Does a guitar´s tone and sound improve with age?

[TBman]

Originally Posted by kizz

Our ears don't, so how would we know ?

I was going to post something similar.

My Martin, which I have had for almost 20 years, sounds very good to my old ears. It was good when I first got it too

I do know that my playing skills peaked a few years ago and are now going in the toilet, so there's that...

[Charlie Bernstein]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

I seem to be in the minority here on the AGF, but I believe a guitar sounds its best during it's first few years. After a number of years, maybe 20-30 or so, the guitar tends to lose bass and emphasize the treble frequencies. . . .

Hm. Might be true sometimes. Don't know how they sounded new, but my '92 and '76 dreads have tons of bass. Likewise the '72 dread I sold a few years ago.

[Charlie Bernstein]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

I seem to be in the minority here on the AGF, but I believe a guitar sounds its best during it's first few years. After a number of years, maybe 20-30 or so, the guitar tends to lose bass and emphasize the treble frequencies. . . .

Hm. Might be true sometimes. Don't know how they sounded new, but my '92 and '76 dreads have tons of bass. Likewise the '72 dread I sold a few years ago.

So I think the answer to Rov's question is: It depends.

[Russ C]

I think I get what Glennwillow is saying but it could be that clarity has increased .. “dryness”, “stiffness”, “responsiveness” - words like that.
..edit, “clarity” may not be as meaningful as I intended. I hear it as a shift in mids with possibly some of the highs we’re talking about. Some mid frequencies (and their prominence) muddy the mix, another will provide edge and definition to notes.
Sure is hard describing tone isn’t it.

[Big Band Guitar]

I believe the "sound" changes very little with age.

I believe sound changes with the player subconsciously calibrating with the instrument, how it is held playing position cowboy or classical, how tight against the body, picking position, fretting grip. All tend to creep into our subconscious and make our own sound.

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by LAPlayer

I'm not saying you're wrong but, how would you reconcile that with the amazing sound from 80+ year-old Martins. Stradivaris...?

What sounds best or even good is all a matter of opinion. There are plenty of people who like bright guitars. Look at the success of Taylor over the years. Bluegrassers like bright guitars because they cut through all the clutter.

The threads on the AGF that go well back in years show that for the collectors who were really into old guitars, Martin and Gibson from the 30s and 40s in particular, valued the old guitars because of increased treble and clarity and their ability to cut through a clutter of sound in Bluegrass situations.

I am hearing the same thing. The difference is subtle, but the change is most certainly there.

Consider these aging devices like the Tonerite or the Tone Traveler. I have used both of these devices and after using them for considerable time I have found that they tend to emphasize the trebles and reduce bass. So here is an artificial aging device, said to do what happens naturally over time, and what do they do? They emphasize the trebles.

Regarding the Stradivaris, that, too, is a matter of opinion. Some recent blind tests showed that many preferred the sound of more modern violins over the Stradivaris. Sometimes people are more influenced by their head and what they expect than by their ears. And again, many people love hearing more upper frequencies from their guitars. They see this as a good thing.

- Glenn

[kizz]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

What sounds best or even good is all a matter of opinion. There are plenty of people who like bright guitars. Look at the success of Taylor over the years. Bluegrassers like bright guitars because they cut through all the clutter.

The threads on the AGF that go well back in years show that for the collectors who were really into old guitars, Martin and Gibson from the 30s and 40s in particular, valued the old guitars because of increased treble and clarity and their ability to cut through a clutter of sound in Bluegrass situations.

I am hearing the same thing. The difference is subtle, but the change is most certainly there.

Consider these aging devices like the Tonerite or the Tone Traveler. I have used both of these devices and after using them for considerable time I have found that they tend to emphasize the trebles and reduce bass. So here is an artificial aging device, said to do what happens naturally over time, and what do they do? They emphasize the trebles.

Regarding the Stradivaris, that, too, is a matter of opinion. Some recent blind tests showed that many preferred the sound of more modern violins over the Stradivaris. Sometimes people are more influenced by their head and what they expect than by their ears. And again, many people love hearing more upper frequencies from their guitars. They see this as a good thing.

- Glenn

Maybe there is not really a reduction of bass, but more of a development of midrange and treble, meaning that the guitar has become more balanced over the entire spectrum and that we therefore hear it as less bass because the midrange and treble area have become more emphasized. The same can happen with changes in humidity from day to day, where we suddenly find that the guitar has lost bass and sounds brighter.

[Mr. Jelly]

Sound is a funny perception. I was forced to not play my guitars for months because of a physical hand issue. When I could start playing them, they didn't sound the same. I don't believe for a second the guitars changed as I'm confident it was the perception in my hearing them. My old perception of their sound has returned though.

[abn556]

If there was no perceived improvement in tone due to aging, would corporations like Martin, Gibson and others invest in research to establish what exactly causes these changes? Keep in mind they then have to make changes in their production processes to add steps to address this if they find a solution - which they feel they did. I don’t think would not have gone to all this trouble if there was no upside. It costs real money to do R&D and change production. Thermally aged tops with hand rubbed finishes take a more time than just spraying a finish on Sitka.

The proof of design is in the A/B testing of the same model with the standard top vs the thermally aged top. Go to your local high end acoustic shop and try them for yourself. If you don’t agree, then don’t buy one. I am going to do it today at Fullers. I will play J-185 and Hummingbird Custom Shop models with thermally aged tops vs models with standard tops and see for myself. I’ll then vote with my wallet.

[gurroz]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

When people lose their hearing, they almost always lose it in the higher frequencies, not in the bass frequencies.

- Glenn

My wife suffers from loss of low tones. It's frustrating because hearing aides address high tones and do nothing for low tones.

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by abn556

If there was no perceived improvement in tone due to aging, would corporations like Martin, Gibson and others invest in research to establish what exactly causes these changes? Keep in mind they then have to make changes in their production processes to add steps to address this if they find a solution - which they feel they did. I don’t think would not have gone to all this trouble if there was no upside. It costs real money to do R&D and change production. Thermally aged tops with hand rubbed finishes take a more time than just spraying a finish on Sitka.

The proof of design is in the A/B testing of the same model with the standard top vs the thermally aged top. Go to your local high end acoustic shop and try them for yourself. If you don’t agree, then don’t buy one. I am going to do it today at Fullers. I will play J-185 and Hummingbird Custom Shop models with thermally aged tops vs models with standard tops and see for myself. I’ll then vote with my wallet.

Manufacturers do things that sell instruments, not necessarily because they are better.

Some people want new guitars that look like they are 50 years old and road worn. Some people want guitars that are artificially aged so that they sound somehow drier and older.

I have tried guitars with baked or torrefied tops and found them lacking bass compared to the versions that are not baked or torrefied. So I have never bought this concept, but yes, some do.

I would never buy a new but artificially aged and beat up guitar.

- Glenn

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by kizz

Maybe there is not really a reduction of bass, but more of a development of midrange and treble, meaning that the guitar has become more balanced over the entire spectrum and that we therefore hear it as less bass because the midrange and treble area have become more emphasized. The same can happen with changes in humidity from day to day, where we suddenly find that the guitar has lost bass and sounds brighter.

It's possible that a reduction on bass could sound like more treble to me. Or, maybe the guitars are really getting more treble -- who knows.

I have never heard any day-to-day changes in guitar tone due to humidity changes. People on the AGF talk about this, but for me, that does not happen.

I have been a recording enthusiast since I was 16, so I have a ton of recordings of any of my guitars. Those recordings give me some basis for my opinion.

- Glenn

[TheGITM]

This is a Universal Truth:

Everything improves with age...

...unless it doesn't.

[koolimy]

Originally Posted by abn556

If there was no perceived improvement in tone due to aging, would corporations like Martin, Gibson and others invest in research to establish what exactly causes these changes? Keep in mind they then have to make changes in their production processes to add steps to address this if they find a solution - which they feel they did. I donÂ’t think would not have gone to all this trouble if there was no upside. It costs real money to do R&D and change production. Thermally aged tops with hand rubbed finishes take a more time than just spraying a finish on Sitka.

The proof of design is in the A/B testing of the same model with the standard top vs the thermally aged top. Go to your local high end acoustic shop and try them for yourself. If you donÂ’t agree, then donÂ’t buy one. I am going to do it today at Fullers. I will play J-185 and Hummingbird Custom Shop models with thermally aged tops vs models with standard tops and see for myself. IÂ’ll then vote with my wallet.

I think the thing is, if you build or manufacture guitars, you KNOW that guitars change in sound. Usually the most change happens right after the guitar is strung up, and it can go on for a few weeks. I watched a youtube video asking boutique builders, luthiers, and factory reps a bunch of questions, and basically everybody said that guitars change with age. Whether it is an improvement is a question, but change they do.

I believe the reason why guitars "improve" is because most people have factory guitars, that are overbuilt. So as guitars become looser with age, it usually manifests as the guitar becoming warmer, bassier, more responsive, etc., which people generally like. If a guitar is lightly built from the getgo, I definitely think that the change can be negative.

[koolimy]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

It's possible that a reduction on bass could sound like more treble to me. Or, maybe the guitars are really getting more treble -- who knows.

I have never heard any day-to-day changes in guitar tone due to humidity changes. People on the AGF talk about this, but for me, that does not happen.

I have been a recording enthusiast since I was 16, so I have a ton of recordings of any of my guitars. Those recordings give me some basis for my opinion.

- Glenn

This is not directly related to your comment, but aren't most of your guitars extremely responsive and lightly built? I've seen at least 3 people that have mentioned the trebles on their guitar increasing (or losing bass, or gaining clarity, etc.), and all of them seem to have guitars that were already very good and responsive. I also experienced the trebles increasing with one of my guitars, but that was a classical so it was a net positive.

So it seems like guitars can definitely get worse with age, and it seems more likely to happen the better the guitar is right now. I still don't understand how it works, but Mr. Carruth mentioned how the main sound producing mode can affect frequencies up to 1000 hz, which is B5, basically the end of the fretboard on the high E string.