Old wood or different wood?

[good_hillbilly]

I got to play a very old dreadnought the other day. It simply had a bark and a "quickness" that a new guitar does not have. Just doesn't. I have tried new Martins, Taylors, Guilds, and now play a decade-old Collings. I have tried a couple of the modern Martin Authentics ... nice guitars, but That Sound is just not there.

NONE of them get that rasping bark of an ancien-regime D-28. It's not a subtle difference, either.

Is it that the wood somehow changes over the years? If so, how? I mean, it's dead. Or is it simply that they had access to stocks of much higher quality wood back in the day?

[gruuv]

Originally Posted by good_hillbilly

I got to play a very old dreadnought the other day. It simply had a bark and a "quickness" that a new guitar does not have. Just doesn't. I have tried new Martins, Taylors, Guilds, and now play a decade-old Collings. I have tried a couple of the modern Martin Authentics ... nice guitars, but That Sound is just not there.

NONE of them get that rasping bark of an ancien-regime D-28. It's not a subtle difference, either.

Is it that the wood somehow changes over the years? If so, how? I mean, it's dead. Or is it simply that they had access to stocks of much higher quality wood back in the day?

Not that this will give you any definitive scientific "evidence," but it's interesting reading IMO.

http://www.premierguitar.com/article...-and-vibration

The stiffness, resonant properties, density, and ultimate strength are the four most important aspects of what defines a tonewood, and these are also the properties that change with age and thus affect tone and responsiveness of guitars.

I personally believe that both the age of the wood and how much the guitar is played contribute to the impact on tone that you're hearing. While the supply of quality tone woods may be decreasing, I don't believe the stock for a five year old, or even 10 year old Martin is going to be drastically lower quality than the referenced D-28. That difference in tone has to do with playing hours and time, in my experience and semi-educated opinion.

EDIT: I should add, too, that because wood is not perfectly consistent in structure, density, etc... from piece to piece even within the same species, in my experience you sometimes end up with a combination of woods that just works beautifully with one another and creates a tonal richness and resonance that is unmatched. So, take that into account as well. But, all things being equal (ha!) I stand by my earlier assertion regarding age/play.

[billgennaro]

You'll get many varying opinions on this topic. I tend to go with my own ears (and happen to agree with you in your assessment). I also listen intently to those people who actually make a living out of building acoustic guitars. Nearly all of them will tell you that wood changes with age and with playing time, although there seems to be little in the way of scientific analysis. Hopefully, some of the luthiers who participate on this forum will chime in. They certainly should be able to provide an authoritative opinion as to how the "quality" of available wood has changed, having hands on experience with the stuff for decades in some instances.

[jseth]

I don't know about the "bark" of which you spoke, but the "quickness" is absolutely more a function of the top wood and the bracing... that's what gives a guitar it's response time, along with however thick the finish is...

You didn't mention what year the guitar you played was... was it truly an "old" one, or made since 1970?

Whenever you play a "factory-built" guitar, there are going to be huge differences between different specimens of the same model... even the same day or week off the bench, even the same batch of wood used in construction.

Truth is, there are differences in the small shop, hand-built guitars too, however those differences tend to be more pleasing characteristics, as opposed to "this one is great, this one? Not so much..."

I mean, they are all built of wood and by humans (mostly?), so there is going to be variance... which is why so many people search for such a long time to find "the One" for them...

[kydave]

You can't build in "age" to a guitar... pure & simple.

[dgonz]

I feel many factors affect tone when a guitar matures. Even the actual music played and the guitar player.

Example: Years ago, guitar companies were experimenting with "aging" a top by exposing it to vibrations to "break it in" faster. The guitars did have a different tone, but not the holy grail of vintage tone they were expecting. What were those exact vibrations? What kind of music did it simulate, etc?

If User A gets Guitar A, plays it exactly 2 hrs every day for 2 years, and plays the same major and minor, open position chords in his very light touch, it will sound a certain way after that 2 years.

If User B gets Guitar B, plays it the exact same amount of hours, but has a very aggressive playing style, plays Jazz, Blues and Rock and plays hard, exposing that top to much more vibrating from the aggressive playing style, and to the different vibrations that different chords and music will produce, that top is going to sound a little different than User A.

I've seen this exact same thing happen with students, and even friends that had the same guitar as me. Every little thing that guitar is subjected go, gives it more character and a different personality. Each strum, each chord, each gig, each bonfire jam, each drunken jam session gives that guitar more of it's own "life", and changes its voice and personality.

[scottishrogue]

I think most of us would agree that wood changes over time depending on the environment. Guitars left out in the sun are going to dry out, or if we don't pay attention to the RH in the room where our guitars are stored, the wood will change, and probably become dried out eventually. Wood left outside will lose color, and the moisture content will go up and down depending on the weather. Tone woods that improve with time will eventually reach their peak, but will begin to a produce a less desirable tone. Nobody can predict when this will happen, if at all in our lifetime. All we can do is speculate, until it begins to occur. So, while I keep a close watch on the RH, and act when necessary, I'm not losing any sleep over the condition of the wood.

Glen

[00-28]

Originally Posted by scottishrogue

Tone woods that improve with time will eventually reach their peak, but will begin to a produce a less desirable tone. Nobody can predict when this will happen, if at all in our lifetime.

Glen

I've been seeing a lot of new guitars with expiration dates lately. Ain't nothing like a fresh guitar.. .........Mke

[good_hillbilly]

Originally Posted by jseth

I don't know about the "bark" of which you spoke, but the "quickness" is absolutely more a function of the top wood and the bracing... that's what gives a guitar it's response time, along with however thick the finish is...

You didn't mention what year the guitar you played was... was it truly an "old" one, or made since 1970?

Whenever you play a "factory-built" guitar, there are going to be huge differences between different specimens of the same model... even the same day or week off the bench, even the same batch of wood used in construction.

Truth is, there are differences in the small shop, hand-built guitars too, however those differences tend to be more pleasing characteristics, as opposed to "this one is great, this one? Not so much..."

I mean, they are all built of wood and by humans (mostly?), so there is going to be variance... which is why so many people search for such a long time to find "the One" for them...

By "bark" I just mean that explosive yet slightly boxy sound that many old guitars have. Tony Rice's old D-28 is a perfect example. The one I briefly played was just postwar -- I think 1946 -- and it had that same exact sound. No modern guitar has that. New Authentics sound great, Collings'es sound great, a bazillion other kinds sound great. They often have a lot of sustain and sparkly clean tone. But they don't have that punch and that crispness -- something isn't there. By no means am I talking about a subtle thing. In an A/B test it would be perfectly obvious.

[Twelvefret]

Originally Posted by good_hillbilly

Is it that the wood somehow changes over the years? If so, how? I mean, it's dead. Or is it simply that they had access to stocks of much higher quality wood back in the day?

I am in a minority, but I think they old ones sounded good right from the start. IMO, it is because of the way they were built and not all were built the same. Some are better than others as with all hand made products.

[Twelvefret]

Originally Posted by kydave

You can't build in "age" to a guitar... pure & simple.

You are correct, but age is not why they sound good.

[Silly Moustache]

Originally Posted by kydave

You can't build in "age" to a guitar... pure & simple.

Although they are tryng with the "aged tone" torrified tops offerings!

[kydave]

Originally Posted by Twelvefret

You are correct, but age is not why they sound good.

It is real & active part of a complex mix.

If you don't believe that, it's OK with me.

You're wrong, but it's OK. Won't be the first or last time.

[bohemian]

"You are correct, but age is not why they sound good. "

Double bingo.. collect your prize.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by bohemian

"You are correct, but age is not why they sound good. "

Double bingo.. collect your prize.

Awww nuts!!

And we were on a roll, having agreed on something TWICE in the past week...