Brand-new vs. REAL Vintage. Your opinion & Why?

[colins]

There is another thread going on right now that queries the relative importance of tone/playability and looks. Seems to me that this thread is partly about the relative importance of tone/playability and vintage mojo.

Mojo and looks are both great and an important part of a purchase decision, but for me the fundamentals to every guitar purchase are tone and playability. So I’d play the new one, play the vintage one, then I’d subvert the OP’s thread and play a third one that is used but not ‘vintage’. If they sound the same I’d think about what jerked on my heart strings and what scared my hip pocket. And I’d most likely go for the third choice and get a great guitar to make great music with, but with minimal lost money if I decide to sell it. I guess for me the mojo is in the music not in the age of the guitar.

[BluesKing777]

I have a guitar or 2 , new and old and vintage but the game changer for me is my Waterloo WL-14L ladder braced. New it sounds older than my oldest 1935 Gibson. I am plunking away on the Waterloo and I now and again look down and get reminded I have a brand new guitar! RIP Bill, shame you didn’t make this guitar for me 40 or so years back....could have missed the search and tone hunt though and just played this!


BluesKing777.

[beatcomber]

Very interesting discussion, and a question that's hard for me answer conclusively. Certainly there are a lot of variables to consider.

I am drawn to old things (my hifi, for example, is built around a 1959 Fisher X-100 integrated tube amp), so that makes vintage guitars inherently attractive to me. That said, I have played some brand new guitars (ie: there's a lovely OM-28 at the Music Emporium right) now that sound so soulful and alive, with layers upon layers of bloom unfolding.

But there is something special about playing a guitar that has a history. And, of course, it has to sound great and play well!

My budget for things like guitars is fairly modest, but I was fortunate to acquire (via this forum's classifieds) an affordable vintage Gibson, a 1964 F25 Folksinger, which is a model that many pass over for a variety of reasons, but I really love it. It plays comfortably up and down the neck, it's no less stable than a new instrument, and its tone is nuanced and sweet. Like others have said, there is something very special about the tone of aged wood.

[Golffishny]

I looked for a birth year guitar for myself. Anything that wasn't "used and scarred or abused" was way above my budget. Add to that not knowing how the guitar was handled or if it was humidified and there were just too many unknowns.
I decided that the new guitars are built more consistently, have terrific sound and playability, and I would know how they were maintained. For the price of a mint birth year guitar I bought a Martin 00-18 and a 00-28. I purchased ones made in the birth years of my grandsons. Eventually, the guitars will be theirs. Until then, I'm enjoying them every day. The old guitars I've played don't sound any better than the new ones, if even that good. I think it seems that like everything, the older I get the better it used to be. Good luck with your individual choice.

[musicman1951]

Originally Posted by hangil210

For instance, if you have a chance to buy only one of either real vintage Gibson J-45 (let's say, from late 1950s) or brand-new one, what would be your choice, and why?

If you have $4,000 to spend then my choice would be new - well, actually it would probably be slightly used.

If you've got plenty of money to spend I'd go with a sweet sounding pre-war guitar. While you might find one in someone's attic, I suspect a great sounding vintage guitar is going to be quite a bit more money.

If I'm spending 5 figures for the guitar I'm no very worried about paying for a neck reset. But I also heartily agree that just because a guitar is old doesn't mean it's a great guitar. Only good wine improves with age.

[TBman]

I would buy the new one. The "mojo" of a J-45 and any guitar for that matter is 10% in your head and 90% from you. String bends, double stops, palm muting.......

[Shades of Blue]

As much as I'd love to own a vintage guitar, I just don't want a guitar with a past history that isn't a part of my history. That, and I can't afford vintage, and I often don't like the smells they come with!

[Coach Jim]

I bought a Martin D-18 new in 1968 when I was 20. Now we are both vintage. I vote for vintage.

[zombywoof]

Originally Posted by BluesKing777

I have a guitar or 2 , new and old and vintage but the game changer for me is my Waterloo WL-14L ladder braced. New it sounds older than my oldest 1935 Gibson. I am plunking away on the Waterloo and I now and again look down and get reminded I have a brand new guitar! RIP Bill, shame you didn’t make this guitar for me 40 or so years back....could have missed the search and tone hunt though and just played this!


BluesKing777.

I agree that the Waterloos as well as the Hauvers, and Fraulinis have been game changers. But I have never played a Waterloo that captures the sound of say my early 1930s Oscar Schmidt-made Galiano jumbo. No harmonics/overtones or sustain to speak of. It just gives you what it has and then gets out of the way. Then again, lurking in the back of my mind is the thought what would happen if I had the spruce bridge plate which runs the entire width of the guitar swapped out for a traditional sized maple one. I had this done with my pre-War Regal jumbo 12 string and it worked out well for both survival and sound.

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by Gmountain

I think old guitars are just old.

So unless there was some sort of connection with a specific person,or it's a family heirloom, I would be wanting new.

We need to be careful that we not paint with too broad a brush. We know that all guitars are not equal to begin with and we know that even with new guitars sound and consistency can vary wildly.

Having said that, my step-son has a 2003 Martin D35, a friend whom I play with regularly has a 2011 D35. I have a 1972 D35. I can tell you that neither of these two guitars, nice as they are, hold a candle in sound to mine. I've played several newer D35's and haven't yet found one that has the tone or character of my '72. Perhaps 46 years old shouldn't be considered "old"?

Part of the equation is how an instrument is cared for. While I wouldn't say my '72 is in "mint" condition, it's in pretty darn good shape. Yeah, it was on the verge of needing a neck reset so I did that and don't regret it for a minute. I have no intention of ever selling it.

[Dwight]

Originally Posted by kiva238

Life is too short to play ho-hum guitars. . . .

...just waiting for a little puff of wind

[Tony Burns]

99 % of the time i buy used -Reason seems simple and smart to me .
I have the benefit of Time and experience the guitar has gained-
Its Sound will determine with time wether it is an outstanding guitar or
something thats a wall hanger . Its flaws will stand out as well as its strengths.
If it is built well ( straight neck -no cracks in wood and flaws in Workmanship )
Plus i dont have to put a couple of years into it to see if its the guitar i expect it to be .
Yes i have bought new - My OM28v was outstanding when i bought it , and yes its even better now -
I even bought new and got rid of a guitar 3-4 years latter because it didnt get better -glad its new owner loved it -
I love Vintage -but its price has to be fair - honestly their are so many guitars out their , why not be picky !



.

[Tony Burns]

Originally Posted by zombywoof

That is a gorgeous instrument !

[fishstick_kitty]

The other option is to buy new from a boutique-ish builder who copies the old gibson designs. I know you're looking at the J45...Kopp et al are all incredible at this (https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...d.php?t=388402).

I have owned a 1943 Gibson LG and it sounded incredible. I have also owned a couple Waterloos and they absolutely NAIL the tone of that guitar...and they play much better (more consistently good) and they are much less money.

But I understand if you want to buy an actual Gibson

[JGinNJ]

I prefer new or very-lightly used, though I've bought archtops that were 15-20+ years old. I tend to keep instruments for a long time and not beat them up, so I like to get something in nice condition.

I did try a mid-60's D-18 last year, it was light as a feather and had amazing tone. I think it was about 3500-4000, though, not worth it to me.