Page 8 of 8

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:08 pm
by antipodean
IvanMunoz wrote:
Hotzenplotz wrote: Additionally I heard the vibrations of the tones are changing the structure even for a long time after building the instrument. This was in a case talking about violins. So maybe this is true for our instruments, too.
Its very possible.
This is definitely true for acoustic instruments where the sounding surfaces are not laminated. In general these surfaces are relatively thin and delicate and thus quite susceptible to structural changes due to vibration through playing, as well as environmental changes (temperature and humidity). An acoustic instrument with plywood sounding surfaces will not exhibit this beneficial ageing effect, however, due to the enhanced rigidity provided by the lamination process. For similar reasons, I remain very sceptical that a solid-body electric instrument can benefit from ageing due to vibration.

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:54 pm
by Hotzenplotz
So to mention this was about violins was not too wrong.

Sorry, dear vintage lovers, in the end, concerning to sound, You paid a lot for scratchy old pots and a fading magnetization. :wink:
But You bought a really nice instrument with a maybe interesting story behind. - It was it worth, IMHO.

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:12 pm
by Ivan3000
Hotzenplotz wrote:So to mention this was about violins was not too wrong.

Sorry, dear vintage lovers, in the end, concerning to sound, You paid a lot for scratchy old pots and a fading magnetization. :wink:
But You bought a really nice instrument with a maybe interesting story behind. - It was it worth, IMHO.
Lets not forget the CPi's on the vintage Ricks!

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:34 am
by egosheep
Hotzenplotz wrote:So to mention this was about violins was not too wrong.

Sorry, dear vintage lovers, in the end, concerning to sound, You paid a lot for scratchy old pots and a fading magnetization. :wink:
But You bought a really nice instrument with a maybe interesting story behind. - It was it worth, IMHO.
Yeah but fading magnetization IS the sound... just try and replicate it with your shiny, perfectly functioning new Ric! :lol:

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:13 am
by Hotzenplotz
Well, while waiting for I have some really nice thing to play with. :lol: :wink:

Or I can keep the pots down, as Sean mentioned before.

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:16 pm
by Ivan3000
Hotzenplotz wrote:Well, while waiting for I have some really nice thing to play with. :lol: :wink:

Or I can keep the pots down, as Sean mentioned before.
Maybe you could weaken the soulder, so it only touches partially.

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:30 pm
by Ivan3000
I've also read that someone put his strat in a tanning booth to amberized the finish, and it signifigantly weakened the magnets.

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:56 pm
by Hotzenplotz
To influence the magnetization could destroy the pups, I would not do it.

What if it was one too much?

And a guitar in the tanning booth? - OMG!!!!

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:22 pm
by jdawe
Yeah but fading magnetization IS the sound... just try and replicate it with your shiny, perfectly functioning new Ric!
Except wasn't George's 12-string close to brand new from the factory when he got it?

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:48 pm
by Hotzenplotz
All records made in the 50s and 60s only could have been made with more or less new guitars...

There is one difference I start now to love more and more: alder vs. maple. I love the sound of an alder made 325c58, in my ears my perfect vintage sound, very "hollow". I read Lennon preferred this sound more, too. About his second 325 he was a bit disappointed in comparison.

BTW: I am not a "vintage hater" at all, au contraire! I just do not like the attitude "it is better, because it is vintage", "better guitars were just made in the past" and so on, all this "better" stuff.

I was curious about the reason for the sound I personally like more, too. And maybe how to achieve it with a new one. In this thread I found all the answers I was looking for, thank You all!

My way of vintage is to use an VOX AC30(VR), toasters and flat wounds. - And all (!) the pots in a 70-80% position. Over the next coming years the percentage of the pots will rise step by step very automatically and naturally, I learned now, too.

About mojo: a new one is nice but absolutely mojo-free, as far as I am concerned. My desire is to add mine the mojo note by note, gig by gig on my own. - I added already the first, self made little ding last week... :shock: :evil:

And every time I see vids like the ones from fretted americana on youtube I am a step closer to the next RAS attack.
Well, these thickbody Rickenbackers, ...Yummy!


PS: IMHO even an 50 years old Rickenbacker is able to function perfectly, just a question of maintenance. Sorry, it's a Rickenbacker!

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:07 pm
by Ivan3000
Hotzenplotz wrote:All records made in the 50s and 60s only could have been made with more or less new guitars...

There is one difference I start now to love more and more: alder vs. maple. I love the sound of an alder made 325c58, in my ears my perfect vintage sound, very "hollow". I read Lennon preferred this sound more, too. About his second 325 he was a bit disappointed in comparison.

BTW: I am not a "vintage hater" at all, au contraire! I just do not like the attitude "it is better, because it is vintage", "better guitars were just made in the past" and so on, all this "better" stuff.

I was curious about the reason for the sound I personally like more, too. And maybe how to achieve it with a new one. In this thread I found all the answers I was looking for, thank You all!

My way of vintage is to use an VOX AC30(VR), toasters and flat wounds. - And all (!) the pots in a 70-80% position. Over the next coming years the percentage of the pots will rise step by step very automatically and naturally, I learned now, too.

About mojo: a new one is nice but absolutely mojo-free, as far as I am concerned. My desire is to add mine the mojo note by note, gig by gig on my own. - I added already the first, self made little ding last week... :shock: :evil:

And every time I see vids like the ones from fretted americana on youtube I am a step closer to the next RAS attack.
Well, these thickbody Rickenbackers, ...Yummy!


PS: IMHO even an 50 years old Rickenbacker is able to function perfectly, just a question of maintenance. Sorry, it's a Rickenbacker!
Phil X seems like such a likeable guy! :mrgreen:

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:08 pm
by Hotzenplotz
Crazy guy! But with this person I can imagine to have a few beers and/ after some jam session. A nice sentence from him to the younger ones:
"Before You write 'I Am The Walrus' You have to write 'Please, Please Me' first."

In this case I add: Before You start collecting vintage Rickenbackers, You have to been played one instrument to vintage.

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:16 pm
by Ivan3000
Hotzenplotz wrote:Crazy guy! But with this person I can imagine to have a few beers and/ after some jam session. A nice sentence from him to the younger ones:
"Before You write 'I Am The Walrus' You have to write 'Please, Please Me' first."

In this case I add: Before You start collecting vintage Rickenbackers, You have to been played one instrument to vintage.
Yep! Start off slow. Unless you're rich! :lol:

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:01 pm
by fabandgear
In regards to old Rickenbackers vs new, I'm reminded of the words of that wise old Connecticut sage, Mr. Goober (WNHC-TV 8, New Haven, CT) who had a kiddie show back in the late '60s..."Make new friends and keep the old. One is silver and the other, gold."

Re: New vs. Old

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:26 pm
by Ivan3000
fabandgear wrote:In regards to old Rickenbackers vs new, I'm reminded of the words of that wise old Connecticut sage, Mr. Goober (WNHC-TV 8, New Haven, CT) who had a kiddie show back in the late '60s..."Make new friends and keep the old. One is silver and the other, gold."
I really like that phrase! You should put that in your signature! :mrgreen: