Why do the old ones sound better?

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282754' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:02 AM']But why assume that wire has made such amazing improvements and changes in tone without any evidence other than it would work nicely for your argument? There are other ways to discern facts than simply declaring them boldly.[/quote]
Again I didn't state it as a fact. I merely threw my hat into the ring with a "real world" suggestion to the OPs question of a difference between then and now. My suggestion that pickup wire may now be purer is based on the idea that consistent production techniques have improved over the last 60 odd years. I hope that by arguing against this you are not suggesting that the quality has remained the same over this time period.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282755' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:03 AM']No you did, no tapbacks [/quote]
Injected, injected, can't be infected!

[chris_b]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1282852' date='Jun 26 2011, 10:40 AM']....for basses like Fenders, over the years the bad ones get destroyed, parted out or mod'd until they are good so by the time they are "old" most of the bad ones are long gone....[/quote]
I've never heard of a Fender being destroyed just because it didn't sound good! I think any bass you don't like (including all the "bad" Fenders) just got sold on until they land up with someone who likes them or who just doesn't know the difference!

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1282852' date='Jun 26 2011, 10:40 AM']There are good and bad basses from most manufacturers every year. However for basses like Fenders, over the years the bad ones get destroyed, parted out or mod'd until they are good so by the time they are "old" most of the bad ones are long gone.

Remember that all these "old" basses were new at some point in their lives and many of the classic bass sounds on recordings from the 60s were done with instruments that were only a few years old at the time.

What I find interesting is that as time progresses it only seems to be Fenders that continue to go up in value even from the acknowledged less good periods of manufacture such as those from the late 70s. Form my personal experience of the time working in my local music shop the new Fender basses we were getting in were almost without exception horrible while the basses from Aria and Ibanez were in every respect far superior. Despite this, nowadays a late 70s Fender is generally worth far more than an Aria Pro II or Ibanez from the same year.[/quote]
Nominated for the "most sensible post today" award.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282762' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:22 AM']....debate is often contrary, saying the same thing would be agreement....[/quote]
Rock on..... (or off depending on you point of view)
I love a good mass debate.

[Doctor J]

[quote name='PauBass' post='1282817' date='Jun 26 2011, 09:57 AM']For those who think that wood has no effect on the bass sound, listen to a Warwick bass and you'll see how it really affects the tone.[/quote]
So an ash bodied, maple necked Warwick Streamer will sound the similar to an ash bodied, maple necked Fender? Personally, I'd say the bell brass frets and active electronics play a more sizable part in shaping the tone than the wood in that example, but it's all personal interpretation. Unless they can prove mojo in a lab, if they can measure it, prove that this wood is more resonant and musical than that wood because of a certain facet, then it's all in the ear of the beholder. Wood isn't the same, two pieces of ash can sound different. Two pieces of old ash can sound different. A new piece of ash and an old piece of ash can sound similar.

There's so much myth and magic bandied around, - better wood in the old days? Fender used pretty cheap standard lumber, they've never been ones for hand selected magic tone wood outside of the recent custom shop. What about all those pieces of crap (Kay, Hofner, Eko, etc etc etc) made from the same era and quality of wood, do they also sound magic now? Of course not. Fender used cheap labour too, it wasn't a team of highly skilled ninja luthiers painstakingly handcrafting the finest musical instruments since Stradivarius, it was cheap labour employed in the production processes of the time who were largely unskilled. Fender had some genius designs which have stood the test of time, that's the strength and, yes, pretty much everything else is an imitation of the original and, in my humble opinion, there's your attraction. You expect an old instrument to sound better, just because. It's a rare artifact of a bygone era, a piece of history in your hands and, quite often, looked at with rose coloured lenses.

Contrast that to modern instrument manufacture, cnc precision bodies and necks may be more consistant but where's the love? Where's the mojo in a perfectly wound pickup? How can it have magic if it's exactly the same as the previous one? The sometimes haphazard manufacture of vintage gear allows us to believe there's something special about this one that the next one doesn't have. There seems to be a 30 year point, which is when an instrument is officially vintage I believe, where it also becomes strangely desirable. See how early 80's basses are now shooting up in price compared to just a couple of years ago. They're not any better, they're just more desirable. Maybe it's a thing where a player is playing an instrument older than they are, there's some kind of lure in that, I don't know. I, too, used to own a 77 Jazz and the build quality was just shocking. Not a Friday afternoon jobbie, the cheap hardware, the standard of routing, just poor. If you came across that in a modern Mexican Fender you'd send it back but because it's so old it's past the point of being crap, now it's called mojo. I recall seeing a late 50's P bass, beautiful looking, but the neck pocket was so wide the neck wasn't mounted straight to the extent that the G string was literally hanging off the side of the neck, utterly unplayable, but lusted after on talkbass by pretty much everyone despite the serious manufacture flaw. Somehow the age was enough for everyone to overlook the quite obvious lack of quality control. I believe it sold for almot 10 grand. Of couse, I'm not saying old is bad, just saying old doesn't mean good by default either. Clearly, they were capable of getting it right too.

Personally, I believe the best instruments ever made will be made this year. Next year, they'll get better again, but of course it depends how you define better. This year, there are already fantastic luthiers adding yet another year of experience to their skillset. These days there are luthiers actively seeking special pieces of wood, rather than just buying in bulk. There are a myriad of specialised parts manufacturers who've dedicated years of their lives to understanding the subtleties of pickups and electronics, they've studied the pioneering work of Gibson and Fender and they're standing on the shoulders of giants so to speak. They're building one-off instruments to be the very best they can be, rather than the embryonic stages of a mass produced item built to a competitive price point. I don't expect humans to get worse at something with experience, but seemingly some believe this can be the case with instruments, that despite all the experience and knowledge now pooled that mankind has somehow forgotten something about building electric guitars and basses. I don't subscribe to that at all.

When you click with an instrument, it's a wonderful thing. My ESP J bass has seen off a number of Fenders, Sadowsky, Lakland and other J designs. It's almost 25 years old now, but the thing is, it was a great instrument back when I got it almost 20 years ago and I think that's the important bit. It hasn't changed that much, other than it's aged a bit and looks a bit battered now. It hasn't gotten better though, that I know of, it just works for me in the same way it did back when I first got it. I remember thinking it was a bit special at the time. I've no doubt the Sadowsky was built to a higher standard with a higher quality of hardware, but the ESP does the J thing the way I want the J thing done. The Fenders, despite being [i]the real thing[/i], never sounded or felt as good no matter how much time I spent setting them up, whether they were newer or older than the ESP. Back then it was just another Japanese import. Being old doesn't make it better than the others or better than it used to be, being my idea of a great bass since I first played it makes it better than the others.

I think I ought to stop now

[PauBass]

Of course electronics, pickups preamp play a major part in the sound of the instrument but wood also affects the tone. I mentioned Warwick basses because, at least to my ears, they sound really woody and I don't think that's down to the electronics. If you were to have the same set of electronics in another bass it wouldn't sound as a Warwick, would it?

I think I was quite clear when I said "I'm not sure what it is, wood, time...."

Again I'm not trying to convince anyone, if "yes" or "no" is going to be down to each person, I just said what I think from my own experience.

[skankdelvar]

If the 'old is better' thing was simply confined to Fenders / bass guitars / musical instruments, then there might be some truth to it. The fact is, almost any community of interest - cars, cameras, boats, trains, whatever - will have a proportion of enthusiasts who regard 'old' as better.

With cars and the like, it's very easy to observe and cite real improvements in quality and function over the last 50 years. But things haven't changed that much in the world of electric bass guitar. Modern basses aren't [i]much[/i] better or [i]much[/i] worse. Hence, the space exists to permit the assertion that old is better. Not because it verifiably [i]is[/i] better, but because there's not much visible or audible difference to disprove the contention.

The motivation behind 'old is better' is that lots of people don't like modern life and would prefer to live in the past. In lieu of a time machine, they acquire the past by acquiring or venerating old things. Not that this is a bad thing. As with one's perception of tone, it's all very [i]personal[/i], which might explain some of the heat in a debate where almost nothing can be measured or verified.

Edited June 26, 2011 by skankdelvar

[redstriper]

I like modern life and I don't want to live in the past, I don't venerate old things like cars or anything else.
I would simply love to find a modern bass that sounds as good to my ears as my old one.
And it's not just my ears - my old one sounds better to everyone who has heard the comparison with newer models in blind tests.
I don't know if it sounds better because it's old or for other reasons, but I'm interested to know of others who may have experienced the same phenomenon.

[Doctor J]

The question is this - has it always sounded good? You've had it for 30 years, has it improved noticably between now and when you first got it?

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='redstriper' post='1282997' date='Jun 26 2011, 02:16 PM']And it's not just my ears - my old one sounds better to everyone who has heard the comparison with newer models in blind tests.
I don't know if it sounds better because it's old or for other reasons, but I'm interested to know of others who may have experienced the same phenomenon.[/quote]
That's an entirely good point you make and fair play to you. It sounds better to you and to other observers. But that may not be because it is old. Or it might be. Either way, it's good that you have a nice-sounding bass

If a particular production period can be shown to have incorporated certain recorded and verifiable differences - pick-up impedance, construction methods, QC, etc., then we're on safe ground. We can reliably attribute certain tonalities to specific issues. But if simply changing a cap value can radically change the sound of a bass, then an ephemeral quality such as age becomes less relevant, IMO.

I've played a fair few basses and guitars over the last four decades and production date didn't seem to have a lot to do with whether they sounded good or played well. Just my experience of the phenomenon. Had the hand of fate sent me a different selection of instruments, my view might have been different. But it didn't.

Just my 2p.

Edited June 26, 2011 by skankdelvar

[redstriper]

[quote name='Doctor J' post='1283006' date='Jun 26 2011, 02:24 PM']The question is this - has it always sounded good? You've had it for 30 years, has it improved noticably between now and when you first got it?[/quote]
It's always sounded the same and it's a sound that suits me, but not everyone else since I play mostly reggae.
Am I the only member of this forum still playing the same bass after 30 odd years?

[Lozz196]

I really think thats great, to still own and play a bass bought 30 years ago.

If I`d had the courage of my convictions, I`d have bought a US Precision in 87 when I bought my first "real" bass, and am sure it would still be with me now, rather than the many basses I`ve bought/sold over the years, trying to get the sound in my head - which was a Precision, doh!

Still, was fun though.

[Spike Vincent]

[quote name='redstriper' post='1283033' date='Jun 26 2011, 03:19 PM']It's always sounded the same and it's a sound that suits me, but not everyone else since I play mostly reggae.
Am I the only member of this forum still playing the same bass after 30 odd years?[/quote]


No.I bough my cheap second hand 78 Fender P in 1981.(The one I'm using on the left) Does it sound the same? I think so, but I'm not using the same amp or string brand, so it's impossible to judge. (Anyone else remember Daddario XL Reds? lovely..).It does, however, sound the same as the less cheap vintage 78 Fender P I bought in 1996.

Edited June 26, 2011 by Spike Vincent

[halfmanhalfdrum]

[quote name='Lozz196' post='1283037' date='Jun 26 2011, 03:24 PM']I really think thats great, to still own and play a bass bought 30 years ago.

If I`d had the courage of my convictions, I`d have bought a US Precision in 87 when I bought my first "real" bass, and am sure it would still be with me now, rather than the many basses I`ve bought/sold over the years, trying to get the sound in my head - which was a Precision, doh!

Still, was fun though.[/quote]

It's all about perception in my opinion. I once bought an old Encore P bass for £50 and took it to a reheareal. I thought it sounded pretty good for a cheap bass but the guitarist, who was of the opinion that anything made outside of the USA was rubbish, announced to the rest of band that it sounded crap and I should buy a "real" one. Over the following couple of weeks I reliced the encore, adding a fender logo and took it to the rehearsal claiming that it was a '68 Precision. Said guitarist stated that it was the best bass he'd ever heard! There is so much snobbery in music. I'm not bothered what anyone else plays - Isn't it about having fun at the end of the day?

[BigRedX]

I think it's not so much about "old" instruments sounding better, but that the OP's old bass sounds better to him.

I would say that a lot of it has to do with the familiarity of the sound. You like the sound of the bass you've been playing for the last 30 years because it's what you are used to and because it's fairly likely that you've adapted your style to overcome any short comings the instrument has.

I know that it's definitely the case with me. Every new bass that I try I always have half ear out for what I liked about the sound of my first bass. The main reason I use different basses now is that the music I play now is not the same as the music I was playing 30+ years ago.

I guess that what the OP would really like is a bass that combines what he likes about his current instrument, but without any of the things that he doesn't like (such as the weight). My advice would simply be to go and play every single bass that you come across irrespective of age, price or name on the headstock. Eventually you'll find the one that has everything you want, but I don't believe that simply age will be the key factor.

[4-string-thing]

[quote name='redstriper' post='1283033' date='Jun 26 2011, 03:19 PM']It's always sounded the same and it's a sound that suits me, but not everyone else since I play mostly reggae.
Am I the only member of this forum still playing the same bass after 30 odd years?[/quote]

Nope.... I've had my Precision 32 years, and my Acoustic rig 31. No doubt it still sounds the same as it did in 1980, but that suits me just fine.

I now own several basses and an Ashdown rig. TBH, I doubt that I would be able to tell whats what in a blind listening test, some people might, but not me, my ears aren't that good!

All I know is, that I like my old bass and my old amp, and that I liked them when I bought them!

[ThomBassmonkey]

Well if people agree that they sound the same now as they did back then, then the only answer is that basses are made to sound worse now and that simply doens't make sense.

We haven't forgotten any techniques in bass building, we've certainly learned new ones. If basses genuinely were better made back then (and there's enough people that believe that for it to have been properly checked out) then they'd still be made the same way.

[73Jazz]

[quote name='chris_b' post='1281375' date='Jun 24 2011, 08:02 PM']I think most of the "for" guys just don't want to get into yet another yes-it-is/no-it-isn't argument. They know what they know and they own the instruments to prove it.[/quote]


i stopped discussing about that issue with others.
It is like discussing about the waves of an ocean with one who likes or (has only seen ! ) the river.
Everyone should believe what he wants.
I owned several p basses modern to vintage. I now own mostly 60´s and 70`s Fender basses.
You can hear the evolution of sound even from pre-cbs to early 70´s and late 70`s.
Better or not doesn`t exist. how could left be better than right?They are different and it is up to you, to choose what fits your needs best.
For me personally..the best choice and best bass i have ever played in my life ( and i played a lot) is my pre cbs 64 p bass.
Lightweight, gorgeous playability, amazing neck and a tone which is heaven for me.
There is no modern bass that can compare to this one in my terms of validation.

Edited June 26, 2011 by 73Jazz

[4 Strings]

[quote name='PauBass' post='1282943' date='Jun 26 2011, 12:41 PM']Of course electronics, pickups preamp play a major part in the sound of the instrument but wood also affects the tone. I mentioned Warwick basses because, at least to my ears, they sound really woody and I don't think that's down to the electronics. If you were to have the same set of electronics in another bass it wouldn't sound as a Warwick, would it?

I think I was quite clear when I said "I'm not sure what it is, wood, time...."

Again I'm not trying to convince anyone, if "yes" or "no" is going to be down to each person, I just said what I think from my own experience.[/quote]


Do they sound 'woody' because they have a nice, open pore wood finish? Bit like maple fingerboards sounding bright because they are a light colour?

[4 Strings]

[quote name='4-string-thing' post='1283269' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:45 PM']Nope.... I've had my Precision 32 years, and my Acoustic rig 31. No doubt it still sounds the same as it did in 1980, but that suits me just fine.

I now own several basses and an Ashdown rig. TBH, I doubt that I would be able to tell whats what in a blind listening test, some people might, but not me, my ears aren't that good!

All I know is, that I like my old bass and my old amp, and that I liked them when I bought them![/quote]


I've had my Jaydee for getting onto 30 years, it started sounding better to me when I thought that it was becoming an old guitar and so would sound better. No idea what the comparison to new would be, my playing has progressed in that time.

[4 Strings]

Here's a thought. Fenders have poured out 10s of thousands of guitars every year, hundreds knocked out each day, probably the largest manufacturer in the world. Their basses are designed for mass production not for luthier workmanship. The choice of woods is based on world market prices and ability to deliver enormous orders by the tonne to certain addresses in the States, Mexico, Japan and Korea. The organisation makes decisions based on maximum return on investment of its shareholders.

Your local luthier will be buying very small quantities of wood, each lump individual and eventually selected for each project. The properties of each type of wood would certainly be known by him, assuming a he's a good one - its his business after all - and carefully crafted into his product. Decisions are based on his reputation and, of course, to make a profit for himself, but reputation will be everything.

From which source are you more likely to find the magic, the guitar with the fabulous sound, the one you can't put down, the one that shows the best effect of the wood? Are Fender products really so individual, so mystical, so dependant on wistful things such as age, years of vibrations. Why aren't those made in Mexico considered as such? Why not Squiers, they've been around for 30 odd years or more, aren't they becoming old and magical? Or is it only the US factory that can cast such a spell?

(Just to show I'm not bias, I have 4 Leo products in regular use and one from a small luthier)

[PauBass]

[quote name='73Jazz' post='1283281' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:52 PM']
i stopped discussing about that issue with others.
It is like discussing about the waves of an ocean with one who likes or (has only seen ! ) the river.
Everyone should believe what he wants.
I owned several p basses modern to vintage. I now own mostly 60´s and 70`s Fender basses.
You can hear the evolution of sound even from pre-cbs to early 70´s and late 70`s.
Better or not doesn`t exist. how could left be better than right?They are different and it is up to you, to choose what fits your needs best.
For me personally..the best choice and best bass i have ever played in my life ( and i played a lot) is my pre cbs 64 p bass.
Lightweight, gorgeous playability, amazing neck and a tone which is heaven for me.
There is no modern bass that can compare to this one in my terms of validation.[/quote]

I couldn't agree with you more.


[quote name='4 Strings' post='1283282' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:53 PM']Do they sound 'woody' because they have a nice, open pore wood finish? Bit like maple fingerboards sounding bright because they are a light colour?[/quote]

Mate I don't know what it is about the wood and I don't mean I can tell/hear which wood is the bass made of, I think you know where I'm coming from. I can tell you I've played a PJ bass that had the electronics from a Warwick bass and it sounded completly different, didn't have that distinctive sound.

I have rosewood and maple boards an no, the colour has nothing to do with brightness on the tone.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='73Jazz' post='1283281' date='Jun 26 2011, 07:52 PM']
i stopped discussing about that issue with others.
It is like discussing about the waves of an ocean with one who likes or (has only seen ! ) the river.
Everyone should believe what he wants.
I owned several p basses modern to vintage. I now own mostly 60´s and 70`s Fender basses.
You can hear the evolution of sound even from pre-cbs to early 70´s and late 70`s.
Better or not doesn`t exist. how could left be better than right?They are different and it is up to you, to choose what fits your needs best.
For me personally..the best choice and best bass i have ever played in my life ( and i played a lot) is my pre cbs 64 p bass.
Lightweight, gorgeous playability, amazing neck and a tone which is heaven for me.
There is no modern bass that can compare to this one in my terms of validation.[/quote]

I agree on this.

Its very difficult to say why (IMO) the old ones sound better, as every post on this thread has merit. "We've forgotten nothing, but learnt lots about making guitars, so they should be better now", is a great point someone made, and difficult to argue against, unless you've played a good (and there are some bad 'uns) early Fender Bass. I think its a combination of everything, the woods, the pickups, the windings, the wires, and of course, the age.
Whenever i pick up a 'new' bass, i find they all sound the same, the strings feel very tight, like they are going to snap at any moment. The controls are very responsive, but its all too 'metal-ly, too trebly, regardless of amp settings etc.

The old ones [i]are[/i] different, its a fact, i've played plenty, and own a few. They are soft, and warm, and playing one is like eating hot buttery toast in your favourite old slippers, it just feels sooo comfortable, and its as if it knows, instinctively what you are playing and how its supposed to sound, and it works every time.
The best playing, and sounding bass i ever had was a '60 Jazz, just incredible, but here's the thing, which will argue about the components being the difference, the closest i've come to that feel/sound, is my '58 P-bass, which feels and sounds very, very similar to that jazz. One has slab rosewood board, twin pickups, stack controls, the other has maple neck, split coil, single volume and tone knobs. Explain that? Plug it in, and you just melt into it, thin, worn neck, with such tone.

I have a Custom Shop Relic '58, that looks the same in every way, how does it sound?, it couldnt be further from the real '58. Is it a great sounding bass? Yes, just different.

Are the old ones better (I'm comparing a [i]good[/i] old one with a [i]good[/i] new one here)?, in my opinion, and that of most players i know, yes they are, way better! Can i explain why?, as you've seen here....No, sorry!

What i will say, is you're ever in a vintage shop, and theres an 'old' bass in (I'm talking at least pre-'64), just have a play, if you havent already, and see, its all a matter of personal taste at the end of the day i guess.

[redstriper]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1283561' date='Jun 27 2011, 12:20 AM']I agree on this.

Its very difficult to say why (IMO) the old ones sound better, as every post on this thread has merit. "We've forgotten nothing, but learnt lots about making guitars, so they should be better now", is a great point someone made, and difficult to argue against, unless you've played a good (and there are some bad 'uns) early Fender Bass. I think its a combination of everything, the woods, the pickups, the windings, the wires, and of course, the age.
Whenever i pick up a 'new' bass, i find they all sound the same, the strings feel very tight, like they are going to snap at any moment. The controls are very responsive, but its all too 'metal-ly, too trebly, regardless of amp settings etc.

The old ones [i]are[/i] different, its a fact, i've played plenty, and own a few. They are soft, and warm, and playing one is like eating hot buttery toast in your favourite old slippers, it just feels sooo comfortable, and its as if it knows, instinctively what you are playing and how its supposed to sound, and it works every time.
The best playing, and sounding bass i ever had was a '60 Jazz, just incredible, but here's the thing, which will argue about the components being the difference, the closest i've come to that feel/sound, is my '58 P-bass, which feels and sounds very, very similar to that jazz. One has slab rosewood board, twin pickups, stack controls, the other has maple neck, split coil, single volume and tone knobs. Explain that? Plug it in, and you just melt into it, thin, worn neck, with such tone.

I have a Custom Shop Relic '58, that looks the same in every way, how does it sound?, it couldnt be further from the real '58. Is it a great sounding bass? Yes, just different.

Are the old ones better (I'm comparing a [i]good[/i] old one with a [i]good[/i] new one here)?, in my opinion, and that of most players i know, yes they are, way better! Can i explain why?, as you've seen here....No, sorry!

What i will say, is you're ever in a vintage shop, and theres an 'old' bass in (I'm talking at least pre-'64), just have a play, if you havent already, and see, its all a matter of personal taste at the end of the day i guess.[/quote]

Now that's what I'm talking about.