Vintage strats

[Sifu Ben]

i like it a lot. The switches and extra screws are annoying, but lets be honest... i bet a lot of us here have done worse to our own gear over the years and this guitar wasnt always the highly sought after thing it is now.

the vintage vs new thing is difficult to quantify...  all else being equal there still always seems to be some extra mojo that comes with age, and it is not just psychological

dont forget, although they did have more fantastic timber in the good old days we still have fantastic timber available now - just less of it.  carefull material selection by the builder should get past that as an issue.  obvioulsy us small builders are better able to do that than a large factory is

wood definately changes structure as it ages.  you can see it with acoustics and classicals as the tops eventually start to seem translucent or thinner, they actually become more brittle as well.  this process is obviously slower with 1 3/4"+ of wood sealed with a lacquer finish  but there is no denying it happens.  do i beleive it explains the often reported better tone of vintage instruments... hell no!  give it a few hundred years then maybe

wood settles into being guitars.. this much is true.  again referring to an acoustic guitar you can clearly hear it change over the first few months of playing as it gets used to being a guitar and everything settles in.  some builders help this process along by injecting sound

alnico magnets also age but again very slow process and i cant see it being an issue without a knock to discharge them

so yeah... mojo!!!

This is what I don't get with vintage Fenders though. They were made by unskilled labour out of any old wood that was available. I can see it with vintage Gibsons however, as they were made by skilled luthiers out of woods that are now virtually extinct.
 I'm sure much of it is snake oil however, and the market is driven by collectors not players, so it's kinda like any other antique.

[38thBeatle]

I have played old Fenders both good and bad. I think there is no doubt that they can be  a good investment but I like my guitars to earn their keep and I cannot imagine taking a guitar that had cost me that much to the Lampshade and Salad Bowl for a gig.

[PhilKing]

As an owner of 3 vintage strats, I should be happy to see the price going up, but to tell you the truth they are over the top now (Les Pauls are something else because the production numbers of sunbursts made between 58 and 60 is less than 1000).  If I was thinking of getting one now, I would buy a Bravewood with a BK strat set, as they have the feel down perfectly and with BK's have the sound too.  If you want a real Fender, buy an Eric Johnson, they are the closest thing Fender is making without going over the top.  I also should add that I was able to buy in the golden age of the 80's and 90's and all 3 of mine added together (57, 61 and 63), cost about a quarter of the price of that one!

[Stevepage]

I've played a vintage 59 Strat. Well played in, completely original and had a good set up. To be honest, it sounded great and fat. But the playability wasn't the best. The resonance wasn't great either.

Now this may have just been one example of a not so great vintage strat. But, the Eric Johnson Signature, to me is a better guitar.

To me, there isn't any mystical thing about a vintage strat. You're paying for the age and the 'mojo'

[WezV]

i dont want anyone thinking i meant 'mojo' as a negative or marketing term.  mojo to me is that undefinable factor that makes something special... some have it and i would pay for it if i had the money... others just get labelled as having it because others from the same year obviously have it. 

MOJO is nothing to do with value but its the fact that some had mojo that makes everybody want ones from the same years.  although i will say a crazed nitro lacquer finish and a certain amount of twisting on a smoke tainted celluloid pickguard all account as being mojo for me - but that needs to be backed up by the kind of mojo i associate with good tone