Old Wood Ancient Myths

Are the superior sonics commonly attributed to vintage electric guitars a happy consequence of the aging process, or did they always sound that way?

Old Chestnut

I believe there are two key issues with some degree of crossover. Firstly, must you have vintage wood and, by extension, vintage guitars to achieve authentic vintage tone? Secondly, do electric guitars improve with age?

Les Paul ‘conversions’ are particularly interesting because they’re a unique instance of major structural alterations and total refinishes being deemed acceptable. In effect, they test the old wood hypothesis to destruction... sometimes literally.

In recent times, countless 50s Les Paul Goldtops have been converted into faux Bursts. Owning a real Burst is sheer fantasy for most of us, but a 54 - 56 Goldtop is a couple of PAFs and maybe a bridge away from being effectively the same guitar. Some successful businesses are predicated on old wood thinking and Les Paul conversions make sense financially, and but can the same be said from a playing perspective?

A friend and I recently tested this with his 53/59 conversion loaded with vintage hardware and a set of highly rated PAF replicas. The conversion sounded a bit flat and nowhere near as good as his Collector’s Choice Les Paul loaded with a vintage hardware and a set of genuine PAFs.

Unplugged it was different story, because the conversion had a richer resonance and noticeably longer sustain. But as much as I appreciate the unplugged tone of a fine Les Paul, I think most will agree that they sound better plugged in.

The PAFs were transferred into the conversion and it came to life. It also sounded better than the Collectors Choice because the PAFs allowed its acoustic qualities to come through. This establishes two things. The wood cannot be disregarded entirely, but a recently manufactured Burst repro with genuine vintage PAFs can sound better than a genuine 50s Les Paul with repro pickups.

I have conducted similar tests using a couple of original 54 Goldtops and a Greco Goldtop conversion loaded with a set of 53 P90s and a 50s bridge. I have even compared a Fender Custom Shop Stratocaster with a vintage bridge and a fully loaded vintage pickguard against an original 63 Strat and installed genuine PAFs in an 81 Greco.

Consistent results lead to clear conclusions. Providing the wood is of the correct type and a similar weight, newer electric guitars equipped with vintage pickups and hardware can often sound indistinguishable from entirely original old ones. They can also sound superior to vintage guitars that have lost their original pickups and hardware.

Age Concerns

On rare occasions I have encountered vintage guitars that are undeniably on a higher level. It might seem plausible to attribute such great tone to the seasoning effects of age, but could that actually be a naïve and lazy assumption.

YouTube vintage guitar stars Doug and Pat make this telling point - “we might subscribe to the tonal differences being down to the quality of the wood, but not the age of the wood”. It’s a fine but crucial distinction.

There are obvious differences between lightweight ‘swamp’ ash and heavy northern ‘baseball bat’ ash, but nobody talks about the specific Louisiana bayou where Fender’s timber suppliers sourced their lumber back in the 50s. Even less attention is given to alder, and when tonewoods are discussed in relation to Fenders, weight is considered to be more important than age.

Lightweight ash and alder body blanks are still widely available, so vintage Fender enthusiasts tend to focus their attention on pickups and, to a lesser extent, hardware. This strikes me as sensible, so long as opinions remain unswayed by marketing terms that reference Texas.

While the informed vintage Gretsch enthusiast may draw some distinction between 3-ply and 5-ply bodies, and various bracing methods, nobody has ever claimed there’s such thing as ‘tone ply’. Fortunately, vintage Gretsch pickups remain relatively affordable, and some of the Custom Shop guitars being produced under Stephen Stern’s guidance are right up there with anything Gretsch has ever produced.

The vintage wood cult centres on Gibsons more than any other manufacturer. In fact, it’s almost exclusive to solidbodies of the 1950s rather than semis and 1960s solidbodies. Some of the wood Gibson was using during that era has become almost unattainable and, as a result, fetishized.

Again, the focus is specific. Maple, if it is considered at all, is revered mostly for its appearance. Brazilian rosewood fingerboards have been off the menu since the 60s, but any piece of wood that has been wrapped in plastic, glued onto a steel reinforced substrate and had 22 pieces of metal hammered into it, surely cannot exert that much tonal influence. When it comes to Les Pauls, it’s all about the mahogany.

Marvellous Mahogany

Not all mahogany is created equal, and it seems that Gibson used various types. We have observed Burst weights from 8lbs to 10lbs, and aficionado Cosmo Verrico has noted that the colour varies. He associates the best tonal qualities with a specific ‘earthy red’ appearance.

He also suggests, “sometimes the colour looks more gold and those don’t sound as good. The earlier P90 Goldtops tend to have the gold colour mahogany, and even if you stick a couple of PAFs on them, they still don’t come up to it.” If that’s true, then it’s caveat emptor when it comes to Burst conversions.

Much of the ‘mahogany’ used in modern guitars comes from Africa, and some don’t regard it as ‘true mahogany’. During the 1950s, Gibson used wood from the American continent, and this could have been Cuban, Honduras or Brazilian mahogany - varieties that tend to be softer and lighter.

It has been suggested that Gibson’s mahogany was ‘old growth’ and was dried out slowly over decades rather than dried in a kiln. Given the quantities of wood that Gibson must have been using, that seems implausible, but a lack of consensus suggests that nobody knows for sure. Perhaps the main beneficiaries of this pseudo-science, mythologizing and magical thinking are those who have invested significant sums in vintage Gibsons.

Aging Wood

It’s often suggested that old wood dries out, but the seasoning and drying processes are designed to reduce water content but not eliminate it. Wood tends to reach an equilibrium with its surrounding environment by continually absorbing and releasing moisture.

Although it may be possible to debunk the ‘dried out’ theory, it has been shown that other changes do occur within the wood over time. Cut timber contains pitches, sugars and oils that eventually oxidise, evaporate and mineralise. Lignin binds the fibres and it hardens, like glue. The upshot is that timber gradually becomes lighter, stiffer and quicker to respond - all of which is good for tone.

Under normal circumstances, this process would take decades for a chunky electric guitar body and may be inhibited by the finish. Assuming those bodies are still aging, then vintage guitars should still be sounding better with every passing year. I can’t honestly say I’ve noticed that.

The structural changes are interesting and the process can be accelerated by baking the wood in an oxygen free environment - a process known as torrefaction or roasting. I have played acoustics and electrics made with timber treated in this way and the results can be extremely impressive. Roasted maple has become commonplace, and I’m starting to see roasted pine and mahogany too.

If you don’t have the money for a vintage guitar, or the patience to wait half a century for your guitar to start sounding good, the obvious solution is to buy a guitar made from reclaimed timber. Several noted guitar makers have been doing this for a while.

For example, Novo guitars are made from roasted and reclaimed timber, and we have never encountered structurally similar guitars with more natural resonance. I have also played some recently made but very high end Les Paul replicas made from very old wood that sound like they’re decades old.

Final Cut

There is some basis for suggesting that 50s and early 60s electric guitars remain largely unsurpassed. I’d suggest comfortable weight, sublime neck profiles, superior hardware and pickups that have never been bettered. The thrill of playing a rock n’ roll artefact cannot be dismissed either. I’d accept that correct wood of the appropriate weight is important too, but it’s not the most crucial factor. The notion that electric guitar tone improves with age is entirely different, and I’m unconvinced it stacks up.

When you listen to great guitar tones on landmark recordings, remember those guitars were barely second hand, let alone vintage. Believing in the maturation theory means accepting that all those Gibsons and Fenders from the 1970s eventually started to sound incredible. Spoiler alert... they didn’t.

More tellingly, if all those pre-1965 guitars have continued to improve, like fine wine or single malt whiskies, then those players, who still tour and record with them should sound noticeably better than their heroes did back in the day.

I doubt that anybody would seriously suggest they do, in which case I’ll leave you with this question. If today’s vintage guitar wielding virtuosos aren’t producing the most awesome guitar tones ever heard, does that mean that their priceless instruments stopped improving a while back? Or could they actually be getting worse? Time will tell... or maybe not.