed about when facts prove too difficult to produce. "Settled in", genius.
 
ourmaninthenorth

ourmaninthenorth

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
7,124
Why?

Money.

I suggest and firmly believe the proposition that the more dough you pay for a guitar, the better it has to sound to you.

I'm not being flippant.

I can make Vintage and Modern guitars alike sound shite with consummate ease; I'm an equal opportunities incompetent. I'm a decidedly average guitar player, but definitely the best guitarist in my house, heaven forfend... another completely meaningless comparison, whatever bloody next?

But I do love guitars, and I do love trying to play em, and I do love all this comparative buffoonery...it passes an hour. However it gives me nowhere to hide once the playing starts and the bubble blowing stops, nor does it shield me from the withering realisation that the indispensability of that £1000 pedal, £20,000 amp, £0 to infinty Guitar, in the completion of "my" sound leaves me sounding exactly the same as after the last bloody great white hope purchase.

Vic said it better above, depends who's playing the bugger...

Granted he said it better and with less words, but I do love to hide behind verbosity, especially when I haven't really got a point worthy of the word.

What was the question again...??
 
Last edited:
A

agogetr

Active member
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
451
Big Al said:
Nonsense, not common sense and shows the kind of lazy thought process and fantasy reasoning that gets tossed about when facts prove too difficult to produce. "Settled in", genius.
Click to expand...
what about the wood in a les paul that has aged 60 years? the glue? the magnets? none of this changes over time? did it ever need a truss rod adjustment?
after being played for years are the fretboard edges rounded and smothed a bit? its not fantasy reasoning its a fact the guitar is not the same as when it was brand new. maybe i should have said 'worn in'. then it wouldnt have ruined your day as much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top