Does old wood really sound better?

[jeremypodom]

I'm not saying it does, not saying it doesn't
what I'm saying is that I haven't ever got my hands on an older acoustic
so, is it mojo, perception, or fact that an acoustic guitar sounds better with time?

 

[otterhound]

I have always considered the term 'old wood' to be meaningless . Yes , some old guitars sound truly spectacular . If you build a guitar today from wood that came from the exact same trees it would be old wood in a new guitar . The reality is that there were good and bad guitars made many years ago just as the same today . Find a good one and be happy , new or old .

 

[Colt W. Knight]

I'm not saying it does, not saying it doesn't
what I'm saying is that I haven't ever got my hands on an older acoustic
so, is it mojo, perception, or fact that an acoustic guitar sounds better with time?

If you read the hardcore luthier journals, they will tell you things like the vibrations over the years changes the molecular structure, so does the slow decay and drying. Plus the finish absorbs into the wood. Yada yada yada.

Is it true? I think it is with a quality instrument made with quality wood. I know my Martin sounds better the older it gets. But maybe that's just me.

 

[jeremypodom]

I have always considered the term 'old wood' to be meaningless . Yes , some old guitars sound truly spectacular . If you build a guitar today from wood that came from the exact same trees it would be old wood in a new guitar . The reality is that there were good and bad guitars made many years ago just as the same today . Find a good one and be happy , new or old .

I have my Taylor 214ce
fantastic guitar, I never get tired with anything about it =]
I just felt like starting a new thread...

 

[Colt W. Knight]

I read an article a few months ago that hypothesized that older instruments sounding better because they were crafted with hand tools likes scrapers, hand planes, and chisels. They sound the thickness planers and jointers tear the wood fibers, and thats why a lot of those old prewar instruments sounded so much better.

Something to think about.

I agree with Otter though. Good and bad guitars now and then. But I think the good ones just get better as they get older.

 

[imsilly]

I think you have to judge the merits of each guitar and the woods they are made from without preconceptions.

It's not like you can you empirically determine whether a certain wood sounds better then another, because that kind of judgment is totally subjective and unscientific.

 

[Colt W. Knight]

I think you have to judge the merits of each guitar and the woods they are made from without preconceptions.

What's the fun in that?

 

[sevycat]

There are so many factors that go into an acoustic guitar being a good instrument.

1. construction of the guitar.
2. tone woods used
3. How much use the instrument has had
4. manufacteur
5. condition and care of guitar
6. operator

 

[Ricky D.]

... I agree with Otter though. Good and bad guitars now and then. But I think the good ones just get better as they get older.

Paul Reed Smith said that the great old guitars were great guitars the day they were made. I believe that. Certainly, some of the old guitars around now are pretty ordinary.

It may well be that there is a selection process at work over the decades, with the better examples remaining in circulation and migrating into the hands of the better (and more successful) players.

Do they get better as they age? That's impossible to demonstrate. How do you compare a guitar to what it sounded like 10 years ago?

Look at the violin world for a moment. Stradivarius violins are the gold standard of vintage violin tone. In blind testing of modern instruments vs. Stradivarius, the modern instruments are often indistuinguishable or found to be superior. Lots more detail on this in the Wikipedia article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stradivarius

 

[otterhound]

I have my Taylor 214ce
fantastic guitar, I never get tired with anything about it =]
See , it works every time .
I hope that you have the pleasure of playing at least one superior old acoustic in your lifetime and may you have the pleasure of growing old with that Taylor .

 

[jeremypodom]

I hope that you have the pleasure of playing at least one superior old acoustic in your lifetime and may you have the pleasure of growing old with that Taylor .

You make it sound kinda creepy =P but thanks

 

[Colt W. Knight]

Paul Reed Smith said that the great old guitars were great guitars the day they were made. I believe that. Certainly, some of the old guitars around now are pretty ordinary. I agree they were good to start with, but Paul Reed Smith has his opinion, as does everyone else.

It may well be that there is a selection process at work over the decades, with the better examples remaining in circulation and migrating into the hands of the better (and more successful) players. I agree, and I frequently bring up this argument when talking about vintage guitars

Do they get better as they age? I think they do That's impossible to demonstrate. Yup How do you compare a guitar to what it sounded like 10 years ago? I don't know, but I do feel free to speculate.

Look at the violin world for a moment. Stradivarius violins are the gold standard of vintage violin tone. In blind testing of modern instruments vs. Stradivarius, the modern instruments are often indistuinguishable or found to be superior. Lots more detail on this in the Wikipedia article here: I always found this hilarious. Those violin guys are hardcore. There a super scientific studies, and hundreds of years of craftsmanship develop by reverse engineering one guys violins. How many did he make in his lifetime, and how many have really survived?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stradivarius

I wonder if there is anyone cyrogencially or artificially aging wood(not just cosmetic)?

 

[beep.click]

I have a lovely Guild that I bought new about 25 years ago -- all solid woods; no plywood.

It sounded great when I bought it, but in all honesty, it hasn't changed that much, over time.

That being said, I've played quite a few guitars from the 60s, and they all had an unmistakable "smoky" quality to the sound. Haven't heard that in any other guitars I've tried!

 

[motwang]

Maybe it has to do with how trained an ear you have. Most non musicians probably could not tell a good sound from an average sound in any instrument. I know that tone wood and craftsmanship play a big part in the sound. A gentleman up in Jamesport, Mo. Makes and sells guitars. He does not claim to be a luthier just a woodworker. He does have a good ear because he tunes his pieces by how thick the wood is in the body. by experimenting from piece to piece and by what wood choices he has made some GOOD sounding acoustics. I had the pleasure of playing one and it sounded as good as any Martin I have played or heard.
Also, I read on Ron Kirn's web site about his barncasters, and how the old wood has crystalized. could this make an acoustic sound different as its wood gets older, too? I believe that a Pre war Martin or Gibson have a great sound ( never played but have heard played), Is it the wood, the craftsmanship, the age, or all the above?
I think the best guitars are the ones I can play and compare, for what I can afford and make the judgement call as to what sounds good to me. Thats all that matters. Who can afford a prewar Martin, not many of us, but man, I'd sure like to play one!!!!!

 

[ac15]

I've got a 60's Martin New Yorker and it does sound fantastic, but I have no idea how much the fact that its "old wood" plays into it. I do believe though, that older acoustic guitars that have been played a lot sound better (or "open up" as many people like to say) from being played over the years.

Actually there was an article I read in Tone Quest report years ago where they mentioned a company in California called something like "timber technologies" (no longer around) who would take your acoustic or electric guitar and put it in front of constant loud sound waves, such as low bass notes etc. for several days. which would get the wood vibrating. Sort of like relicing the sound, by subjecting it to the vibrations you might get from years of playing. People who heard these guitars after they were treated unanimously thought that they sounded way better and had "opened up."

Not sure what I believe, except to say that that sounds plausible for acoustic guitars at least.

 

[otterhound]

Just the ramblings of an old fart .
I honestly believe that great hands make great guitars . Great wood just makes it a bit easier .

 

[Ricky D.]

I wonder if there is anyone cyrogencially or artificially aging wood(not just cosmetic)?

From the Wikipedia article:

The violin christened "Opus 58", was crafted by Swiss violin-maker Michael Rhonheimer from wood treated with fungus by Empa researcher Francis Schwarze. The remaining non-Stradivarius violins were also made by Rhonheimer, two from untreated wood and one more from treated. The wood used to make Opus 58 had been treated the longest – nine months. Schwarze treated Norwegian spruce with the fun*gus Physi*por*i*nus vit*rius and syc*a*more with Xy*laria lon*gipes. These fungal species reduce wood density without degrading the compound middle lamellae, when kept to earlier stages of decay.Microscopic analysis of treated wood, along with resonance frequency testing to measure five physical properties (density, modulus of elasticity, speed of sound, radiation ratio, damping factor) revealed a reduction in density, accompanied by relatively little change in the speed of sound. According to this analysis, treatment improves the sound radiation ratio to the level of cold climate wood considered to have superior resonance.[9]

 

[otterhound]

From the Wikipedia article:

The violin christened "Opus 58", was crafted by Swiss violin-maker Michael Rhonheimer from wood treated with fungus by Empa researcher Francis Schwarze. The remaining non-Stradivarius violins were also made by Rhonheimer, two from untreated wood and one more from treated. The wood used to make Opus 58 had been treated the longest – nine months. Schwarze treated Norwegian spruce with the fun*gus Physi*por*i*nus vit*rius and syc*a*more with Xy*laria lon*gipes. These fungal species reduce wood density without degrading the compound middle lamellae, when kept to earlier stages of decay.Microscopic analysis of treated wood, along with resonance frequency testing to measure five physical properties (density, modulus of elasticity, speed of sound, radiation ratio, damping factor) revealed a reduction in density, accompanied by relatively little change in the speed of sound. According to this analysis, treatment improves the sound radiation ratio to the level of cold climate wood considered to have superior resonance.[9]

Excuse me , but I think my ears are bleeding .

 

[DADGAD]

so, is it mojo, perception, or fact that an acoustic guitar sounds better with time?

My acoustic sounds better the more I play it. It sounds better today than when I bought it.

I read something by Seagull guitars about placing their acoustic guitars near a music sound source when not being played. Like on a stand next to a hi-fi. The vibration does something to improve the tone of a wood musical instrument.

 

[imwjl]

I've had the privilege to play 45 - 70+ year old 00 and D 18 and 28 series Martins and later model guitars considered top tier. I also own a year old Santa Cruz that's not made with exotic woods but Richard Hoover said mine was made with much older wood than any factory and most guitars would have.

My conclusion is that a well made guitar that is set up well, has fresh strings is most important. Then add a superb player.

One of the old D-18s I tried and heard often really is spectacular and it is not the oldest among them. I also concluded that I'd probably spend on one each of a particular Collings and Santa Cruz dread I tried at my local dealer before I'd pay the huge price for some of the old Martins I've heard but one D-28 really could bang out the individual notes in an exceptional manner.

The amazing D-18 I mention has a top that would no way be accepted by most modern web posting guitar lovers because of the runout and general looks.

My SCGC has not seemed to open up or get more lively in same way a Larrivee and Martin did after a year of much playing. I can't say it's because of older wood or just because it's made well. The made well part sticks in my mind because of my visits to the dealer. That dealer will have some Martins that are as fine as anything in the high end room but most all of guitars in the high end room are very consistent with that characteristic I describe as being very responsive.

Adirondack tops seem to be another exception. I believe what's said about the time they need because every Collings and Santa Cruz my local dealer gets are consistent and it is without fail that I like the used ones with Adirondack tops more than the new ones.