A Guitar And Gear Support Forum

Dweeb that I am, I seem to have read that, after all, guitars from the classic era may not compare that well against their modern replicas.

I mean, as an example, original Strat was clever, elegant in its own way, but it is no engineering marvel.

Somewhat true?

BTW, I was interesting in the violin recently, and studied up construction that makes a violin. The interplay between tcomponents, placement, adjustments, is just something else!

Please define "golden era." Thank you.
Martin's golden era was different from Gibson's which was different from Guild's which was different from Gretsch's, etc.

I think just like today, they ranged from absolutely incredible to garbage coming from the same line. That problem is probably worse in the oldies, since CNC has taken over more work, meaning more repetition of precision work. I also think something that gives a slight advantage to the good vintage pieces is that there was a greater appreciation of craftsmanship in the past.

The big difference was there was a better chance the wood was aged longer and more properly back then. Also it was more likely a decent craftsman was able to spend some time on it. The components were at least decent and solid. Then to add to the mystique the old guitars have had decades of people tweaking them, perhaps 2 or 3 knowledgeable players or even a few decent guitar techs have worked them over. And perhaps the truly crappy ones that used to be have been parted or destroyed.

Gibsons in the 50’s had a ton of variation from guitar to guitar. The early Les Pauls were mostly crap, with tuning issues etc., but they sorted that out eventually. The good bursts were better than the Norlin era scrap wood stuff, but on average the recent ones are probably better and more consistent. Heck some of the tops on 50’s burst just screamed “we don’t give a shit” and they don’t put out anything like that today. The custom shop stuff gets way more care than the originals with more selective woods, and as ridiculous as their prices may be, they are still a fraction of the cost of a vintage instrument that isn’t as good.

Fenders from pre-CBS are a bit different. They were more consistent, in part because they were designed to be simpler to build. They really weren’t that special though. Nothing that can’t be built as good or better today. I had a chance to spend some time with a real deal 61 Strat, and what I learned is that it was really cool, but as a player, there is no reason for me to ever spend 5 figures on a vintage Strat. My MIJ with SD Antiquity Surfers sounded as good. Close, not exact, but there was no clear one is better. I think current Fender American guitars are just as well made, if you like the necks and other specs.

There really is no magic in the vintage stuff I have seen, other than they have big collectors value. As a player, they are good, but not really better.

Good points on craftsmanship +time allowed to build right, careful wood selection.

And yes, CNC and other aids gets us right geometry every time, no need to hack at it to make things fit, even though some modern guitar cavities and pockets would disagree...!

I heard this once and i now repeat it to myself often.

"Things were never as good or as bad as you remember them.

We also use the phrase "turkey butt" in our house frequently. Without hijacking the thread with that story, it amounts to we do what we do the way we do it because we always have. The 'Golden Era' is because they say it is.

It is just like cars, a new Camaro or Mustang will run circles around the late 60s ones they are designed to look like, but put them side by side and most people are going to be drooling over the '68 GT500 or '69 ZL1 instead of the '21 GT500 or '21 ZL1...

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

Am I weird because I assumed that the title of this thread is referring to Korean Les Paul copies made from the late 90s through the mid 2000s, in other words, Rondo golden era Agiles?

Yes, the MIK guitars made during that period at Unsung, Samick, et al, tend to be some very well made instruments.

@nomadh hit the nail on the head. I recently read an article that stated guitar manufacturers from 1920's to the mid-1960's got lucky with the grade of wood. Many species were light, resonant, old-wood and well cured. They did not sleuth around for the stuff. They just bought it and what came in was pure luck.

As far as golden-era for Martin, Gibson, Gretsch & Fender and for solid body construction, the seasoned craftsmen were applied to the acoustics and archtops. Until 1958, Gibson executives called solid bodies "table slabs with strings" and 'a passing fad." They were also considered more affordable and replaceable (disposable?). To keep costs down, the newbies were sent to those lines and quality control was minimal.

My theory on why most are really good now, especially the Fenders and Les Pauls: players and their techs have fixed some of those guitar's flaws over the years. Paul Reed Smith told me that he believes it is also because they have been extensively played over the years, especially the ones which were great out of the gate. He thought it altered the wood, glue, etc. to resonate musically and that their necks felt 'played-in.'

Having frequented vintage guitar shows in the 90's, I learned there is an axiom that the mint guitars from the golden era, typically did not sound or perhaps play well.

IMHO: quality, efficiency and value in new guitars are the best there has ever been. The old-wood s the one thing manufacturers are actively trying to overcome. My AMI Les Paul and AMI Special (both my builds) were build from 1948 Honduran mahogany (I got lucky - the lumber yard owner had built his wife a bedroom set as a wedding present and tucked away the scraps) and the LP top was from Easter NY maple from the 1960's (more luck - a specialty hardwood store had it tucked away for years). Both guitars are resonant, balance and never fight you. Tone for days.