Is A Vintage Guitar Better Than A New One?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ย. 2024
- We got our hands on a stunning 1952 Martin D18 and simply had to put it up against a new one. Erwin and Adrian, two of our luthiers and both Martin Dreadnought enthousiasts, played them side-by-side to show you the differences.
"New Arrivals" every Friday @ 16:00! / New video every Sunday at 16:00!
Thank you very much for watching! If you like what you see please take a moment to like and share this video! Want more TFOA? Here are the places where you can find us!
Facebook: www.facebook.c...
Instagram: / thefellowshipofacoustics
Pinterest: / pins
Twitter: / tfoaguitars
Website: www.tfoa.eu/en/
Any feedback or other questions? Comment below or send us a message!
Both sound great but I'd give the nod to the 1952 because that pumpkin color top is sooooo cool.
Yep, yellow toner is such a shame.
The 1952 sounded fabulous and it’s 2 years older than I am lol ! I have a 2019 D-18 I live only 75 miles from the Martin Factory .
That vintage one sounds fantastic, very balanced from low to high tones. Not that the new one is bad, I think it will also sound better with age.
Enjoyed that, and they both sound great. I'd probably go for the new one -- considering how closely they sound -- just to avoid maintenance issues, the slightly wider neck, and to save a few dollars.
Yes - that 1952 just kicks ass. Has that Bluegrass MOJO.
The 52 just sounds a little more seasoned! They both sound great! So does my taylor 210e!
The new one sounds great but there is no comparison really. The tone of old wood wins every time.
In today's market you can buy three new D-18's for the price of one '52. So today I bought a new one. It has forward shifted, scalloped bracing so when it opens up it will be an awesome box.
Great choice Charles! Couldn't agree more.
The playing is wonderfull of you both!
Thanks Alfred!
yes, really! :-)
Man, you guys just absolutely kill it, love watching you demo guitars. D-18's I think are my favorite sounding new guitar straight off the shelf.
Taylor is great as long as your not playing hard driving acoustic bluegrass then you might not hear it if you are martin copys all of them are ĝreat except they all cost more and still don't have that Martin Sound that all the copys are still trying to get to this day.Guild acoustic dreadnought guitars in my opinion are a very good choice. TAYLOR great intonation great sound but not a Martin that's for sure.Don't see any Taylor's on a Bluegrass stage. Might see a bourgeois guitar or a Collins even Blueridge
I love the voice of the vintage D18.
Nice playing guys.. both sound great, I dream of a D18 one day
A great demo of two D18s, which certainly shows the effect of a few years on a good Martin but also delightful to see Mr Adrian Farmer, who I hadn't seen or heard of for a decade or three. Nice to see you Adrian, keep on picking ... and building ?
A bit of both!
@@thefellowshipofacoustics Hi I spent this afternoon with a chap called Pat - who plays great Dobro - you know him I believe. he sends regards,
Nice picking fellas very enjoyable! I would like to know compared to the Martin Pre War guitars! Thank you!
Love the sound of the 52.
The '52 D-18 rear-shifted is more like my D-18 Authentic 1939 Aged. And the newer D-18 is more like my forward-shifted D-18 GE. Great playing for both of you. Nice of TFOA to do these videos showcasing these two fine Martin's.
I prefer the 52 model...hands down!
I honestly believe they used old growth solid woods back in the day. It gives a way better tone.
Their might have also been more old growth available back then.
There is zero science behind that logic.
The new one sounds better. More articulation combined with stronger base😊
The ‘52 has that dry woody old sound, but it doesn’t have the “ring” of the new one. I’d need both.
We perceive vintage guitars as better than new guitars because they are the perfect examples of guitars built from the past. They are still around because they are such great examples. Trust me there were plenty of awful guitars built in the 40's, 50's and 60's. You just don't see or hear them because they were discarded like anything else that wasn't made well.
That's a very good point! I wonder if in 60 years we can say the same about 2020 and if our new guitars now, will be just as good as vintage is now :)
@@thefellowshipofacoustics Who knows, but I suspect that with all the mass produced stuff from China, Indonesia etc that will be plenty of junk around as well lol.
@@neverenoughguitars8276 History will always repeat itself ;)
Sometimes the cheap guitars of the day became better with age too. I just finished a major restoration project on a 1963 Epiphone FT30 Cabellero. It is a small body ladder braced, all mahogany guitar, Epi's copy of the LGO. She does not have a deep bass end but her mids and higher range are crisp and clear and ring on for 30 seconds or more. She projects beautifully into a microphone and records really well. Not expensive even today for a vintage guitar but in her day she was originally maybe
There weren't many bad guitars from that era. Trust me I know because I'm an old man. Having said that, My 2005 D18 authentic is one of the best guitars I've ever owned and I have owned hundreds. A 1952 would have a rosewood board and bridge.
It Is always a joy to see those two together. Very talented
Big like!!!!
Greetings,
David
Thanks David!
Two fantastic players, two fantastic guitars. Maybe its time you both together give a concert in the Dinatheater. You both have also enough stories to tell!
Haha, perhaps you can convince them Harry! Lovely idea.
@@thefellowshipofacoustics During the concert you both can promote different kind of guitars and let the audience during the pause talk about what they like most ... I think there are also more players in the house that may stand up to show their individual skills or together with the both of you.
2 canons and they both sound awesome.
That '52 is just a beautiful sounding instrument. If it's true that Martin guitars sound better with age then I have a lot to look forward to.
Thanks guys great demo
In my opinion they are not really comparable because of the scalloped bracing. The vintage D-18 has a well matured, warm and woody
sound. Beautiful guitar.
Forward shifted bracing on new one not scalloped. I believe scalloped bracing comes only on herringbone model M artins.Hd 28s we're the bluegrass guitar,still are with scalloped bracing.almost all guitars with scalloped bracing have the herringbone trim,that use to be how you could tell the difference.im sure things have changed in this new digitech world.Also martins use to h a very a lifetime guarantee on necks ever since they have this adjustable neck,no more guarantee ,what's up with that? Because to put adjustable truss rod in any guitar you have to route out more of the neck to let truss rod move.all Martins pre 80s were guaranteed for life,all the ones that didn't have an adjustable truss rod.Now they are adjustable with no guarantee.ill stick with the old technology it worked for over 100 years.Thats why the older ones are better,adjustable necks can only be adjusted so far and then you will need a neck reset also.all handmade dreadnought will eventually need a neck reset, there are exceptions but for the most part..I have a 56 that never had a neck reset .I have a 77 that's needed two.but 70s Martins should be left on the shelf and sent back to Martin .something was wrong in 70s they were making what ovation called 2nds only you didn't get that "2nd" price on Martins.I think all 70s Martins had to be worked on before they made the 80s.Anyways I was always told by Martin players that the70s were rough time for Martin
@@robertflagg2461 This is false. All D18 since 2012 are scalloped bracing.
The 52 for now. I want to hear the new one a few years from now when it's opened up a little more.
So do we!
The interesting part, each guitar sounded better in the other player’s hands. Player on left sounded better on the 52, player on right sounded better on the new one. The newer guitar sounded better on the right. Personally, I like forward shifted guitars better than rear braced non-scalloped. I have a 1944 D-18 that has scalloped bracing that I think sounds better than either one, but it’s not forward shifted. I have a 2018 D-41 however with forward shifted scalloped that I think is the best sounding guitar I have ever played. I think I would prefer a D-18 that is also forward shifted, scalloped D-18 of any age.
I know the pre-war Martins are the holy grails, but 50s Martins hold a special place in my heart.
I've got a buddy with a 50s D18 and it's light as feather. I almost threw it on accident just by picking it up.
Airy but warm. You feel the guitar's heartbeat when you're playing it.
New 18s are...well new. They're thuddy, heavy, less crisp sounding. Not a big fan of new D18s myself. Maybe they'll age well though, time will tell.
I'm guessing they will! I've got no clue what a 50's (or pre-war for that matter) '18 sounded like when it was first strung up.
@@thefellowshipofacoustics True. Nor do I!
Being sound to each a subjective thing. I really enjoyed this The 1952 had a better quality and more open sound. The new D-18 sounds great while not having that openess yet. I know it will come in. Just a bit of time and playing will get there. They are Martins and made to be played!!
Exactly Keith! Thanks for sharing :)
Prefer the new. Bracing helps. And I prefer the D18 over the D28. Never thought the tone wood used for the bcak/sides would make a difference. Mahogany over Indian rosewood.
There is a HUGE sound difference between mahogany and rosewood back and side guitars !!!
It’s interesting though. I saw a study done that tested players of various skill levels playing a bunch of different guitars. Their ability to discern the differences between tone woods on the back and sides was nearly zero.
IMO the best middle ground for non-collector players is any of the high end Martin "copies" (or their own versions) that cost 50% more than the new D-18, and and a fraction of a good '52. There are old guitars that sound absolutely magical, but if you chose two at random the new "vintage" will possibly sound better, almost certainly play better, and definitely be more durable.
I lived in Belgium for 3 yrs, it would have been fun to have gone up there to see your guitars.
We're still here! ;)
@@thefellowshipofacoustics But I am not still there :-( I am back in the USA
I was lucky to visit NL many times and it is one of the most beautiful countries I ever visited. I was absolutely impressed that every Dutch person I met spoke English as well as I do.
@@dodgermartin4895 Can't help it, they teach it at school! Thanks
Idk, the older guitars just open up and there's a midrange thing that happens I can't explain but I hear it. The new one is more "focused" sounding, but the '52 has a midrange punch and resonance, to me
Nice playing, I actually prefer the new one in this case
Came for the comparison, but mostly just loved the guitar playing. Great playing guys.
Great twin guitar flatpicking - on two D-18s, perfect!
The newer D-18 has a more rounded sound. However, both are Martins and Martin always rules!
and that my dear old friends is the sound of a Martin Guitar...
The 52 has a better tone in the player on the left hand. The high strings really ring on the 52 . But you would expect that with age. The new one sounds the best for the short time it's been played and will sound better with time and exposure.
Both good but I prefer the older one. It has an earthy, fuller wood tone to it.
Both are amazing though!
The Tennessee Waltz…I’m 67 years old and one of my first songs I learned on guitar was that ole Tennessee Waltz lol
Haha what a great song to start off with Dale! Thanks for sharing ;)
@@thefellowshipofacoustics I forgot to say I use to play it on my 1937 Martin 0-17 that I bought for $20 back in 1968
@@bastardsonofretkillr Holy cow what a steal! You couldn't get a better guitar for the money
@@thefellowshipofacoustics I know when I bought it I didn’t know what I had
I just down loaded a photo of my 1937 MARTIN 0-17 Adirondack bracing and solid Mahogany top back and side Brazilian rosewood bridge and Fingerboard that’s me 1973 playing the Martin 0-17
Amazing play and review. It is pretty different even through my cheap earphones. I wanna get a vintage Martin if I could get a lottary. Anyway I am pretty satified with my new Martin.
I like the bassiness and bominess of the new one better.
Would love to see martin do a d18 forward shifted non scalloped standard.
the d18 1939 authentic would be closer with the rear shift at least in specs but still great to hear them
True indeed! But we thought the comparison would be cool with a standard, as the '52 was standard at the time as well.
@@thefellowshipofacoustics It is a very cool vid regardless....keep it up
Y'all be doin' some pickin' in the Netherlands...... thanks for the comparison.
We sure try to! Thanks for watching ;)
I will take the 1952 ! I have a '53 00-18G I absolutely love !
The Martin D-18s made today (2023) are also have scalloped bracing.
"Old guys" like us know how to ring the bells....😚
Cool enjoyed the music thanks for sharing
forward shifted scalloped bracing is the way to go. The new sounds incredibly better...woodier tone and more articulation.
You can't put brakes on progress!
Pains me to say it as I own a 40 year old Martin but I preferred the new one
the 52, if that 52 forward gonna be monster
I'm surprised how close they are in sound. The 52 sounds more open and detailed....now. Once the new one breaks in and opens up it should sound just as good or better than the 52.
Forgot to mention the long saddle on the 52....that makes a rather big difference in sound as well when compared to a modern short saddle.
Both guitars sounded good in there own way, the new one has a lot of chime to it, could be because it's new and needs time for the top to open up and part of it could be the strings. The older one has better note separation and seems like it's coming in to it's own.when they do comparison like this they should both be fitted with the same kind of strings.
Great picking and sounds, I can't tell if the 52' is that much mellower sounding or if maybe the strings are a bit old?
Best thing is they're both having fun!
Exactly :)
Hard to compare Martin against Martin. When you do you have to put the same stri gs on both use the same pick and not have one with scalloped bracing .they have to be the same and set up the same.any minor adjustments o. An acoustic will get you a whole new sound most of the time.put your strings a little higher and you will get more volume,On. A Martin you will anyway and a harder pick 1m you'll get volume.apick is alot of sound and every single pick will make your guitar sound different. So these comparisons are not always true.its pretty much a fact that older wood sounds better but if you using wrong pick you could end up sounding like an ovation with that nice fiberglass tone that they have that must be good for something..plastic guitars are ok,but....
Would have been nice if both mics were at the same level. Both sound good though, and nice playing!! So is there a 2 for one sale comin up??
The 1952 guitar for sure! More character and steady definition. The newer model seems to have a crisper tone which is sustained longer. But for me? The 1952 vintage Martin.
Proof a great guitar gets better with time”
Older Martin to my wood ears. Deeper. Richer.
Vintage all the way. Beautiful sounding and looking guitar but I betcha it’s A LOT more than the new one 🤣 The 52 projects way more to my old ears anyway.
Definitely the old fella for me, but I wouldn’t be disappointed with any of them.
I'm afraid we're gonna have to keep Adrian, but you can take the guitar!
The 1952 wins, hands down no question.
Pretty obvious the old one's strings ring out where the new one is more of a combined sound.
I went back and forth 6 times while the fellow on the left played each guitar. The vintage won the race by a length and a half, imo.
New one HONKS in the midrange. In the best way.
The new one is good, but it’s one dimensional, whereas the vintage one has that dry complex tone that an old Martin does so well. I tried many, and went with a ‘51. Outstanding.
Adrian please do a video tutorial about the stuff you start playing at 3:21.... Dank u wel!
We will definitely ask Adrian to do so if he has the opportunity!
the '52 should have a rosewood fretboard. not ebony. I believe it was '47 when Martin went from ebony to rosewood on the D-18.
The vintage guitar wins totally in all areas. But,...........I bet if you play 20 new guitars, at least one will play "substantially as good" as the vintage. Wood has a tremendous acoustic properties variablitiy - even wood cut from the same tree, omg. Just like winning the silicone lottery for CPU's and GPU's (for overclocking), one needs to win the cellulose lottery for an exceptional sounding acoustic guitar. The ambient environmental humidity has a large role to play in how well a guitar "ages". As well as use. I've heard of people putting their guitars in front of their stereo speakers to "break in" their acoustic guitars. I personally don't know how effecitve this practice is. But you can teach your guitar how to play different types of music this way. After playing orchestra music for so long, my guitar turned into a trans violin. OMG. She's now dressed with a very ornate bow. She's very jealous of Jimmy Page's Telecaster.
Great guitars and great playing. Can someone please tell me what song is being played @3:20?
So much better
damnnnnnnnn the new one was right there
I'll take whichever one you don't want...
Then you'll end up with empty hands I'm afraid.
Is it the age itself (wood drying out etc) or the amount of playing time that changes the sound in an older guitar? Or both?
Absolutely both!
The 52 has a soul.
Did you guys have the same thickness of picks the guy on the left the sound is more Basse maybe it's just me both guitar's sound great
Both same picks!
The old one sounds muddy... But it also sounds like an Old Bob Dylan record. The new one has an objectively better sound and more clarity, but the old one has more character
The new one sounds just a bit muffled. Could it be the strings? Coated on the new one perhaps?
A Ibanez Concord 671 from 1975 ..is that vintage ....bought when i was 20..... In super condition...
Hmmm officialy it would be classified as vintage :)
From Seattle, United States...”dankuwel!”
Graag gedaan!
And from old SA boetie living in Panama... Baie dankie - ek verkies die nuwe een
from NYC.....screw you!!
:P
A '52 with ebony?
Probably just very dark rosewood :)
Give that new one a few years
Exactly!
Am I the only person who finds vintage guitars seem to have a personality to the tone. And they can vary from example to example. Modern guitars seem to all sound exactly the same or at least close across the board. Even if I was blind folded just listening. I could spot you the 1952 over the modern in this video. What I'm talking about is especially relevant with gibson acoustics. My vintage gibsons have personality and richness. Every modern gibson I pick up either sounds muffled/ dead like it needs 20 years to open up or exactly the same as one another example to example. I assume this is done on purpose for sales and manufacturing. But it seems to loose it's soul to me.
We totally agree with you! Guitars do mature and develop their own unique character. With older age it only gets better 😃
New one will grow up one day 😁
Exactly! I'm so curious to what new D18's, especially the re-imagined line, will sound like in 50+ years.
The new one is clangy and boomy... I prefer the old one in the hands of the man on the left. It is the opposite for the man on the right..
Can’t tell through TH-cam any difference very much at all (which is testament to Martin consistency of manufacturing over all that time).
But yes I am quite sure in real life the older one will sound better, as the wood ages the guitar changes a little. That’s why it’s an investment for the grand kids. Leave Um a Rolex and a Martin and they probably have a safer investment than your house. Lol
Haha perhaps Craig, it's tough to say! Only time will tell ;)
Hey, they’re Martins! What’s not to like!
The new one sounds great but, the 52 is so much dryer sounding.
The wood dries up with ageing
The 1952 model sounds warmer, whereas the new model sounds brighter, at least to me. I don't think one necessarily sounds better than the other, they sound different but good in their own ways.
Could I ask what strings you are using? Great comparison
Thanks! We used these: www.tfoa.eu/en/martin-ma540fx-light-12-54-tommys-choice.html
the new one is warmer, the old one is purer. that could change with a different position in the room :) do another one where you don't introduce which is which in the audio and see if we can hear the difference without looking. ears are funny that way...
1:50 2:35
The new sounded one dimensional compared to the vintage. A more apt comparison would be a war time or pre war D-18 to a new one. I promise you, the new one would not fare well.
I wanted one of those but settled for the new one as I didn’t have the extra 30 grand on me. 😂
Yeah well considering they're 30+ grand it better win. Ffs.
What strings (brand/gauge/type) were used on each here? Same age of strings?
Yessir! Both new Martin 0.12 SP's ;)
Would have been interesting to hear them with medium strings (13-56). Also, the 1952 should have rosewood fingerboard/bridge since that change was made around 1947.
1:47 2:34
3:21 4:23