Say It Ain't So, Norm!

[Doc Sausage]

I would say most of us who have spent a goodly amount on a modern guitar, would concur that many of them or fine instruments. I wonder how people like, Joe Bonamassa, will accept the notion that vintage is great, but so is new? ESPECIALLY, coming from, Norm?

Or...is there a place for both? And more importantly, does the price disparity keep both camps happy? After all, it did say, "almost!"

Will say, will the timeless virtues of PRS and Taylor be spoken about within the same club as Gibson and Martin, in some future forum somewhere?

“They’re now making some of the best guitars they’ve made in 50 or 60 years”: Norman's Rare Guitars owner thinks modern guitars are almost as good as vintage ones

“A lot of the cars they built in the late Sixties and Seventies have become trash heaps, but there guitars have stood the test of time.”

guitar.com

 

[Bob Womack]

You know, George Gruhn said this same thing recently.

Bob

 

[bern1]

It is all totally true and has been true for some time. It’s not the 80’s any longer. Yes, there are iconic first version guitars that command high dollars. It is not because they are better instruments, rather that they have become cultural icons.

There are SOME of those that are DEFINITELY better than new ones but I’ll argue that the majority of NEW guitars are BETTER than the old ones. Of course some will prefer the old ones anyway for a variety of reasons.

Same is true of a lot of other things in this life. Progress is good!

Guitars are different than other items where the differences can be measured. A modern C7 Corvette is demonstrably better than its’s vintage counterpart, although some will prefer to drive the older model, just like with guitars.

I am fortunate to have both new and old guitars. Some days I reach for a newer one and some days for the older model………

 

[Any Name You Wish]

I agree with Norm. Reissue guitars and amps are both stellar today, especially the custom shop stuff. Its a fun time to be a guitar player! This doesn't diminish the value of vintage gear at all. Will today's custom shop reissue guitars be super valuable someday? If Gibson and Fender go out of business then sure. Otherwise, they hold their value pretty well after the initial hit leaving the store. It is remarkable that things turned out the way they have with all these great reissues of iconic gear. Made my life brighter, that's for sure.

 

[dnabbet2]

I've had new and old Les Pauls, and I do remember the old ones fondly.

But I could afford an old one today if I really wanted one -- I play '54-type Custom reissues now -- but honestly I'd rather have a new one: even by the 1980s an old one had cracked plastic, corroded bridge irons, a bent tuner here and there ... frets that had been dressed so often they really needed to be replaced.

Give me a new one that's all in one piece and good to go.

 

[brandtkronholm]

The classic “High McCarty Era” Gibsons will always be at the top of the mountain.
However, for the past 25-30 years, especially the past ten, the Custom Shop Gibsons are just consistently amazing guitars that rival, if not surpass, their origins.

But vintage (50’s - early ‘60s) will always be the touchstone.

But I love the new stuff.

Yet The old stuff is magic.

 

[J.D.]

I know it is not a popular opinion here but I'm old enough to remember when golden era Gibsons and Fenders were just used guitars. There are definitely some incredible examples but, contrary to what seems to be today's beliefs, they weren't all great. But because a lot of early recordings/artists used them, they are relatively rare, and were so much better than what was being produced new in the '70s and '80s, they became legendary (and quite expensive). Today's guitars are constructed more consistently than the old ones and are arguably just as good, just not as rare. PRS made some absolutely incredible stuff in the mid-late '80s that was arguably better than what Gibson and Fender were doing as far as quality and innovation, and is still making world class guitars.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

I know it is not a popular opinion here but I'm old enough to remember when golden era Gibsons and Fenders were just used guitars. There are definitely some incredible examples but, contrary to what seems to be today's beliefs, they weren't all great. But because a lot of early recordings/artists used them, they are relatively rare, and were so much better than what was being produced new in the '70s and '80s, they became legendary (and quite expensive). Today's guitars are constructed more consistently than the old ones and are arguably just as good, just not as rare. PRS made some absolutely incredible stuff in the mid-late '80s that was arguably better than what Gibson and Fender were doing as far as quality and innovation, and is still making world class guitars.

Old growth wood, though.

 

[Any Name You Wish]

Old growth wood, though.

It is quite possible to have a slab of new growth mahogany that is more resonant than an old growth slab. There, I did it. I started it again. God help us all

 

[clapciadrix]

I’d like to throw this in as well, the quality of very inexpensive guitars available now is way better than in the ‘60’s and’70’s. Many different price points now and even the most modest of them is a viable beginner guitar. I think CNC has made building a good cheap guitar easier.
When I was first beginning, Fender had their one line of American made guitars. They didn’t really cater to the beginners needs. So if you only had say, one hundred dollars for an electric guitar, the guitar was probably some overseas thing that was near impossible to get to stay in tune and was difficult to fret.
I’m constantly amazed at the quality of the under$500 guitars are nowadays.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

It is quite possible to have a slab of new growth mahogany that is more resonant than an old growth slab. There, I did it. I started it again. God help us all

I don't believe new mahogany is the same. Nor are many other components, because they are no longer available, and some are proscribed by law.

 

[F-Hole]

I disagree. Having had a ‘burst made into a Collectors Choice, the difference in quality, playability and sound between the two was truly stark. The new guitars just didn’t do it.

No experience with new Fenders.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

I’d like to throw this in as well, the quality of very inexpensive guitars available now is way better than in the ‘60’s and’70’s. Many different price points now and even the most modest of them is a viable beginner guitar. I think CNC has made building a good cheap guitar easier.
When I was first beginning, Fender had their one line of American made guitars. They didn’t really cater to the beginners needs. So if you only had say, one hundred dollars for an electric guitar, the guitar was probably some overseas thing that was near impossible to get to stay in tune and was difficult to fret.
I’m constantly amazed at the quality of the under$500 guitars are nowadays.

'Tis true that cheaply- priced instruments are streets ahead of many (but not all) of the badly set-up guitars many of us started with.

I do consider that the struggles I had built character and imbued me with a sense of determination that served me well.

Let the beginners of today suffer as I suffered, say I.

 

[Blind Lemon Chicken]

Time will Tell , It always does.

 

[ourmaninthenorth]

In somewhat Orwellian fashion, all guitars are equal, but some are more equal than others.

My appreciation follows the same thinking.

 

[Dave P]

I’d like to throw this in as well, the quality of very inexpensive guitars available now is way better than in the ‘60’s and’70’s. Many different price points now and even the most modest of them is a viable beginner guitar. I think CNC has made building a good cheap guitar easier.
When I was first beginning, Fender had their one line of American made guitars. They didn’t really cater to the beginners needs. So if you only had say, one hundred dollars for an electric guitar, the guitar was probably some overseas thing that was near impossible to get to stay in tune and was difficult to fret.
I’m constantly amazed at the quality of the under$500 guitars are nowadays.

I agree. Back when I started playing, it was on a crappy acoustic with the action 1/2" off the neck. Now there are sub $200 guitars that play and sound pretty good. You see a badass player like Jack Pearson playing a $100 Squier when he was guitars at home that are far more expensive, it's a good testament to how playable cheap guitars have become.

 

[Dave P]

I don't believe new mahogany is the same. Nor are many other components, because they are no longer available, and some are proscribed by law.

Same species, but is plantation grown in Fiji. Not old growth from Honduras.

 

[Dave P]

It's not real practical to take out vintage guitars on the road anymore. There are a lot of guys gigging with newer guitars and leaving the valuable stuff at home. If you are very selective, there are new guitars that can hang with the old ones, but it takes some effort to run the racks to find them. You can't just call Sweetwater and expect them send out a magical guitar.

 

[Doc Sausage]

Looking back to 1968 when I got my first acoustic guitar, the cheap ones were ridiculously horrible to play. And as mentioned, there were only two types available - cheap or expensive. I was only 12 then, so a Gibson or Martin might as well have been Jimmy Page's No. 1.

In 1969, the parents bought me a Vox Hurricane. Looked cool, but as history has revealed, it was no keeper either!

 

[gary buff]

I know it is not a popular opinion here but I'm old enough to remember when golden era Gibsons and Fenders were just used guitars. There are definitely some incredible examples but, contrary to what seems to be today's beliefs, they weren't all great. But because a lot of early recordings/artists used them, they are relatively rare, and were so much better than what was being produced new in the '70s and '80s, they became legendary (and quite expensive). Today's guitars are constructed more consistently than the old ones and are arguably just as good, just not as rare. PRS made some absolutely incredible stuff in the mid-late '80s that was arguably better than what Gibson and Fender were doing as far as quality and innovation, and is still making world class guitars.

Great post, you read stories about players and dealers buying LP Standards in the 60s for $50-$100 because they couldn't give them away (a lot less than the $250 or so that they cost new at that time); they were not "vintage" yet, simply "used". My first "good" guitar was a '74 Stratocaster bought in '75 with the new natural finish with lots of grainy ash which, as I found out after playing it for awhile, was hard to play, sounded thin and wouldn't stay in tune. Otherwise it wasn't bad.....my friend bought the exact same guitar and his was so much better than mine I begged him to sell it to me. So, yes, QC was definitely hit-and-miss in those days and IMO was largely responsible for the birth of the vintage guitar market populated by real dealers.

I do have to say that most of the vintage guitars I played back then did play well with a good set-up (I won't mention sound which is totally subjective, for example many people I know like the sound of the later LPs more than the originals for various reasons). Having said that, the worst guitar I ever played in my life was a '57 Strat for sale at one of the well-known dealers of the day; the maple neck needed much work as many of those did and it just played awful. So I agree that just because a guitar is old doesn't prevent it from being a turd.