How does the community think vintage precisions would fare in the same test?

[dougal]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/deceptivecadence/2012/01/02/144482863/double-blind-violin-test-can-you-pick-the-strad/

"[color=#666666][font=georgia, sans-serif][size=4]In the world of violins, the names Stradivari and Guarneri are sacred. For three centuries, violin-makers and scientists have studied the instruments made by these Italian craftsmen. So far no one has figured out what makes their sound different.[/size][/font][/color][color=#666666][font=georgia, sans-serif][size=4]...[/size][/font][/color][color=#666666][font=georgia, sans-serif][size=4]a professional violinist could tell the difference, right?[/size][/font][/color][color=#666666][font=georgia, sans-serif][size=4]
Well, a research team recently tried to find out. They gathered professional violinists in a hotel room in Indianapolis. They had six violins — two Strads, a Guarneri and three modern instruments. Everybody wore dark goggles so they couldn't see which violin was which.[/size][/font][/color][color=#666666][font=georgia, sans-serif][size=4]
Then the researchers told the musicians: These are all fine violins and at least one is a Stradivarius. Play, then judge the instruments."[/size][/font][/color]

[krysh]

probably similar.

[BigRedX]

Does it matter?

Either you like the sound and it fits with the other instruments, or it doesn't.

[Linus27]

Yep, I don't think many if any would be able to tell the difference, certainly not tonally. In fact recorded most would not be able to tell if a song was recorded with a Jazz, Precision, Warwick, Squire, Washburn, Stingray etc.

[jakenewmanbass]

depends on the ear of the listener, it comes as no surprise to me that if you deny people their senses (sight and smell) that their ability to judge something with the other sense is impaired.
What really matters in this is how the instrument feels to the player and at that point it's over to subjectivity, doesn't matter if it's cheap, medium range or mega expensive. If the player is happy he or she will make it sing.

[EssentialTension]

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/163896-violinists-cant-tell-the-difference-between-stradivarius-violins-and-new-ones/"]http://basschat.co.uk/topic/163896-violinists-cant-tell-the-difference-between-stradivarius-violins-and-new-ones/[/url]

[Ben Jamin]

A friend of mine has a few expensive acoustic guitars, some of which are modern and some vintage. He explained to me that as the wood ages the sap/resin crystallises, hence why older acoustics grow darker in shade. He said this means more sustain and warmth. And when he played his newly acquired 1954 Martin you could really hear it. The sound resonates for flipping ages, and there's so much more warmth and body to it, compared to his modern models (we're talking acoustics worth about 5-10k each here)
That's a short paraphrased version of what he said in less complicated terms anyway - I don't much about it myself.
But I could definitely hear a difference between his warm vintage guitars and his bright modern guitars.

I don't know how much difference the wood would make on an old Precision, bearing in the mind the different lacquers and pick-ups too.
I reckon acoustically you might be able to tell - but put through an amp, into a cabinet, into a microphone, mastered on a DAW, and finally compressed into an mp3 file I doubt you'd be able to tell.

Ultimately though I reckon Jake's got it in one
[quote name='jakenewmanbass' timestamp='1325630589' post='1485561']
What really matters in this is how the instrument feels to the player and at that point it's over to subjectivity, doesn't matter if it's cheap, medium range or mega expensive. If the player is happy he or she will make it sing.
[/quote]

Edited January 4, 2012 by Ben Jamin

[krysh]

[quote name='Ben Jamin' timestamp='1325635066' post='1485621']...
But I could definitely hear a difference between his warm vintage guitars and his bright modern guitars....
[/quote]
aside different types of construction, did they have equally fresh and the same strings?

[Ben Jamin]

[quote name='the_krysh' timestamp='1325635737' post='1485631']
aside different types of construction, did they have equally fresh and the same strings?
[/quote]

He played one of a pretty much identical construction to his Martin with the same sets of new Elixir strings on both

Edited January 4, 2012 by Ben Jamin

[Ancient Mariner]

But we know guitars and basses are highly variable - I have 3 strats here, and each one sounds quite different due to distinct constructional and hardware differences.

Don't forget that in this study they weren't being asked if they sounded the same - quite the opposite, they were asked which they preferred for sound and playability. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some preferred a well set up modern Fender to a vintage instrument with a more 'retro' set up, heavy strings and high action.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Ancient Mariner' timestamp='1325637014' post='1485649']
But we know guitars and basses are highly variable - I have 3 strats here, and each one sounds quite different due to distinct constructional and hardware differences.

Don't forget that in this study they weren't being asked if they sounded the same - quite the opposite, they were asked which they preferred for sound and playability. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some preferred a well set up modern Fender to a vintage instrument with a more 'retro' set up, heavy strings and high action.
[/quote]
Quite. Anyone handed Stevie Ray Vaughn's Strat would be almost unable to play it with the high action and string gauges, but listen to the tone and the music the man made with it.

[simon1964]

Interesting article. For me the most telling comment was that "People don't agree. They just like different things". Who would have guessed?!

I've got four Precisions and they do sound and play very differently. But, to be honest, whether the '64 and '73 sound and play better than the two modern reissues is debatable.

[cytania]

Here we go again...

Ben Jamin, the effect you mention is real but applies primarily to acoustics. Afterall there is a big area of thin wood on the top that flexes to make tone. If anyone here believes it greatly influences bass tone then they should get Yamaha's BB2024x where the wood has been treated/cooked (Yamaha dub the process ARE) to replicate this. Compared to vintage Fender prices these Yammy's must be bargains.

I'm also reminded of this recent thread;

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/163553-nearly-bought-a-precision-bass-today"]http://basschat.co.u...sion-bass-today[/url]

Note that until Jack blew the lies away taking the neck off he liked the tone a fair bit. Leo Fender may have had looks and tone in mind but he also created instruments that could be made easily on a production line by workers untrained in the black arts of luthiery. The bodys were covered in Fullerplast and then given a sunburst, even before the final nitro colour was applied. The necks were bolted with shims and all sorts of paint crud in the pocket.

These aren't paragons of perfect woodworking or precision engineering, which is why they are easy to copy and why Squiers get so close. Even the lousy quality of the seventies (somewhere round here there are pics of stripped precisions with the body blocks all asquint) couldn't kill the onward march of Fender.

The design is so basic, so solid. Where Gibson necks go wobbly and need removing and regluing a Fender just gets shimmed and voila. This must be part the reason Fender is so dominant today. It's hard to make them go bad.

What the original piece is saying is that Stradivari are not special and I guess neither are old Fenders. Both are benefiting from mystiques and given that Stradivarius' legend has lasted centuries I'm not sure the crazy prices old Precisions go for will be shaken by anything I say here. Ah well, post anyway...

Edited January 4, 2012 by cytania

[Lozz196]

Hmmm, the old "do vintage instruments sound better" thing. Well for me, my 77 sounds different to my 97, which in turn sounded different to the two 2006 models I had, which both sounded different to each other.

I favour the 77 for live work as I simply love the mojo of old knackered Fenders (though mine isn`t too beat up). When I saw it advertised I just loved the look of it, so bought it. It plays great, and sounds great.

But do I prefer the sound of it? Well whichever one I`m playing, I set up the same sound from the amp, so the answer is probably not. I prefer it for how it looks, as both of mine play the same.

[Jondeeman]

[quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1325661453' post='1485696']
Hmmm, the old "do vintage instruments sound better" thing. Well for me, my 77 sounds different to my 97, which in turn sounded different to the two 2006 models I had, which both sounded different to each other.

I favour the 77 for live work as I simply love the mojo of old knackered Fenders (though mine isn`t too beat up). When I saw it advertised I just loved the look of it, so bought it. It plays great, and sounds great.

But do I prefer the sound of it? Well whichever one I`m playing, I set up the same sound from the amp, so the answer is probably not. I prefer it for how it looks, as both of mine play the same.
[/quote]

I think that just about sums it up.

I'd hate it if the bass world took a similar direction to the violin fraternity - a place where "new" is rubbish and valueless, and where the instrument you play can gain you notoriety...

[Low End Bee]

My 2007 Precision sounds and plays better than my old '68 did. I may have had a bad '68 and now have a good '07. Who knows?
I haven't noticed a huge aural difference when playing old and new P's. There is something about the wear on well played old instrument plus the inconsistencies in pre CNC manufacture that often makes them feel a bit special. So for tactile and subliminal reasons they will often be more satisfying to a lot of players.
Would I like to own a vintage Precision? Yes I would. But only for sentimental and not sonic reasons.

[3rdUncle]

[quote name='Ben Jamin' timestamp='1325635066' post='1485621']
A friend of mine has a few expensive acoustic guitars, some of which are modern and some vintage. He explained to me that as the wood ages the sap/resin crystallises, hence why older acoustics grow darker in shade. He said this means more sustain and warmth. And when he played his newly acquired 1954 Martin you could really hear it. The sound resonates for flipping ages, and there's so much more warmth and body to it, compared to his modern models (we're talking acoustics worth about 5-10k each here)
That's a short paraphrased version of what he said in less complicated terms anyway - I don't much about it myself.
But I could definitely hear a difference between his warm vintage guitars and his bright modern guitars.

[b]I don't know how much difference the wood would make on an old Precision, bearing in the mind the different lacquers and pick-ups too.[/b]
I reckon acoustically you might be able to tell - but put through an amp, into a cabinet, into a microphone, mastered on a DAW, and finally compressed into an mp3 file I doubt you'd be able to tell.

Ultimately though I reckon Jake's got it in one
[/quote]

Yeah, acoustic instruments are a completely different kettle of fish to electric ones.

The defining factor in the sound of a bass or electric guitar will be the electronics. It stands to reason that the wood would be such a big factor in an acoustic instrument.

[ead]

Given that a £20k+ violin such as those in the test will take up to 1 year to make there is considerably more scope for variation in the manufacturing process comapred to even the luthier made basses.