Do older basses sound significantly better?

[DirkP]

I am even sceptical regarding the myth of better or natural dried wood used in the 50s and 60s. Wood was an industrial produced good already in the 50s and 60s for furnitures, buildings etc. Leo Fender didn't use wood dried in his garden for decades to build the guitars and basses. Wood drying over the decades has been much improved.

In the past 40 years since these two reviews were published, the drying process has been understood much better and the drying operation has been improved for reducing drying time and achieving even moisture content distribution both between and within boards. However, the other drying defects are still occurring, although the causes of these defects are better known.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[bucephylus]

The structure of wood quite definitely changes with time. The nature of those changes, and the effects on the properties of wood are well known and documented in the scientific literature.

For the most part, the thermal treatments normally used to turn “green” timber into board stock create a fair approximation of the changes expected, resulting in acceptable dimensional stability and properties appropriate for use. Wood stock used to create musical instruments has already been “aged” to some extent. But, those processes are not perfect. So, wood microstructure and properties do continue to evolve after the instrument is made.

The player notices these changes with wooden bass guitars mainly in three respects: The density of the wood (and so, weight of the bass) is reduced; the tendency to absorb water (and so, change tuning) with seasonal changes is reduced; and the instrument becomes more resonant.

None of those changes in purely electric instruments are generally perceptible either in recorded parts or to an audience.
Classical acoustic instruments show the changes in a more direct way; so, are valued more by players. But, blindfold tests even with the violin family instruments show that audience perception does not conclusively coincide with player perception.

In general, wood aging after the instrument is made seems to improve the “feel” of the instrument to the player, but have unremarkable effects on recorded “tone” or audience perception.

FWIW

 

[Guitalia]

Well, there's "old" and then there's "worn out".

I also think it's worth pointing out that the instrument most violinists picked was around 30 years old at the time of this blind test so very much "broken in" and more or less the same age as we refer to as "old" in the context of this thread. I doubt if any professional violinist would have picked a brand new violin in a double blind test. I might be wrong of course. I'm not a violinist.

From Invalid Link Removed:

"A pool of 15 new and 9 Old Italian violins was assembled by the authors. The new violins were built by professional makers in Europe and North America and were between several days and two decades old."

According to my reading of the Results section, anyway, there was no reliable pattern with respect to correct or incorrect identification of any of the violins as new or old.

Maybe some bass players with exquisitely attuned senses can tell older basses from newer purely on the basis of the age of the wood. But there are too many counterexamples in other areas to take the idea entirely seriously. (There's the Invalid Link Removed.)

Personally, I think we're just one double-blind study away from burying the claim about old wood sounding different from new wood in basses. And solid-body basses at that! (Not that the study would convince the believers. Science is unpleasant.)

 

[bucephylus]

Finishes may make water bead up on them, but they do not stop water vapor from leaving…

This is generally true for modern finishes.

OTOH, I “refinished” (actually more destroyed) a ‘75 P Bass ca. 1994-ish, which was finished with some kind of cross linked transparent finish by Fender; said finish being between 1/32” and 1/16” thick. After grinding that finish off (because no solvent would dissolve it), I left the project in my closet over the winter, picking it up the next Spring. That body literally lost something just short of a pound just by sitting on the shelf, much to my surprise.

But, those finishes were much more the exception than we see today.

 

[jdjk7]

I am wondering if the aging of the wood on solid body bass guitars over decades makes.them sound noticeably better than new ones. For example a new Fender P vs one that is 20 or 40 years old?

I feel like part of the equation is bias. Back when said old instruments were made, there were keepers and there were lemons. Who's going to keep an old, crappy bass that doesn't want to play well? It's more likely to get parted out or trashed. The ones that survived today are the ones that people decided were worth keeping.

 

[MegaSwing]

I feel like part of the equation is bias. Back when said old instruments were made, there were keepers and there were lemons. Who's going to keep an old, crappy bass that doesn't want to play well? It's more likely to get parted out or trashed. The ones that survived today are the ones that people decided were worth keeping.

There ARE the occasional ‘case queens’, however.

 

[Wisebass]

People hear, taste and feel with their eyes.

Actually a wine expert can tell you a lot about a wine just by looking at it!

In a glass, against the light! Colour, transpareny and suspended solids,

can tell a whole lotta things about the wine!

After that some real experts will close their eyes to be more concentrated to smell and taste.

Rule number one for testing wine is:

Never look at the bottle! Don't watch what is around you. Instead look inside and hopefully enjoy. (Pierre Poupon)


greetings

!wise(b)ass

 

[bassliner50]

Better players always sound significantly better. This happens regardless of the cost, country of origin or vintage of the instrument.

 

[micguy]

This is generally true for modern finishes.

OTOH, I “refinished” (actually more destroyed) a ‘75 P Bass ca. 1994-ish, which was finished with some kind of cross linked transparent finish by Fender; said finish being between 1/32” and 1/16” thick. After grinding that finish off (because no solvent would dissolve it), I left the project in my closet over the winter, picking it up the next Spring. That body literally lost something just short of a pound just by sitting on the shelf, much to my surprise.

But, those finishes were much more the exception than we see today.

A pound is a hell of a lot of moisture - the loss I see between Summer and Winter is on the order of 20 grams (about 1 percent of the weight of a body). You're talking about a loss of 20 percent or so - that thing would have been dripping to start with.

 

[Mastermold]

People will use all kinds of confirmation bias to justify overpaying for vintage instruments.

Some folks are willing to pay for the real thing. A gift shop replica poster may look as nice as the actual painting in the museum but that doesn't mean paying for the real one was a waste of money. If authenticity matters to you, it's worth it. If not, it's not. And there are plenty of good sounding cheap instruments to make music with.

 

[Mastermold]

A pound is a hell of a lot of moisture - the loss I see between Summer and Winter is on the order of 20 grams (about 1 percent of the weight of a body). You're talking about a loss of 20 percent or so - that thing would have been dripping to start with.

That's what I tell my doctor -- I'm just retaining water.

 

[micguy]

That's what I tell my doctor -- I'm just retaining water.

Are you finished in poly or lacquer?

 

[Mastermold]

Are you finished in poly or lacquer?

I think I'm just finished period!

 

[Mastermold]

By the way -- irony -- I've been reading this thread while playing an SX jazz bass the whole time and thinking hey it sounds pretty decent!

 

[BassikBrad]

Old wood sounds great with new strings

Trust me.....I'm a bass player

 

[VeryTallBassist]

Old wood sounds great with new strings

I think there may be a "that's what she said" joke somewhere in there...

 

[bucephylus]

A pound is a hell of a lot of moisture - the loss I see between Summer and Winter is on the order of 20 grams (about 1 percent of the weight of a body). You're talking about a loss of 20 percent or so - that thing would have been dripping to start with.

Yup. Then again, it was 30 years ago. Might have been closer to 1/2 pound. In any case, it was substantial.

Also, that was NOT normal uptake and release. Fender in the 70’s was not thorough with their board stock thermal treatment. And, their clear finishes could get to bar table thicknesses. You could literally see the crack faces, when the coatings would crack.

As I originally noted, not a typical situation.

 

[JRA]

I am wondering if the aging of the wood on solid body bass guitars over decades makes.them sound noticeably better than new ones. For example a new Fender P vs one that is 20 or 40 years old?

The implication of many of these posts seems to me to be that the high prices of old instruments are because of their rarity and collectibility, not how they sound and play?

 

[Jim C]

A pound is a hell of a lot of moisture - the loss I see between Summer and Winter is on the order of 20 grams (about 1 percent of the weight of a body). You're talking about a loss of 20 percent or so - that thing would have been dripping to start with.

Never thought to weigh them during dry vs. wet season to see if they absorb moisture.
Great idea and surprised the difference is 20 grams especially if you seal 100% of the body.
I suppose relative humidity in ones house as well as the amount of air movement makes the difference in weight assuming constant temperature.
It does seem counterintuitive that something as thick and hard as polyurethane would allow the transfer of water vapor but I have no empirical proof either way.

 

[DrBnz]

Older bass players might - not older basses