Why Are Guitar Players Obsessed With Vintage Gear?

My take? It's another way people make themselves feel good. I do it. Just not with crazy, overpriced, vintage gear. I have few nice things, and not afraid to admit that part of it is show.
It can also be a place to park some investment money, if not for your own retirement, for your kids. And while it's appreciating in value, it can hang on your wall, or be on display in your man-cave, for friends to marvel at.
Personally, I try to be practical with spending money, just not when it comes to guitars or trucks. Those are my 2, don't-care-if-it's-more-than-I-need, it's-what-I-want, indulgences. Even the Axe Fx III might be in that category...
If I am being totally honest, if $100,000 was like no big deal to me I am guessing I would have a few very old Tele's and Strats. So I know what your saying..................I play and record in my Home studio for the most part. But I still have a bunch of guitars, at present an FM3 and FM9 and quite a bit of equipment that just sits.
 
Same goes for vintage vehicles. Its' all a matter of taste and who really cares? For example a 1965 Mustang Coupe went for $1200 back in the day and now goes for more than $20k. Instruments, art, vehicles, etc, all up to the collector to what they want to pay. For some, it's sentimental.

By the way, here's my 65 which I got because it's my birth year
I get what you're saying, but there is a difference. IF you could buy a 65 mustang with modern engine, brakes, etc. I don't think there would be very many people buying a vintage one. A Vintage and new version of a guitar are virtually identical. Props to Dodge as the Challenger is probably the closest that any car company has come to doing it.
 
If I am being totally honest, if $100,000 was like no big deal to me I am guessing I would have a few very old Tele's and Strats. So I know what your saying..................I play and record in my Home studio for the most part. But I still have a bunch of guitars, at present an FM3 and FM9 and quite a bit of equipment that just sits.
Yeah, I think anyone in a first-world country is guilty of it, to some degree or another. Most of us have things that go beyond what we need, and we're willing to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
I get what you're saying, but there is a difference. IF you could buy a 65 mustang with modern engine, brakes, etc. I don't think there would be very many people buying a vintage one. A Vintage and new version of a guitar are virtually identical. Props to Dodge as the Challenger is probably the closest that any car company has come to doing it.
Nah, I can't agree with that. The appeal of vintage is in it having its originality. If you upgraded a vintage car with new components, its desirability would be gone. A vintage piece, any item, is much more sought-after the closer to original it is. It's not about practicality, or functionality. Mostly.
 
Nah, I can't agree with that. The appeal of vintage is in it having its originality. If you upgraded a vintage car with new components, its desirability would be gone. A vintage piece, any item, is much more sought-after the closer to original it is. It's not about practicality, or functionality. Mostly.
You don't dig restomods? They used to have low value, but have quickly increased as people realized they can have their cake and eat it too.
 
Nah, I can't agree with that. The appeal of vintage is in it having its originality. If you upgraded a vintage car with new components, its desirability would be gone. A vintage piece, any item, is much more sought-after the closer to original it is. It's not about practicality, or functionality. Mostly.
There's markets for both really. Those original numbers matching cars command the most money in general. Then there's guys like me that like the look but would much rather have a mustang II front end for better handling and a modern drive train that's fuel injected with 3x the ponies.
🤘😜
 
You don't dig restomods? They used to have low value, but have quickly increased as people realized they can have their cake and eat it too.
No, that's not exactly what I'm saying. I just believe that if you have 2 identical vintage items, one with modern upgrades, the all-original one will be more valuable. Which could, I suppose, mean that it's actually in less demand, but that's because there's a lot less people able to afford the original ones.
I think maybe it's a matter of 2 different markets...?
 
It's all about mojo and emotional connection to objects. I've never craved a vintage guitar or amp, but I do think on some weird ethereal level, picking up an old guitar does somewhat channel all the "experience" that the instrument has. I've noticed this especially with orchestral string players. Many have said it before, it could mean nothing and there may be no measurable difference, but if the instrument makes you feel good you'll play differently.

I have an old airplane (she's older than me and she's got around a bit more than I have...). The electronics have all been upgraded to state-of-the art and I do have to kind of admit that the upgrades killed off a little bit of the mojo. But my old airplane still makes me feel different than when I fly new state-of-the-art equipment. I think one reason is I learned to fly in old crappy airplanes so it takes me back to a great time in my youth. I don't know. It's just mojo.
 
Vintage in general doesn't appeal to me, mainly due to the cost, and you can get so much more modern features for your money with new stuff.
But one reason that would appeal to me owning an item like that, is if it came with some sort of historical outline. To me, the people that owned it before me, what they did, how it was used, etc., would be super cool.
As an example, I've worked on really old houses. One in particular had a "pedigree" of past owners. I found old pictures in the local library when trying to determine what the original gutters were, so they could be replaced properly. On another job, the owner had the original real blueprints (meaning, in blue), and later sets showing 2 additions/renovations. Now that's cool stuff to me. I like history.
 
I just believe that if you have 2 identical vintage items, one with modern upgrades, the all-original one will be more valuable.

Do you feel in that context that "more valuable" is also synonymous with "less functional/usable?"

Yeah, it is worth considerably more, but must be garaged or stored in a climate controlled environment,
and becomes more akin to a Museum piece that only sees the road or the stage infrequently at best.
 
Some of those things are around because they DO sound better. I played an old Super, and damn, it was glorious.

That being said, just because it has a '50's or '60's number doesn't mean it sounds better, but some would like to believe it across the board. But no doubt that old wood just sounds better in many cases.

I've played a '59 that sounded good, but not great. I've played a vintage Strat (don't remember the year...alcohol may have been involved,) it sounded great. But to my ear, my PRS Silver Sky would have blown it out of the water for overall tone and versatility.

It does make folks feel good to buy something that may be from their era, or predates them. More power to them.

R
 
If I could redo one material thing in my life I would buy up every mid to late 60s muscle car I
could get my hands on, and also all of the Gibsons, Marshalls, and Fenders that people
were literally giving away in the pursuit of pointy guitars with locking trems and digital
rack gear to go with it in the mid 80's to early 90s.

Cherry muscle cars for less than $2k was the norm.... same with $300 and $400 Les Pauls
and Plexis. It was an insane, once in a lifetime sort of thing when everyone lost their collective
minds for the new, shiny things. ;)
 
Wonder if anyone will covet my axe III and modern guitars in 70 years when they are “vintage” ?

Nope. In time, guitars will be 'all in one'. You'll be able to choose your software and all things will run out of the 'cloud'. (Which is a small word for how it will be in 70 years...everything will run on the grid.)
 
Vintage features can be really stupid and detrimental. e.g.: I've just flattened the silly staggered poles of a pickup that I've bought (even though is a new model, it is only available in vintage staggered mode) with the soft beat of a hammer, as Darrell explains at this video.

 
Last edited:
I like some of the stories and history behind certain pieces of gear but also don't get obsessed thinking that old stuff is better than new.
If you have the money and want a piece of history, go for it ;)
But damn, that new Suhr sure is niiice.
 
Last edited:
Because people say it’s better than current obtainable stuff, and guitar players always lust after what they can’t have, thinking it’s the key to magical tone and amazing chops....

After all, most famous guys with that really cool gear sound pretty good, so must be the gear right ?
The irony is that to the famous guys it was usually a stepping tone in their quest for tone. So we may like their classic tones on their early albums, they obviously prefer the gear they have today. Unless you're as anal as The Edge, who thinks that every song he plays today should have the tone that it was on the original album and thus always tours with a rack bigger then a pro studio.

Overall the vintage craze started to emerge in the 90's, which was the era in which rock started to die IMHO. When it became backwards looking and guitar players became obsessed with imitating the classic tones of their heroes instead of finding their own. Or maybe it was because the boomers had their kids leave the house and the disposable cash to finally get the same gear as their heroes as when they were young? The vintage market in most products after all is often dominated by middle aged to older men with lots of disposable income.

I'm not surprised that most people here profess not to be interested in vintage gear. After all, we're into modelers. Which is usually anathema in the vintage guitar gear market.
 
Back
Top Bottom