Vintage Instruments: Quality or Psychosomatics?

[Frank Blank]

32 minutes ago, PaulWarning said:

maybe the language was a bit harsh, but deep down isn't that why people buy vintage things, to impress other people, it makes them feel good, there again it could be just me that just doesn't get it

Actually my use of the word harsh was, if anything, a bit harsh! What I actually meant was accurate or correct. I agree wholly with your statement, to impress, to feel good, it's a not often discussed motivator.

Edited January 1, 2018 by Frank Blank
Spelling correction

[Frank Blank]

14 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

Well, there you are, you see..? I've not the slightest dress sense, and even less aesthetic 'taste' or interest in garments (except socks, maybe; I like to have warm feet...). Oddly, though..? No, quite the norme to be as different as we are all the same. 'I say potato' and all that. Don't sweat it; there's no kittens being harmed. Anyway, nostalgia isn't what it used to be. 

I have no dress sense either, but I do appreciate some old clothes, especially hats.

[Dad3353]

Hat's..? Can't abide hats. As a school kid, I picked up a trilby found on the grass, put it on my head and got stung by a bee that was in there. Can't abide hats. We are all nurture, as well as nature. Much of our character is set in stone before we're weaned.

[Frank Blank]

8 minutes ago, Roger2611 said:

Great avatar Frank! I think a lot of the vintage thing is snake oil nowadays, sure some of the early instruments were great instruments but as any dealer worth his salt will tell you whilst some are fantastic others can be total rubbish, take the fabled 59 Les Paul as an example, most are apparently fantastic examples and are rightly hugely desireable and sadly spend their lives locked in bank vaults, others were bland ordinary instruments that players owned, realised they didn't like them and sold them on, my bet would be that any 59 /60 Les Paul you see come up for sale on the open market will be one of the latter unspecial instruments!

We all acknowledge that both Gibson and Fender went through some serious build quality instruments back in the late 70's, I guess at that time it was easier for a buyer to guarentee a better instrument if they brought an older 60's instrument, not that all 70's Fenders were bad, that no doubt drove a lot of the move towards the vintage market.

I have a cracking 79 Precision that is a rarity because it weighs in at just under 9lbs and plays and sounds great, I had an exactly the same bass a couple of years ago that weighed in at 10.5 lbs and that sounded ok and played ok, two very different basses from the same year.

Now that Fender and Gibson have far better quality control (and they have to to compete with all the other manufacturers out there) the vintage desireabillity, at least on playing grounds, is somewhat diminished,  I have a custom shop 62 Precision that is perfect for me, it is beautifully built, with nice light woods, it has a nitro finish (which on Fender's I prefer) but is built with over 50 years of experience behind it and to me offers the best of both worlds, the next argument comes because it is a "heavy relic" which sparks the whole "why make a relic" debate but for me it is the best that Fender are currently offering so I brought it!

Crass, it's a must.

This is such good info. Although I am about to purchase a modern Chowny bass (I'm on a short scale mission at the moment) I still feel the perfect Jazz bass eludes me and I don't want to rule out a vintage model in case I miss a bass I love, if that makes sense?

[Frank Blank]

6 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

Hat's..? Can't abide hats. As a school kid, I picked up a trilby found on the grass, put it on my head and got stung by a bee that was in there. Can't abide hats. We are all nurture, as well as nature. Much of our character is set in stone before we're weaned.

How odd, I was stung by a wasp that alighted unnoticed on my ice cream between licks when I was a child, can't abide ice cream...

[Cato]

Personally I'll take new and shiny over vintage with mojo everyday of the week.

I wouldn't turn down an original 51 p bass, mind, but I'd happily have it refinished if it wasn't in mint condition.

[Chiliwailer]

24 minutes ago, Frank Blank said:

Crass, it's a must.

This is such good info. Although I am about to purchase a modern Chowny bass (I'm on a short scale mission at the moment) I still feel the perfect Jazz bass eludes me and I don't want to rule out a vintage model in case I miss a bass I love, if that makes sense?

I’m not sure if I believe in the perfect Jazz Bass, (or any bass) I’ve played too many Jazzes that are great in very different ways. 

Though having owned very nice pre CBS and Custom Shop Jazzes in the past it’s nice to say that the one I’ve bonded with the most is my current 2015 USA Std, it’s far from perfect, but it’s my most played bass these days. 

Its good that you’re not ruling out a vintage, of what you can afford, a good bass is a good bass after all. 

2 minutes ago, Cato said:

Personally I'll take new and shiny over vintage with mojo everyday of the week.

I wouldn't turn down an original 51 p bass, mind, but I'd happily have it refinished if it wasn't in mint condition.

Refinish a battered 51? Crikey!  

Having previously owned vintage basses with reliced ‘mojo’, it started to feel odd to me having a bass with someone else’s wear, these days I like near mint vintage or nothing. Never thought I’d say that years ago. 

I own my current 66 P Bass because I like the history more than anything else, it is an excellent sounding bass and a joy to play. Yet a decent modern bass would be just as fine for me too, but while I can it’s nice to own a part of the Fender history that I’m so fond of. 

[Frank Blank]

18 minutes ago, Cato said:

Personally I'll take new and shiny over vintage with mojo everyday of the week.

I wouldn't turn down an original 51 p bass, mind, but I'd happily have it refinished if it wasn't in mint condition.

So what does a 51 P bass have over a 2017 P  bass?

[Cat Burrito]

I've had both and there are definitely good and bad examples of everything. I think everything I own now is 21st century but with classic / retro stylings. I had some great 70s basses though. Were they better? No. But I get that people want a bit of vintage mojo to get closer to their idols / the classic era. We live in the consumer age and players can have whatever they can afford. I wouldn't knock a player for spending £6k on a classic Fender anymore than I would a friend having a modern PRS, which although not to my tastes I have to remind myself it wouldn't be my instrument! 

[Frank Blank]

5 minutes ago, Chiliwailer said:

I’m not sure if I believe in the perfect Jazz Bass, (or any bass) I’ve played too many Jazzes that are great in very different ways. 

Though having owned very nice pre CBS and Custom Shop Jazzes in the past it’s nice to say that the one I’ve bonded with the most is my current 2015 USA Std, it’s far from perfect, but it’s my most played bass these days. 

Its good that you’re not ruling out a vintage, of what you can afford, a good bass is a good bass after all. 

Refinish a battered 51? Crikey!  

Having previously owned vintage basses with reliced ‘mojo’, it started to feel odd to me having a bass with someone else’s wear, these days I like near mint vintage or nothing. Never thought I’d say that years ago. 

I own my current 66 P Bass because I like the history more than anything else, it is an excellent sounding bass and a joy to play. Yet a decent modern bass would be just as fine for me too, but while I can it’s nice to own a part of the Fender history that I’m so fond of. 

I like that, owning part of the history, it's a kind of belonging isn't it. I feel it too, even having a modern Fender, its still a part of the lineage. All these musings are really helping.

[Frank Blank]

1 minute ago, Cat Burrito said:

I've had both and there are definitely good and bad examples of everything. I think everything I own now is 21st century but with classic / retro stylings. I had some great 70s basses though. Were they better? No. But I get that people want a bit of vintage mojo to get closer to their idols / the classic era. We live in the consumer age and players can have whatever they can afford. I wouldn't knock a player for spending £6k on a classic Fender anymore than I would a friend having a modern PRS, which although not to my tastes I have to remind myself it wouldn't be my instrument! 

I suppose we are settling for the instrument that we like in the end, if that is vintage so be it, if it is modern then likewise, so be it. In the end we are satisfying ourselves and if part of that is to own something older with some history or some nice wear then that's part of what you are paying for.

[SH73]

Some people swear that drink taste better out of can than bottle and triangle cut sandwiches taste better than rectangular cut.

I prefer drinking bottled  beer out of a bottle not a glass. Sure it tastes the same.

 

[Cato]

15 minutes ago, Frank Blank said:

So what does a 51 P bass have over a 2017 P  bass?

First mass produced solid bodied fretted bass guitar?

I can't imagine that there are many bass players who wouldn't be interested in that slice of history. 

[Frank Blank]

19 minutes ago, SH73 said:

Some people swear that drink taste better out of can than bottle and triangle cut sandwiches taste better than rectangular cut.

I prefer drinking bottled  beer out of a bottle not a glass. Sure it tastes the same.

 

I’m all for the square cut sandwich but profess no preference with beer.

[Frank Blank]

12 minutes ago, Cato said:

First mass produced solid bodied fretted bass guitar?

I can't imagine that there are many bass players who wouldn't be interested in that slice of history. 

Apart from me. 

[Burns-bass]

21 minutes ago, SH73 said:

Some people swear that drink taste better out of can than bottle and triangle cut sandwiches taste better than rectangular cut.

I prefer drinking bottled  beer out of a bottle not a glass. Sure it tastes the same.

 

Err...

 

[mikel]

Beer from a bottle is in a different league to beer from a can, unless its Guinness, with the widget.

[neilp]

5 hours ago, Burns-bass said:

I think there’s a difference between appreciating vintage instruments and fetishising then. 

Take your typical Strad violin, and the original baroque neck will have been replaced on almost all of them, yet they’re still recognised as the pinnacle of the musical instrument world.

 

 

Not just the neck. New bass bar almost certainly, quite possibly half-edged more than once. And the ARE the pinnacle of the musical instrument world

[neilp]

I have a violinist friend who currently plays an unattributed, unlabelled Italian Violin. The wood has been dated by dendrochronologists to 1722. The general belief is it's a Strad, but there's no proof, no provenance. It sounds AMAZING. Big, powerful, bright but smooth. Typical Strad. It's worth about £20k because it has no name and no provenance. No-one hearing it would doubt the quality, but price and value are not always the same thing

[oldbass]

There is no doubt in my mind that vintage instruments are at the very least made using better materials, ie woods that were grown longer and metalwork that is substantial etc etc and I'm sure there are superb examples out there. 

I've owned a dead original 71 P bass and an original 77 Stingray and both were pretty crummy,  the P being the better of the two.

They were both very heavy and neither sounded particularly great but you could tell the materials were very good indeed especially the neck on the P which was totally stable and seemed to impart a hefty if somewhat dead tone to the bass...the Stingray just sounded meh what ever I tried to do to it and that was back when it was only a couple of yrs old....

Would I trade any of them back for my current Vintage Mod Squier P bass....nope.

[wateroftyne]

I haven't read the thread - apologies - but my view is this:

All other things being equal, IMO this:

...looks a million times nicer than this:

[chris_b]

Whether there is a difference or not, if you can't hear a difference then there is no difference.

[wateroftyne]

Just now, chris_b said:

Whether there is a difference or not, if you can't hear a difference then there is no difference.

[T-Bay]

12 hours ago, mikel said:

Beer from a bottle is in a different league to beer from a can, unless its Guinness, with the widget.

Undoubtedly, I think it’s because glass is very stable chemically whereas, even when coated, cans are made from materials that are nowhere near as stable so affect the flavour. Beer in barrels in pubs is also in effect a big can but it’s shelf life is much shorter and the volume to surface area is much greater so the effect is lessened. Always beer from a bottle for me.

[lurksalot]

1 hour ago, T-Bay said:

Undoubtedly, I think it’s because glass is very stable chemically whereas, even when coated, cans are made from materials that are nowhere near as stable so affect the flavour. Beer in barrels in pubs is also in effect a big can but it’s shelf life is much shorter and the volume to surface area is much greater so the effect is lessened. Always beer from a bottle for me.

Drifting somewhat , but all the mashing, brewing and conditioning is done in metal vessels when done commercially. If samples from the same brew were stored for a couple of months in a bottle and cans, then compared while drinking them  from a glass , I don't reckon there would be  any difference. 

I think I might have a look at this while I have a moment or two , drinking for science . 

To drag back on topic, just about , are vintage wines ,better, tastier etc , I doubt it , just that the investors in wine snobbery need to protect their investments . 

Snobbery , mines better than yours because I'm a snob 

 

Edited January 2, 2018 by lurksalot
Spelig