is VINTAGE all that???

[shredderbetter]

I was just wondering if EBMM people think vintage gear is "better" than newer stuff??I have a buddy that's the big fender guy I own 6+ of my own(before i met EBMM) but he always touts his vintage as superior??I think for investment it's great but they play no better than most made to date,my question do you think you'd rather have a NEW rig of your choice or is vintage truly superior??I look at it like this I sure wouldn't get a 55 chevy to road trip when a new car is available??i can get any sound out of ONE of my ebmm I'm looking for depending on musical style,and the sheer engineering end of production itself has so improved a BETTER finished product IMHO so what do you guys think??Is vintage superior or just a 401k substitute??

 

[Astrofreq]

It all depends on the piece of gear. I think my vintage Boss analog delay absolutely sounds better than many others. There are many brands that I think their older gear was just better built. EB is not one of them. I have an older strat that sounds different than my EB's. That's the idea. Not better, not worse, but different and that's a good thing.

 

[glockaxis]

A large part is the investment thing, but equally is the psychological aspect of using an old, originally innovative guitar that tells a story of 30+ years of life on the road. It's that type of mental thing that causes some people to play better w/ that particular instrument. Technically speaking, newer EBMM is better.

If Lucious gave me his black sparkle #1, the psychology of having that instrument would inspire me to play a lot better or be more creative that using anything else. You see what I'm saying?

 

[shredderbetter]

I do understand,I own many signature models and a few personal artist pre owned guitars it's like you said if the artist can do things with this guitar~ I can too! i couldn't blame the guitar for MY shortcomings as a player!I mainly am interested in the guitar end much of the amps and pedals are most certainly more "musical" in the design but newer ones are built more consistent and many boutique models are the best of both worlds!

 

[CarbonTim27]

I seem to remember someone from a guitar magazine saying that you should always play an instrument that can do more than you can... to me, EBMM's are capable of sooooo much more than I'll be so I'm constantly inspired to get better. I've already seen a drastic improvement in my playing since I got my JP.

As for vintage gear, I can't see it being innovative now. Sure you might be able to recreate that AC DC sound, but really, why? I'd be happier using new gear to try to create something that no one has heard yet than if I were to try to sound like Jimmy Page. But I'm the kind of guy that says "I wonder what that pickup would sound like in that guitar with that amp" so that I'm always pushing myself to get to that next level of sound.

 

[67tele]

I've always been a Tele type of guy and usually like the vintage better than new. Probably just because they're worn in and more comfortable to play to me. But the Albert Lee I've got plays as comfortable to me as any vintage guitar I own or have played. My favorite Guitar!!

 

[roburado]

It all depends on the piece of gear.

I would probably agree with this. I have an old Mesa .50 Caliber+, which I'd rather have than Mesa's current 50-watt amp, the Express 5:50. I'd rather have the F-50, which was their 50-watter just prior to the Express, than either the .50 Cal+ or the Express 5:50, however.

But...if you're talking vintage guitar vs. a new EBMM? Based purely on playability, tone, etc., I'll take the new EBMM in most cases.

 

[Big Poppa]

Its like sayingdo you like a really worn in shoe or workboot or do you like to start fresh? SOme old workboots are not very good some are like house shoes.

 

[gerry d]

some vintage stuff is very nice.... some not so nice, EBMM make great gear... all the time... so... it's like anything... if its good then its good..

 

[guertzi]

I don't believe that vintage is better per se,
some is good, some is just plain crap.

I remember that back in the seventies everybody was complaining about the poor quality that Fender an Gibson instruments displayed at that time. They used three bolts for the neck back then at Fender and you could easily move the neck in the pocket like nothing.

Sometimes they would glue together surplus pieces of wood and make a new body out of it. A friend of mine sanded of the finish from his '76 Strat and found that it had been made out of SEVEN pieces of wood.
And the Les Pauls from the mid and late seventies were almost flat tops.

So it is rather strange that the prices of guitars from that dark age in manufacturing quality have been climbing up the ladder for the last years just because they are now VINTAGE instruments...

I agree with BP, the shoe comparison is really good.
It's not because it's vintage, it's because it WORKS for you and makes you feel comfortable that makes gear or a guitar special and valuable.

 

[robelinda2]

As far as EBMM goes i'm sure the new stuff is better than the old stuff, I would expect EBMM to get better and better at making their guitars. You can see the difference already with the new nut, better trems on the silos, silent circuit etc.

 

[Tim O'Sullivan]

People forget with all the hype about old guitars, the really bad ones have been discarded over the years and generally only the good ones survive.

That said, I would have a new guitar over an old one every time.

 

[hbucker]

"Vintage" tends to be a marketing ploy in many instances IMO. And I get sick and tired of listening to Gibson disciples stating "vintage" (by whoever is defining it) is unquestioningly better, period. A reference was made in this thread to what was considered bad production from Fender & Gibson back in the 70's. Now I don't have a hard time believing that there were some gems that came from those companies in that decade, but it's funny how all of a sudden the decade of "duds" are becoming collectible "vintage" guitars. What happened in the past 15 years to make otherwise crappy guitars great???

I also believe that modern production techniques employed by Music Man and other companies translate into much more consistency in quality than they had back in the day. I also believe that the ridiculous sums of $$$ vintage guitars are fetching are just insane. No guitar anywhere was ever worth that much to the masses. Maybe to a few who have the $$$. But not because it's THAT much better. It's because that person wanted it and there aren't that many of them.

With all of this, there is a place in the tonal spectrum for "vintage" types of gear. I just installed a set of handwound pickups in my LP. They were modeled after a set that came out of a "60 ES-335 and they sound fantastic. My EVH also sounds fantastic but in a different way. Each does something the other won't and that's how I likes it.

"Better" depends on what tone you need and when you need it. I'm just glad we have all these choices available to us.

 

[spychocyco]

I really think a lot of it is mindset. So much stuff today is being manufactured cheaply and shoddily that we tend to think that everything that was made a long time ago was made better. In some cases it's true, in some cases it isn't. There were great guitars made in the past and there were cheap, shoddy guitars made in the past. The same thing can be said for the present.

 

[Sub1 Zero]

As far as EBMM goes i'm sure the new stuff is better than the old stuff, I would expect EBMM to get better and better at making their guitars. You can see the difference already with the new nut, better trems on the silos, silent circuit etc.

Very true, I'm sure they'll continue to innovate.

 

[JMB27]

Is Vintage all that?

For me it is truly an instrument by instrument situation - I have played some great "new" stuff and I have played some great "old" stuff. Likewise, I have played both "old" stuff and "new" stuff that I truly did not dig ....

cheers

Joel

 

[pjc812]

An instrument is a very personal thing. I would only buy a vintage guitar because that particular instrument spoke to me... not just cos it's vintage. A buddy of mine has a beat to hell ES330 that I'd take in a heart beat if he offered it to me. Needs a frett job like nobody's business but MAN it sounds good.

That being said, that guitar is a one trick pony. For the most part, I prefer new instruments. 99% I go for my balls, even for acoustic shows thanks to the piezo and the sweet middle position on the JP mags. It's almost like buying a pair of underwear someone's worn for ages. The wonderful thing with Balls, you can order exactly what you want and nobody even tries on that pair of underwear...

For audio and sound related stuff, I tend to prefer analog (vintage). It sounds fuller, and that can be proved using physics not just the subjective ear. I prefer tube amplifiers (my tech hates them, says they're a pain to work on) and vinyl records. I remember the first time I heard a CD and thought it sounded, well, sterile. I know digital recording has come a long way since then but you still only get a bit rate and resolution rather than a sine wave.

+1 on most vintage Gibbies and Fenders being built like crap. What amuses me is they brag about their new stuff being just like their vintage stuff. Hm

 

[Astrofreq]

I also believe that modern production techniques employed by Music Man and other companies translate into much more consistency in quality than they had back in the day.

ABSOLUTELY!!! Companies using computers to carve out necks and bodies are so much more consistent than 20 years ago, at least that I can tell. The free Taylor video was fascinating to watch.

Also, I tell my students that some of the $100 guitar amps sound KILLER compared to my $100 Gorilla amp in 1986. On the other hand, I'd play through my 1987 Crate G40C over a Line6 Spider ANY FREAKIN' DAY OF THE WEEK.

 

[marantz1300]

My silo.s an 89. Old for a musicman. It is THE best built guitar i,ve ever played. I hav,nt played a new one, but if they are better built then my silo, i want one. But i,ll still keep my "VINTAGE"silo.

 

[GuitarHack]

I also believe that modern production techniques employed by Music Man and other companies translate into much more consistency in quality than they had back in the day. I also believe that the ridiculous sums of $$$ vintage guitars are fetching are just insane.

I totally agree. It's very tough to argue that the consistency from any decent manufacturer today isn't way better than 30-40 years ago. Older may be better (or worse) in a particular case, but not just because it's older.

We guitarists in general are an odd lot...it sometimes seems we only want to go backward, not forward. If an idea is too new, deviates too far from a Strat or an LP, then it goes nowhere. Gibson and Fender both make more LPs and Strat variations today than ever before.

And how many of us are on a quest to nail a tone that was around before we were born? Look at all the boutique amp builders...everything is described in terms of Black Face, Tweed, Marshall, Dumble...etc. At least in the amp arena, it seems like the big guys are innovating more than the smaller guys. The reverse seems true about guitars.

That said, I think maybe we EBMM fans are a little more forward-thinking. After all, we embraced something other than a Gibson or Fender.