How long does it take for a regular guitar to catch up with it's "aged" counterpart?

[RalphH]

Originally Posted by Mr. Paul

I would be interested to see any evidence that Martin has made such a claim.

From Martin:
"..[blah blah blah]...The result was the ability to replicate key properties of a guitar top from the 1930's-1940's or from the mid 1800's. Having the ability to target a historical era ..[blah blah blah]..."

https://issuu.com/cfmartin/docs/vts-booklet_low

Ya know... the way you phrased that kinda sounded like you thought I was making stuff up...

[Br1ck]

I'd say it's getting there around 20 years, at 30 I hear it. Depends on the guitar and how much it's been played. At 40-50 years, it's there. I can not for the life of me describe it, but I know when I hear it.

I've got to say, cooked tops get halfway there, but some question how they will age. Then there is the old personal bias that can't be overlooked. I pick up a 50 year old guitar and just want to like it. There goes objectivity out the window.

[rgregg48]

Like everything else on AGF
if you think it is...it is!

[Mr. Paul]

Originally Posted by RalphH

From Martin:
"..[blah blah blah]...The result was the ability to replicate key properties of a guitar top from the 1930's-1940's or from the mid 1800's. Having the ability to target a historical era ..[blah blah blah]..."

https://issuu.com/cfmartin/docs/vts-booklet_low

Ya know... the way you phrased that kinda sounded like you thought I was making stuff up...

Ralph,


LOL I'd not read that particular bit of marketing manure. I don't hesitate to call bs, if I knew you were making stuff up I'd not have left room for any doubt

Cheers

Paul

[buddyhu]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

It isn't a silly question, given the amount of marketing behind new "aged" guitars. Unfortunately, a meaningful answer requires data. As far as I'm aware, there isn't sufficient published data. If companies have done the testing - some, like Yamaha, might have - it hasn't been published.

To answer your question, one would have to develop response profiles on new guitars, on those same guitars as they age - to identify what, if any, objective changes in response occur as an instrument ages - and on new guitars.

One would also have to develop a "listener evaluation criteria" that identifies what changes a listener can distinguish and what changes matter to the listener that define a tone as being "better" or "aged". Not all changes are relevant to the listener, even if they happen: measuring equipment can identify changes but those changes are not necessarily distinguishable to listeners, let alone contribute to what is perceived as "better" tone.

Charles Tauber has mastered clearheadedness and clear communication, and here is another post that reflects that. Not much more to say.

~~~~~
Regarding torrefied tops: last Fall, i bought a used Collings C10-35, with a torrefied Sitka top. Love it! If it were any more brilliant, I’d be blinded, sonically speaking. I have had it less than a year, so too soon to assess how the tone might mature. And since it is sunburst, who knows if the top might look strange if it were a natural finish. But i am fine with it as it is.

The tone of my Collings OM changed a lot in the first two years, and many folks describe new Collings as “tight”. I will just keep playing it and will see what happens. It would be nice if the notes rounded out a bit, as they did (quite significantly) with the OM.

[EZYPIKINS]

In my opinion. And you can take it with a grain of salt.
More than the age of the guitar. It needs to be played.
The more it's played. And especially played in tune. The better it will sound.
My Gibson has been played every day since about 2016 And the tone is coming in nicely.

[Goodallboy]

When that happens we may all be dead, the guitar will have passed through 5 other owners and 1 of them was a chain smoker.

[RalphH]

Originally Posted by Mr. Paul

Ralph,


LOL I'd not read that particular bit of marketing manure. I don't hesitate to call bs, if I knew you were making stuff up I'd not have left room for any doubt

Cheers

Paul

It was a whole thing. There was a youtube video too.

[hifivic]

Originally Posted by brencat

Try not to think of torrefied guitars as having a head start. IMO, it's a totally different sound. Me personally? I'm not sold on torrefied tops. I've had a few and the things they've had in common were a narrower cone of sound and less brilliance in the upper mids and highs compared with non-torrefied versions.

I don't have the patience anymore to break in Adirondack tops from brand new, but I'm not sure I like brittle tone and/or the mellow/subdued highs of a brand new guitar with torrefied Adi either. So I stick with used instruments now that have been played and well cared for.

Pretty much my experience also, I seem to prefer German tops over Adi.

[phavriluk]

About the same time as my age matches my parents'...

[Kerbie]

Originally Posted by hifivic

... I seem to prefer German tops over Adi.

Likewise, by a lot.

[smic28]

In my opinion, torrefied does not equal a guitar aged through playing and environmental changes. I have two guitars with torrefied tops. Both sound good, but I would also say a little tight. They still sound new. I have a couple of other guitars that I have owned for anywhere between 13 and 18 years. Both of these have changed from good to great in that time. I don't mind buying a torrefied guitar but I wouldn't pay extra for it.

[bufflehead]

Originally Posted by hifivic

... I seem to prefer German tops over Adi.

I'll take Sitka over either.

[Oldguy64]

Originally Posted by schwa

I have been around guitars long enough to know that guitars "age" over time. Some say that it's due to the wood drying out, some say that guitars "coalesce" - they forget that they are a bunch of pieces glued together - and act more as one.

It seems everyone now offers guitars with "aged tops". They promise to deliver the sound of older guitars out of the box.

How "old" are these aged guitars? 5, 10, 50 years?

I'm wondering how long before my 18 year old Martin is going to be comparable to the current aged guitars.

Sorry if this seems a silly question.

If one believes Bob Taylor, a guitar “opens up” at intervals.
One, five, ten, and twenty years approximately.
At the twenty year mark, it’s made most of the changes it’s going to.
I think torrefication dries the saps and resins, but the question that I have, is does that make it sound “better” or simply “different”?
And as the guitar ages, how is it going to react to the wood around it expanding and contracting at different rates due to differences in moisture content?
Of course, it’s also possible that I’m thinking way too hard.

[printer2]

Originally Posted by Oldguy64

If one believes Bob Taylor, a guitar “opens up” at intervals.
One, five, ten, and twenty years approximately.
At the twenty year mark, it’s made most of the changes it’s going to.
I think torrefication dries the saps and resins, but the question that I have, is does that make it sound “better” or simply “different”?
And as the guitar ages, how is it going to react to the wood around it expanding and contracting at different rates due to differences in moisture content?
Of course, it’s also possible that I’m thinking way too hard.

It does dry the sap and resin but it also decomposes the wood to a certain extent. It cooks off a part of the wood called hemicellulose. If you broke off a corner of the top before it is made with one being the raw wood and one that has been torrified you would have no problem telling which one was treated. On which is better, that does also come down to people's tastes. And in that way different.