Vintage vs new.

[mongo2]

A valuable reality check worth reiterating is that vintage rock records were made with what was then brand-spanking-new gear.

I can, however, appreciate why a player might cultivate a patina fetish!

Exactly, and ignoring the siren call of the patina is an essential part of the critical listening skill.

 

[michael_atw]

Anyone who denies the obvious truth of the vintage scam isn't paying enough attention to what they are hearing. Once the skill of critical listening is learned it's very obvious.

I've noticed many musicians think they hear better than they do. I have a friend who is has a classical guitar degree, probably one of the top 20 best guitarists in western NY, and he has the smarts enough to know he can't hear nuances like so many claim to hear on a regular basis on forums like this. It gets rather old; but that's a common thing among humans in all aspects. We always think we're better at things we aren't. I prefer to avoid that as much as possible and save myself the funds. Same with cars - I owned a '73 Grand Torino which was a hunk of crap in more than a few ways...

 

[peterpalmieri]

If we are going to compare a PreCBS Jazz bass to a new one, we have to compare it to one with similar options or at least consider the difference in options.

The biggest ones being the High mass bridge and string through the body. Different pickup wind, laminate fingerboard, brazillion rosewood. Not considering the ash maple models etc. Fret wire, nitro finish.

Personally I am drawn to the preCBS options and I think the American Vintage '64 holds up very well against a vintage bass.

That being said those specs are popular with folks building vintage style basses both Fender and otherwise.

Like the original violin article, this combination seems to work. Years of research and testing have been done to build an instrument that is true to the original and in some cases surpases it.

In the violin article the "cheap new" violins were $30,000 great lengths were taken to design a high quality instrument.

So to me the answer is clear, if you have a great PreCBS jazz bass, and you go to the custom shop or a boutique builder they now have the capabilites to produce an instrument that is equal or better. If you want to take that PreCBS bass to every guitar store you can find and compare it to a New American Standard bass you may likely find a bass you like better but it will be a long journey.

Again in the violin article they had the best of the best both old and new, so to discuss the average or bad instruments doesn't really help anyone.

 

[king_biscuit]

Anyone who denies the obvious truth of the vintage scam isn't paying enough attention to what they are hearing. Once the skill of critical listening is learned it's very obvious.

My older Fenders do sound somewhat different than my newer ones -- better? I think so, but better is subjective, and everybody can make there own mind up about that. Now, I know, and you should know that one of the driving reasons for vintage instrument attraction has nothing to do with tone, playability, or any other utilitarian measurement. There are great deal of people who like cool old rare stuff -- comics, stamps, coins, cars, etc -- for reasons other than pragmatic usefulness. You may not "get" this, but those more thoughtful and less egocentric do.

 

[metron]

I'm not sure what you are on about with this. "Sand cast magnets? I agree with you.
Most people agree that hand wound pickups do sound better.
While the type of insulation may not impact the tone, it's thickness will affect the overall capacitance, which will. Also, corrosion will affect resistance, which will.
Magnets do lose strength over time. A weaker magnet can be set closer to the string before it interferes with a string's movement. This will absolutely change the tone of an instrument.
The differences that these add up to may not amount to much. And there's no telling if what they amount to are a plus or minus to you.

I don't see anyone claiming those things don't happen. It's the general assertion in that guy's blog that all those things result in better changes to the sound of older instruments. Anecdote and conjecture.

 

[karl_em_all]

I'm aware of this but this has nothing to do with analog vs. digital. What I wanted to say is, why do people always have to rationalise irrational decisions. There's a saying in marketing: most decisions are irrational but afterwards we often put enormous efforts to justify them in a rational way.

I simply buy vinyl because I like it and I like worn in instruments as much as I like new instruments for different reasons. There is no police force around that has declared playing vintage or non-vintage instruments illegal, so who cares?
The resale-value argument is not the argument of a musician. Rather the opposite. It's the argument of a dealer.
And as others have mentioned before: the real vintage instruments (not my '78 Jazz for example) are worth so much that one can not use them anymore.
At least for me basses are something I use and even abuse in a kind way without thinking all the time it could be damaged or be stolen.
BTW the 70' instruments that have survived and stood the test of time are still cheaper used than their "vintage reissue" counterparts.
In Germany a Fender '74 RI is about 2500,- Euros, the used ones in good condition are rather a bit cheaper.

Dirk

I like vinyl too

A buddy of mine was in NY last year and checked out a few pawn shops to see if he could find something cool. Some of the 70's model Gibson guitars he found had price tags of $8-12K. Personally I was shocked to find out that they would be on the shelf with that kind of a price tag. Like did Duane Allman record 'Layla' with one of these or something? It must just come down to how sought after the brand name is as a maker of quality and then the rarity and condition.

I have a '13 4003 Ric and if the older models sound better I'd love to play one. Chances are they'd probably just be different.

 

[mongo2]

I've noticed many musicians think they hear better than they do. I have a friend who is has a classical guitar degree, probably one of the top 20 best guitarists in western NY, and he has the smarts enough to know he can't hear nuances like so many claim to hear on a regular basis on forums like this. It gets rather old; but that's a common thing among humans in all aspects. We always think we're better at things we aren't. I prefer to avoid that as much as possible and save myself the funds. Same with cars - I owned a '73 Grand Torino which was a hunk of crap in more than a few ways...

Ask any audiologist, some people do have better hearing, that's a given. However, listening is a skill that can be improved if you have decent hearing.

Musicians, especially those playing electric instruments, are at high risk of hearing damage from exposure to high volume content. I'm sure that comes into play for some. I'm now very glad I've protected my hearing since the early '70s.

 

[mongo2]

My older Fenders do sound somewhat different than my newer ones -- better? I think so, but better is subjective, and everybody can make there own mind up about that. Now, I know, and you should know that one of the driving reasons for vintage instrument attraction has nothing to do with tone, playability, or any other utilitarian measurement. There are great deal of people who like cool old rare stuff -- comics, stamps, coins, cars, etc -- for reasons other than pragmatic usefulness. You may not "get" this, but those more thoughtful and less egocentric do.

Can you be absolutely sure that your are not hearing the patina?

Attempting to insult me simply weakens your argument.

 

[king_biscuit]

Can you be absolutely sure that your are not hearing the patina?

Attempting to insult me simply weakens your argument.

I'm not insulting you by stating that you are arguing from an egocentric perspective, any more than you are insulting me be demanding that "vintage" instruments (of which i own a few) are a "scam." If you have a rebuttal to my post then make it, but please spare the self riotousness!

 

[mongo2]

I'm not insulting you by stating that you are arguing from an egocentric perspective, any more than you are insulting me be demanding that "vintage" instruments (of which i own a few) are a "scam." If you have a rebuttal to my post then make it, but please spare the self riotousness!

I think you mean "righteousness" there don't you?

The scam in the vintage market is the assertion that "vintage" instruments are inherently better. They aren't.

Since vintage is considered to be 25 years old or older, do you really think that an instrument made 25 years ago is inherently better than one made recently?

 

[king_biscuit]

Can you be absolutely sure that your are not hearing the patina?

Attempting to insult me simply weakens your argument.

I think you meant "you are" didn't you. Auto correct can be a bitch.

 

[mongo2]

I think you meant "you are" didn't you. Auto correct can be a bitch.

Yes it can...yet another bane on society. However, you didn't answer my question about hearing the patina.

 

[king_biscuit]

I think you mean "righteousness" there don't you?

The scam in the vintage market is the assertion that "vintage" instruments are inherently better. They aren't.

Since vintage is considered to be 25 years old or older, do you really think that an instrument made 25 years ago is inherently better than one made recently?

I don't think everyone considers them inherently better, just like a reprint of the first issue of Batman is not inherently worse than the original. They are different and for some collectible, though. Because you don't like them doesn't render the whole thing a scam. I can't stand mayonnaise, and I would never eat the filthy oily crap, but I can't say that you are being scammed by buying and eating it, if that is your thing.

 

[mongo2]

I don't think everyone considers them inherently better

And they shouldn't. Nobody should since it isn't true.

just like a reprint of the first issue of Batman is not inherently better than the original. They are different and for some collectible, though. Because you don't like them doesn't render the whole thing a scam.

I never said that I didn't like any older instruments, as I've posted in this thread I have and regularly use several. I have and use them because they are good basses not because they are old and I had to try quite a few to find the good ones. The scam is the insistence of some that vintage is inherently better.

I can't stand mayonnaise, and I would never eat the filthy oily crap, but I can't say that you are being scammed by buying and eating it, if that is your thing.

That's a really bad analogy, but it reminds me that I have to go make my lunch...thanks. I'll use mayo in your honor

Responses in bold above.

 

[jstar]

I read that article a while ago and it rings way true to me.

I'm a trained Cellist. I have met Yo-Yo Ma, and he invited me to play his Stradivarius Cello, The Davidoff Stradivarius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davidov_Stradivarius), or at least the cello he used to play.

It sounded great, but that's because it is a really well made and maintained instrument. There's absolutely nothing to all that "mojo" ****. Either an instrument is well made or not. Older instruments are worn in pleasing places like wood edges smoothed over and the like. That is most of what people feel as "vintage mojo."

My current cello is a cheap student model that cost about $1000. Nobody has ever said it looks nice, but plenty of people have complimented the sound of my playing.

I'm also a carpenter, and the adage "They don't make them like they used to" is true there too. Old houses are a nightmare of crappy construction and take tons of money to bring up to modern standards. They last cause people spend tons to keep them looking original.

So, all this Vintage Magic stuff is just humans NEEDING things to be better. They aren't. You can get a bass for $500 and get it playing 100% as well as a $5000 vintage instrument.

 

[king_biscuit]

Originally Posted by king_biscuit View Post
I don't think everyone considers them inherently better

And they shouldn't.

just like a reprint of the first issue of Batman is not inherently better than the original. They are different and for some collectible, though. Because you don't like them doesn't render the whole thing a scam.

I never said that I didn't like any older instruments, as I've posted in this thread I have and regularly use several. The scam is the insistence of some that vintage is inherently better.

I can't stand mayonnaise, and I would never eat the filthy oily crap, but I can't say that you are being scammed by buying and eating it, if that is your thing.

That's a really bad analogy

I simply don't think that most people are buying old Fenders because they think they are inherently better than new ones. My point is that the collectable market and mentality is more complicated and complex than mere utilitarian usefulness of items. I am sure there are those that will not admit that much of the reason they want or own old Fenders is the same set of reasons the next guy owns old baseball cards. But most of the guys I know that have old instruments can't play a lick and can't tell the difference in a MIM Jazz and a peach 61 stack knob from a playability/sound perspective.

You are setting up a strawman argument by setting the premise that people into "vintage instruments" think they are inherently better, which you are obviously defining to mean better in a scientifically measurable way. My point is that this vintage instrument phenomenon is no more scientifically measurable than the allure of the first issue of Batman.

 

[karl_em_all]

Anyway, today CDs are mastered for CD, and a lot of old stuff has been remastered, so the CD should be the superior product.

It's pretty subjective but at the same time a high quality turntable, (much like a high quality bass, amp, or cab) will make a very noticeable difference to the quality of the sound.

 

[mongo2]

You are setting up a strawman argument by setting the premise that people into "vintage instruments" think they are inherently better,

That is precisely the argument made by some here and pretty much the topic based on the OP and video.

I am fully aware that one of the driving forces of any market, including vintage instruments, is the "cool" factor. That's not what I'm talking about.

 

[Mastermold]

....
So, all this Vintage Magic stuff is just humans NEEDING things to be better. They aren't. You can get a bass for $500 and get it playing 100% as well as a $5000 vintage instrument.

Playing as well isn't the issue for me (or the vintage players in my band). All my basses play really well because they're set up well.

The issue is tone. If you're wanting 50's or 60's era tone then a vintage bass from that era is a good solution. They're the real deal. But I've found the new reissues can also do the trick, and with a good relic job can often feel as broken in and comfortable to play too. But each bass (old or new) has to be judged individually, not collectively, because there are good and not so good ones from every era (old and new).

 

[peterpalmieri]

I read that article a while ago and it rings way true to me.

I'm a trained Cellist. I have met Yo-Yo Ma, and he invited me to play his Stradivarius Cello, The Davidoff Stradivarius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davidov_Stradivarius), or at least the cello he used to play.

It sounded great, but that's because it is a really well made and maintained instrument. There's absolutely nothing to all that "mojo" ****. Either an instrument is well made or not. Older instruments are worn in pleasing places like wood edges smoothed over and the like. That is most of what people feel as "vintage mojo."

My current cello is a cheap student model that cost about $1000. Nobody has ever said it looks nice, but plenty of people have complimented the sound of my playing.

I'm also a carpenter, and the adage "They don't make them like they used to" is true there too. Old houses are a nightmare of crappy construction and take tons of money to bring up to modern standards. They last cause people spend tons to keep them looking original.

So, all this Vintage Magic stuff is just humans NEEDING things to be better. They aren't. You can get a bass for $500 and get it playing 100% as well as a $5000 vintage instrument.

The old Adage of "They don't make them like they used to" is saying they don't make them as well as they used too. I'm not sure what houses you are looking at ...My home was built 30 years before the electric bass existed I have an original slate roof with zero leaks, brick face that has never needed repointing and steal windows that work as new. 1" thick plaster walls with original plaster. Much like an old Fender it was just a normal house built for a working class family. Look at the some of the homes in the post WWII subdivisions and your statement is more accurate.

If we are talking about a vintage Fender $5000 isn't going to get you a decent preCBS bass.

That all being said I do agree with your general concept.