What's a 'Vintage' Instrument????

[neepheid]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375333' date='Sep 16 2011, 11:37 AM']I think this post has been hijacked a little, and has turned into a "basses i like vs basses i don't is the important thing", which i completely agree with. I don't think anyone would suggest otherwise.


The post is to ask people what they consider to be a 'vintage' instrument, simple as that. The issues on whether vintage instruments are worth the money is an entirely different argument, one that has been debated at length on this forum alone. The market price of anything is based on demand. the whole fairy dust thing is lost on me. a good bass is a good bass if it was made in 1951 or 2011. Fenders are always considered more collectable because they reach a wider audience. I would imagine an Alembic Stanley Clarke, on paper, is a better bass than a fender precsion. But if you advertised them both, the people genuinly interetsed in an Alembic would be far less than those interested in a vintage fender for the same price, thats just the reality.

Did/do fender make great basses, yes, did/do they make firewood, yes.

Anyway, back to the subject, looks like it's '73 then. :D[/quote]

You asked what's a "vintage" instrument. I offered the point of view that I do not recognise the term as being in any way relevant within the context, albeit in a ranty way, because it irritates me. It's meaningless balderdash, being further perpetuated by its continued discussion.

So we're only allowed to voice an opinion in your thread if we A) agree that vintage as a concept is valid and B) provide a year of manufacture before which basses are considered vintage or an age that a bass must achieve before it is considered vintage? Is that it?

Edited September 16, 2011 by neepheid

[Fat Rich]

If it's a bit damaged, and it's on eBay, then it's vintage.

I used to think pre CBS was vintage for Fender, but I suppose 70s counts now too. Also Fender really ramped up production numbers in the 80s so that maybe makes them less rare and less "vintage".

Sometimes it's a change of management or maybe a change in construction technique that defines an era, some people are saying the older Status basses with the graphite "paddle" shape neck through design are vintage even though they're from the 80s. For a lot of people on Basschat any Status is too modern for them.

I think any guitar from before about 1965 could be called vintage without too much argument, after that it's up for debate.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Fat Rich

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='neepheid' post='1375349' date='Sep 16 2011, 11:54 AM']You asked what's a "vintage" instrument. I offered the point of view that I do not recognise the term as being in any way relevant within the context, albeit in a ranty way, because it irritates me. It's meaningless balderdash, being further perpetuated by its continued discussion.

So we're only allowed to voice an opinion in your thread if we A) agree that vintage as a concept is valid and provide a year of manufacture before which basses are considered vintage or an age that a bass must achieve before it is considered vintage? Is that it?[/quote]

I started replying to that, then got bored, and decided not to bother, as i think everyone generally gets the point, and the mood I'm in today, I'm likely to offend, which would be silly.

Vintage as a concept clearly is 'valid'.

You said " I do not recognise the term as being in any way relevant within the context". How can the term 'vintage', not be relevant in the context of a discussion about what we consider to be 'vintage'. Sigh.

I think some people over think things, anyway, I'm gonna leave it there.

I'd hate to ask you about climate change....as a concept that is.

[gareth]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375333' date='Sep 16 2011, 11:37 AM']Anyway, back to the subject, looks like it's '73 then. [/quote]


Does that mean in 10 years time "vintage" will be 83 or 73 then?

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='gareth' post='1375408' date='Sep 16 2011, 12:42 PM']Does that mean in 10 years time "vintage" will be 83 or 73 then?[/quote]

Following that logic, it would be '83, and so on, i guess?

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375333' date='Sep 16 2011, 11:37 AM']The post is to ask people what they consider to be a 'vintage' instrument, simple as that. The issues on whether vintage instruments are worth the money is an entirely different argument, one that has been debated at length on this forum alone. The market price of anything is based on demand. the whole fairy dust thing is lost on me. a good bass is a good bass if it was made in 1951 or 2011. Fenders are always considered more collectable because they reach a wider audience. I would imagine an Alembic Stanley Clarke, on paper, is a better bass than a fender precsion. But if you advertised them both, the people genuinly interetsed in an Alembic would be far less than those interested in a vintage fender for the same price, thats just the reality.[/quote]
But you need to believe this given the instruments that you collect and sell.

[Clarky]

I don't think the OP was really addressing whether a 'vintage' instrument is better or worse - there have been countless threads about this and analogies between basses and other collectable items (eg, many - including me - would love an old '50s/60s sports car but it would undoubtedly be vastly inferior performance-, comfort- and economy-wise to a modern sports car costing a great deal less)

[chris_b]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375063' date='Sep 16 2011, 12:20 AM']....OK, so what do we consider valid criteria to be called ‘vintage’? Reason I ask, is that I’ve seen a few late 70’s Fender basses advertised recently as 'vintage', and I’ve never considered these to be 'vintage' instruments.[/quote]
That's old age creeping up on you!!

90's instruments will be considered vintage some day!!

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1375445' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:09 PM']But you need to believe this given the instruments that you collect and sell.[/quote]


The quote you referred to is a fact, not what i beleive in. I don't know what criteria is needed to label an instrument 'vintage' anymore, hence the thread.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='chris_b' post='1375455' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:19 PM']That's old age creeping up on you!!

90's instruments will be considered vintage some day!![/quote]

I think you're right, as I eluded to in the original post.

At work, I'm mentoring a graduate, and he filled in a form for me recently, and he stated his date of birth as 1988, i gave it back and asked him to correct it, to which he looked at me blankly, and somewhat confused, i then 'did the math', and realsied that i was in fact working with someone who was actually born in 1988, which to me, seems like he should be about 3 years old!!! Time moves fast, and as such, the whole 'vintage' thing does too. Like i said, 'vintage' is more relevant to the age of the person, not the instrument.

I'll get my coat.......by which i obviously mean housecoat, pipe and slippers. Anyway, I've just had lunch, so I'm off for a nap.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375469' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:29 PM']The quote you referred to is a fact, not what i beleive in. I don't know what criteria is needed to label an instrument 'vintage' anymore, hence the thread.[/quote]
Looking at your sig, if you don't know then we're fooked.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='Clarky' post='1375448' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:13 PM']I don't think the OP was really addressing whether a 'vintage' instrument is better or worse - there have been countless threads about this and analogies between basses and other collectable items (eg, many - including me - would love an old '50s/60s sports car but it would undoubtedly be vastly inferior performance-, comfort- and economy-wise to a modern sports car costing a great deal less)[/quote]

Indeed, but would said car be classed as a 'vintage' one?

Exactly right, this has nothing to do with good/bad/better/worse, its just about about age/era.

[chris_b]

Our neighbours have just come back after 4 years working in Canada. I was convinced that they'd only gone at the start of last year!!!

[Lozz196]

I think, if I remember correctly, that you can insure cars under the Classic Car category, once they are 25 years old, so attching this figure to the instrument world makes a kindof sense, bringing parity throughout.

And looking at late-seventies cars, such as the TR7, Triumph Dolomite Sprint, Jag XJS, Ford Capri, well these are definate vintage/classic looks.

I suppose, objectively, as instruments such as a Precision, or a Les Paul look the same whether made in 1979 or 2009, that could be a reason why the 79 instrument isn`t considered vintage.

But imagine if Precisions stopped being made in 79? Would a 79 Precision then be considered vintage?

[LastBass]

From Doctor J - "Personally, I think there might be a link to the age of the buyer, where having disposable income and a large dose of nostalgia makes owning an instrument older than you are a cool thing."

Good point Dr J. Trouble is, apart from presumably a few pre-production Precisions that my disposable pension won't quite stretch to anyway, there are no bass guitars older than me!

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1375497' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:39 PM']Looking at your sig, if you don't know then we're fooked. [/quote]




I know what [i]I [/i]define it as, which in Fender's case (Thats all i deal with generally), it has always been, and will always be pre-CBS. But recently the 70's models are called this, hence putting it out there.

I think the upshot is, I'm getting old, and even my JV could well be classed as a vintage bass.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='chris_b' post='1375501' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:41 PM']Our neighbours have just come back after 4 years working in Canada. I was convinced that they'd only gone at the start of last year!!![/quote]

Exactly, not just me then....thank God!!

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='LastBass' post='1375508' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:43 PM']From Doctor J - "Personally, I think there might be a link to the age of the buyer, where having disposable income and a large dose of nostalgia makes owning an instrument older than you are a cool thing."

Good point Dr J. Trouble is, apart from presumably a few pre-production Precisions that my disposable pension won't quite stretch to anyway, there are no bass guitars older than me![/quote]

1937, surely this qualifies???

[attachment=89589:oldest_bass.jpg]

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375469' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:29 PM']The quote you referred to is a fact, not what i beleive in. I don't know what criteria is needed to label an instrument 'vintage' anymore, hence the thread.[/quote]
What actual category of musical instruments are you talking about? All musical instruments? Electric instruments? Solid electric instruments? Just Fender bass guitars?

I think the actual category of instruments your talking about will have an impact on whether they can be classified as vintage or not.

The two things that vintage is most commonly associated with - cars and wine - it has completely different meanings. With wine it simply refers to the year so in this case 2010 is just as much vintage as 1977. With cars it refers to a fixed period from 1919 to 1930. So you can see neither of these definitions are really any use when describing musical instruments.

If we were talking about electrically amplified instruments (IMO the most useful category) then I would be reluctant to classify anything made since 1945 as vintage.

[geoffbyrne]

Just to get my tuppenceworth in!!

I'm in my mid-sixties, and when I was a kid, the only time I really heard the word 'vintage', it was attached to 'car rally', and if I recollect properly, the cars had to be at least 30 years old to enter. At that point in time, no cars were 100 years old, so none could be termed 'Antique', although there are now some that do. I accept, personally, that all things older than 30 years are 'vintage' but not the other form of usage.

Now, language changes, and obviously, the word 'vintage' was directly related to the year a wine was gathered/made, but, as has been thoroughly thrashed over above, its usage now seems to infer 'desireable' and has been consigned to the bin of 'Drop Meaningless Words In Here'.

Personally, I will continue to use it in the manner I learned as a child & will continue to read items.

So there!





G.

[Hutton]

All I'm trying to say is that the term 'vintage' has been seen by many people to somehow confer a superiority on instruments falling under this category. Prices therefore follow suit. It is however IMO misplaced. If we just dropped the term altogether then it wouldn't be an issue. Each bass would be taken on it's own merits and priced accordingly as a Jazz, Precision or whatever irrespective of age. As far as Fenders are concerned I'm going to leave the last word of this post to 'Gruhn's Guide to Vintage Guitars' :-

"Fender was sold to CBS on January 4 1965. Although the instrument lines continued to expand until the end of the decade, the sale of CBS marked the beginning of a decline in Fender quality that lasted through the 1970s."

[dlloyd]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' post='1375063' date='Sep 16 2011, 12:20 AM']OK, so what do we consider valid criteria to be called ‘vintage’?

Sure there’ll be lots of varied opinion on this. Please bear with me…..

Reason I ask, is that I’ve seen a few late 70’s Fender basses advertised recently as 'vintage', and I’ve never considered these to be 'vintage' instruments.

My guide has always been pre-CBS for Fender as being a real ‘vintage fender’, but then there’s Musicman Stingrays, I wouldn’t have an issue with someone describing a ’77 Ray, as vintage, because as far as Ray’s go, the pre-EB models are desirable, collectable etc, and because of the pre/post EB being easy to separate, its an easy line in the sand to draw.[/quote]

Vintage, in the case of guitars, just means old and collectable.

When I started playing guitar and bass, in the mid-late 80s, pre-CBS strats were already described as "vintage guitars" These were in many cases less than 25 years old at the time. People had been told they were better than the current ones and they could see that rich, successful musicians played old, beat up guitars. So "old and beat up" became desirable.

A lot of it is smoke and mirrors. The Les Paul standard got taken off the market in 1960 when nobody was buying them. Then in the mid 60s people saw the likes of Eric Clapton playing them and there was suddenly a demand for them again, so Gibson brought it back in 1968. But of course it was the old ones people wanted...

I remember reading an interview with Eric Clapton around 1990 in which he was asked about the Les Paul... his had been stolen in 1967 or thereabouts and he switched to various other guitars: An SG, a Firebird, a 335, then strats. Why hadn't he bought another Les Paul? He wasn't able to find a decent one. This was more than 20 years later. How much do they cost now?

[alanbass1]

Okee dokee, all this debate made me look up the word in a dictionary which came up with the following meanings:


vin·tage   /ˈvɪntɪdʒ/ Show Spelled [vin-tij] Show IPA noun, adjective, verb, -taged, -tag·ing.
noun
1. the wine from a particular harvest or crop.
2. the annual produce of the grape harvest, especially with reference to the wine obtained.
3. an exceptionally fine wine from the crop of a good year.
4. the time of gathering grapes, or of winemaking.
5. the act or process of producing wine; winemaking.
to wines or winemaking.
8. being of a specified vintage: Vintage wines are usually more expensive than nonvintage wines.
9. representing the high quality of a past time: vintage cars; vintage movies.
10. old-fashioned or obsolete: vintage jokes.

Good thing is it majors on wine, a little bit like the missus so maybe she will also become vintage. Also note meaning number 9, which does fit into there being a period in time where the item being referred to is accepted of being of higher quality

[Hutton]

Maybe it all depends on whether you view guitars/basses as a collector or as a player.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1375530' date='Sep 16 2011, 01:58 PM']What actual category of musical instruments are you talking about? All musical instruments? Electric instruments? Solid electric instruments? Just Fender bass guitars?

I think the actual category of instruments your talking about will have an impact on whether they can be classified as vintage or not.

The two things that vintage is most commonly associated with - cars and wine - it has completely different meanings. With wine it simply refers to the year so in this case 2010 is just as much vintage as 1977. With cars it refers to a fixed period from 1919 to 1930. So you can see neither of these definitions are really any use when describing musical instruments.

If we were talking about electrically amplified instruments (IMO the most useful category) then I would be reluctant to classify anything made since 1945 as vintage.[/quote]

I'm not talking about wine or cars, I'm talking about musical instruments, specifically, electric, solid body bass guitars, the ones that people [i]generally[/i] think about when discussing 'vintage' guitars, so we're talikng Fenders, Rickenbackers, Gibsons, Gretsch, Hofner, and if the vintage thing comes more recent, as its being suggested, then all the other manufacturers will come on line. Its not an exact science is it, it's just a general feeling for what we consider vintage, nothing to over analyze.

This is basschat afterall, if it was Harpsicordchat, then I'm sure 'vintage' would mean a different era entirely. Sorry for not being more specific in the opening thread, didnt feel it was neccessary.