Millennial Interest in Acoustic Guitars?

[lgherb]

First of all, I hate generational labels because i feel pretty strongly that they lead to age based discrimination in general. I strive to treat people as individuals and I don't really "see" age when I am looking into someone's eyes and having a meaningful discussion.

For the record, I was born in 1963 so I guess that makes me on the cusp of the end of the baby boomers and the start of Generation X. (I am also at the tail end of a family of 8 kids.)

It's refreshing to hear the comments of people below 30 here (and it makes me angry at the amount of debt they are forced to take on).

Anyway...overall there have been some very interesting comments and observations about things like pianos becoming less ubiquitous as society has become more mobile, backing tracks becoming more prevalent at open mike nights (I see the rise of karaoke as a contributor there), etc.,.

The interesting thing to me is the "brand blindness". This is a good thing. It is what a marketplace is all about: produce a good product at a good price and it will sell...produce overpriced instruments and the only sales will come from people who rely on brand name over quality.

We all know that major guitar makers have waxed and waned over the years (much like car companies) in terms of the products they produce. There are some mediocre at best guitars from iconic brands, great guitars from much lesser brands, and any combination in between.

One thing that people of roughly my age may want to ponder is that when with each of us that kicks the bucket, more and more "vintage" guitars that we've acquired over the years will hit the market, the market will become more saturated, and there will be downward pressure overall on pricing.

Couple this with the "new golden age' of guitar making and as people now under 30 start restructuring their debt and have more purchase headroom, they will have amazing choices of instruments at price points people my age couldn't touch.

Now all we need to do is start a discussion on how younger generations can gut the music industry and destroy the machine that produces market driven performers (as opposed to artists) that make concert going an extremely expensive event that exposes you to drivel.

[Dylan]

I am considered a millennial and obviously love acoustic guitar. I think that the passion to learn guitar is still there because it is such an accessible instrument, but because not all pop musicians play guitar as much any more, the draw to the instrument is a little less strong than in the past decades.

With that being said, millennials love Taylor guitars. I don't know why, I think they are a bit overrated, but that's my opinion.

[FrankHudson]

Originally Posted by lgherb

First of all, I hate generational labels because i feel pretty strongly that they lead to age based discrimination in general. I strive to treat people as individuals and I don't really "see" age when I am looking into someone's eyes and having a meaningful discussion.

For the record, I was born in 1963 so I guess that makes me on the cusp of the end of the baby boomers and the start of Generation X. (I am also at the tail end of a family of 8 kids.)

This is a point that is often overlooked. First of the concept of named, fixed-border generations is specious. It only gained credence because we had a large cohort born after the end of WWII, which though something of a global phenomenon, when talking about "Boomers," most folks are talking about the USA. That sharp line marking point of 1945 to start a generation has not been duplicated in my lifetime, and an ending point is arbitrary. Every labeled generation since then has been an extrapolation of some time-span used to mark the Boomers.

People born about the same time have an opportunity/propensity to have shared experiences. That's common sense. But to say that someone born in 1961 had the same set of experiences likely held in common as someone born in 1946 is silly--and I'll skip the whole question of how much location and social class and ethnic identity might change the likely set of shared experiences. And how one relates to those experiences, how it forms their character? Always the same? I don't think so.

This isn't a rant. We will go ahead and use the somewhat useful, though very fuzzy, concepts of the spirit of a time, or behaviors that become more common or less common as cultures change. I don't see who that can be avoided. I'm only saying that those generational labels we use as shortcuts to allow us to refer to that in a word or two have considerable limitations.

My son, born in the first decade of this century is sure he isn't a Millennial. I asked him what generation he is then. He says he doesn't know. I think he may have a point there. He's starting to develop his taste in music. He likes to sing, likes synthesizer sounds, and he hasn't developed any interest in guitar. But there's time yet. When I was his age I couldn't get enough of bowed strings, and I think more folks in my cohort played accordion than guitar. Those now well into their 20s may have generally "set" their musical interests, but there's always another age group coming along.

I've said this before. If the entertainment industry coalesces into spectacles with elaborate pre-recorded tracks and costume changes every other number, there will inevitably be a counter movement, and the acoustic guitar is about as far from that as one can get. One can't be assured of that though, it could be accordions.

[terken]

As a 72 year old builder and life long player my observations are that there are plenty of young people playing acoustic guitar. Mainly to accompany themselves on vocals and typically playing cheaper guitars plugged in. Lower end Taylors seem to reign supreme with the dream of owing a more expensive Taylor.

For teenage girls including my granddaughter the ukulele is huge. The future of ukes is solid.

There is a definite plaid shirt bearded Americana subculture that love the mojo of old catalogue archtops and ladder braced flat tops and whose wet dream is to own an old J50. The word Gibson on an old headstock carries some clout in this demographic.

Of course there is the almost negligible minority of Bluegrass children following in their parent's footsteps and becoming jaw dropping pickers by the time they reach puberty.

The future for luthier built and boutique small factory instruments in the 4K plus environment? Probably not so great. Same for archtops.

The good news? Prices for used high end flat tops and archtops are bound to come down.

It is definitely not the 60's when you could walk down the hall of a college dorm and in every other room some guy was beating out Tom Dooley or Greenback Dollar.

Someone earlier said you could become a good guitar player in a few months. Wow. Alternate reality?

[Edgar Poe]

I think it has a lot to do with Location, Location, Location. I think Demographics play a huge factor in who plays what.

Ed

[aknow]

One thing I've noticed, at college dorms there are less guitars. My daughter's last two dorms have included public meeting/gathering rooms. I've attended 3 events and not a single person w/ a guitar. Small sample, I know, but 35 years ago, you probably couldn't find a party off campus without a whole slew of people with their guitars.
Now they hang with their cell phone.

[aknow]

Originally Posted by FrankHudson

This is a point that is often overlooked. First of the concept of named, fixed-border generations is specious. It only gained credence because we had a large cohort born after the end of WWII, which though something of a global phenomenon, when talking about "Boomers," most folks are talking about the USA. That sharp line marking point of 1945 to start a generation has not been duplicated in my lifetime, and an ending point is arbitrary. Every labeled generation since then has been an extrapolation of some time-span used to mark the Boomers.

People born about the same time have an opportunity/propensity to have shared experiences. That's common sense. But to say that someone born in 1961 had the same set of experiences likely held in common as someone born in 1946 is silly--and I'll skip the whole question of how much location and social class and ethnic identity might change the likely set of shared experiences. And how one relates to those experiences, how it forms their character? Always the same? I don't think so.



This isn't a rant. We will go ahead and use the somewhat useful, though very fuzzy, concepts of the spirit of a time, or behaviors that become more common or less common as cultures change. I don't see who that can be avoided. I'm only saying that those generational labels we use as shortcuts to allow us to refer to that in a word or two have considerable limitations.

My son, born in the first decade of this century is sure he isn't a Millennial. I asked him what generation he is then. He says he doesn't know. I think he may have a point there. He's starting to develop his taste in music. He likes to sing, likes synthesizer sounds, and he hasn't developed any interest in guitar. But there's time yet. When I was his age I couldn't get enough of bowed strings, and I think more folks in my cohort played accordion than guitar. Those now well into their 20s may have generally "set" their musical interests, but there's always another age group coming along.

I've said this before. If the entertainment industry coalesces into spectacles with elaborate pre-recorded tracks and costume changes every other number, there will inevitably be a counter movement, and the acoustic guitar is about as far from that as one can get. One can't be assured of that though, it could be accordions.

........................

[aknow]

Originally Posted by FrankHudson

This is a point that is often overlooked. First of the concept of named, fixed-border generations is specious. It only gained credence because we had a large cohort born after the end of WWII, which though something of a global phenomenon, when talking about "Boomers," most folks are talking about the USA. That sharp line marking point of 1945 to start a generation has not been duplicated in my lifetime, and an ending point is arbitrary. Every labeled generation since then has been an extrapolation of some time-span used to mark the Boomers.

People born about the same time have an opportunity/propensity to have shared experiences. That's common sense. But to say that someone born in 1961 had the same set of experiences likely held in common as someone born in 1946 is silly--and I'll skip the whole question of how much location and social class and ethnic identity might change the likely set of shared experiences. And how one relates to those experiences, how it forms their character? Always the same? I don't think so.



This isn't a rant. We will go ahead and use the somewhat useful, though very fuzzy, concepts of the spirit of a time, or behaviors that become more common or less common as cultures change. I don't see who that can be avoided. I'm only saying that those generational labels we use as shortcuts to allow us to refer to that in a word or two have considerable limitations.

My son, born in the first decade of this century is sure he isn't a Millennial. I asked him what generation he is then. He says he doesn't know. I think he may have a point there. He's starting to develop his taste in music. He likes to sing, likes synthesizer sounds, and he hasn't developed any interest in guitar. But there's time yet. When I was his age I couldn't get enough of bowed strings, and I think more folks in my cohort played accordion than guitar. Those now well into their 20s may have generally "set" their musical interests, but there's always another age group coming along.

I've said this before. If the entertainment industry coalesces into spectacles with elaborate pre-recorded tracks and costume changes every other number, there will inevitably be a counter movement, and the acoustic guitar is about as far from that as one can get. One can't be assured of that though, it could be accordions.

Most of the performers who require a costume change for every song are not what I would consider musicians. And I resent labeling generations, as if I am supposed to pre-judge them based on the decade they were born, completlely nonsensical. I have 3 daughters, 2 of which are more than 50 years younger than me. They have turned me on to more good music than any other media outlet. Conversely, they absolutely love the music I've introduced them to.