-
I have this desire for a while now to buy an acoustic archtop. Just an everyday pickup and play guitar. No amps, no cables, etc.
I am very interested in buying something from the 30s or 40s as people think they sound better in general and it would be cool to own a piece like that.
just wondering, those who own one of these antique guitars, what is the reality of owning one like? More maintenance? Constant problems modern guitars don’t have?
I realize, of course, it largely depends on the quality/shape of the guitar.. but just in general.. is owning an antique guitar worth it over a modern one?
-
04-24-2026 04:08 PM
-
I have solid woods Gibson, Guild, D'Angelico (modern USA) and Epiphone acoustic archtops from 2018, 2015, 2014, 2006, 2001, 1999, 1994, 1993, 1951 and 1944. You have to choose with some care, but I've experienced no difference in maintenance burdens or any other troubles, between the 1944 L-7 and everything newer, but all were bought in uncompromised structural condition. The 1944 has a robust neck with 1" depth from the 1st to 9th frets. None of these archtops have required unusual efforts to keep them shipshape.
I've played archtops from the 1930s and don't see such an acquisition as intrinsically more delicate if it's structurally sound in the first place. Body wood cracks that have been properly repaired are no problem and tend to be stable. Bracing can crack or even break over time, but those things can be repaired, too. It's not like it can't happen to a newer guitar. I've never needed a neck reset for any of my guitars, but it's not an unusual luthier's task. Glue joints can fail, but I've seen that happen in 2 year old guitars. I don't handle my 1944 any differently than the 2018.
Phil
-
Phil makes good points. I think the issue is in not buying a guitar with significant issues needing restoration, unless you're into that kind of thing. Some of us in the group do like to restore and bring back instruments that are, shall we say, troubled. I imagine it could be pretty satisfying, I have not done it myself (well, my flattop is pushing 50).
My observation of the vintage guitar market is that often people whose guitars are in really crappy shape still think they're worth a lot of money. "It's a vintage Gibson." "It needs a new fingerboard, a neck reset and a loose brace reglued." "OK, I'll knock 100 bucks off the price."
-
I'll add that on average, my experience is that acoustic flattops of same age and condition as counterpart archtops, require more watchful attention and maintenance than the archies.
And if you're in the US and you want a vintage acoustic archtop you don't have to worry about, just go to thatrhythmman.com to see what @thatrhythmman here has in inventory. You'll get a fully vetted old guitar you can have confidence in, if that's what you're looking for.
Phil
-
To turn a phrase, there's nothing like that old guitar smell. Do yourself a favor and find a instrument that has had any structural issues addressed. If there is any receipts or contact info for the person that did the repairs, living or dead, keep all paperwork. Cosmetic issues are another matter-if you like bright and shiny, that's OK, however one of the charms of vintage archtops are the dings or finish wear telling the story of the guitar's life.
It's a quest. Gibson guitars from the 30's, 40's and 50's were IMHO better built than just about anything else. You will pay for a nice one, but it will hold it's value. They have the Gibson blessed sound, depending on the instrument. There are some rare duds. If you got the coin, forum member That Rhythm Man has a beautiful 1950 D'Angelico New Yorker on the market-however a bit of overkill for a sofa guitar.
I'm a vintage Epiphone guy myself. They may not have the sophisticated, refined tone of a Gibson, however I love their brash, barking tone-depending on the guitar of course. My 1953 Epiphone Triumph Regent (no pickup) gets played out on intimate cocktail lounge type gigs along with sofa duty. I don't treat it any different on a gig than my Benedetto.
-
I miss the '51 Gibson I parted with back in the day, but I do think the whole "old is better" line of thought may be hype (except for older people, we are better :-)) I have friends who build violins, cellos, etc - not guitars but instruments, who have impressive stocks of wood. Several of them tell me that after 10 years the whole "mellowing of the wood" thing is vastly overstated. To me if you're going to pay a premium for something older than 10 or 15 years you need to have a good reason to do so (like a specific builder perhaps).
-
I had a 1952 Gretsch for about 6 months. I was constantly worried about scratching it, about the neck joint, about finish checking and peeling. It got to the point where I didn’t want to take it to gigs. So I traded it for an Eastman.
The Eastman is a very nice guitar and I don’t have to worry about accidentally destroying something that’s 75 years old.
Vintage mojo and vibes sound great on paper, but the reality of taking a 75 year old guitar out to play gigs wasn’t very fun for me. I was always worried it was one drunks stumble from destruction.
If the Eastman gets damaged. At least isn’t not 75 years old. I think something that old should be preserved in a way that I can’t step up to.
But maybe you can.
-
One more thing to add. Sierra Tango is right. The old ones smell better.
-
Guitars were made to be played. Render them inoperable through frequent playing and gigs and they have best served their true purpose.
Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
A few of my experiences of vintage guitars:
1.) Action too high when the bridge is set at it's lowest, can indicate that maybe a neck reset is needed.
2.) A twisted neck can be a big problem. Ensure that the neck is straight.
3.) Can the Truss rod nut be adjusted. Is there enough thread for tightening adjustment or too much thread. If there is too much thread the truss rod has probably sunk into the neck wood.
4.) Binding can detach from body over time.
But, all can be fixed by a good Luthier at a cost.Last edited by GuyBoden; 04-25-2026 at 08:37 AM.
-
I’m really into preservation. I couldn’t do that, but I also don’t want to stop anyone else’s good time. Originally Posted by DawgBone
-
My observation has been that the first few years of a guitar's life is where stuff like construction defects and necks developing warps and twists crop up, and after that as long as the guitar is reasonably well cared for and played it's fine pretty much forever. You might have to deal with a neck reset at some point (with flattops more often than other types), and almost all guitars eventually need a refret, but if those things have already been done on a 50 year-old guitar, there really isn't much differnce between "vintage" and "used" as far as fragility goes.
-
So I’m 68 years old and remember being able to buy old guitars vs,vintage ones.
My dad once joked that he difference between noodles and pasta was $5 a pound!
I’ve owned way too many vintage and newer guitars over 50 years of playing the instrument. And while I can appreciate the Golden Age of Gibson,Epiphone,etc.
My take is it is ultimately a tool to make music with. And no matter how ornate,beautiful the woods are new or old. It has to work for each of us in the situation it was intended.
And while almost any guitar can be used in a variety of situations,generally acoustic Archtops work best for quieter gigs than their laminate cousins.
Also they were made when different frets and strings were produced. So maybe take that in mind if that’s a turn off.
Ultimately I feel the best overall guitars are being produced since the 1990’s and onward. We are living in a Golden Age of Luthiery and there way more choices than ever.
Now if you’re a cork sniffer or guitar dealer the money is in storytelling and selling dreams,Lol!
-
I get it, but I'm a utilitarian. Mass produced items aren't really something I see as worth preserving. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
Yes, a flattop guitar is a significantly weaker structure than a carved archtop. Steel strings or nylon, gut matters little; a flat top is weaker and has a shorter working life expectancy. There are very many violins, cellos and gambas hundreds of years old. 16th and 17th century lutes in playing condition, less than a handful. Segovia stated that a guitar was good for only 2 or 3 decades. Of course his instruments were constantly exposed to drastic temperature and humidity changes from travel.
Originally Posted by 213Cobra
-
In my opinion, vintage archtops weren’t mass produced. Originally Posted by DawgBone
But even a vintage Stratocaster. It’s a survivor and should be treated with care. And I don’t even bring a stand to gigs.
-
You had a Gretsch, a manufacturer of mass produced goods, so it's the equivalent of keeping a pontiac or oldsmobile garaged. I guess some people will appreciate it, and I suppose it makes sense for at least a few to be preserved. But the number of guys "collecting" commonly available mass produced instruments now seemingly exceeds the number of people who actually use them for the intended purpose, which dovetails nicely with the clown society we live in today where everything is inverted i.e dudes with 50 guitars who can't make a clean switch between cowboy C and G chords. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
In the end all this junk will cease to exist so it seems mostly pointless to me anyhow. Are unopened star wars toys and kiddie comic books really worth a shit? Not to me. LOL
I don't bring a stand to gigs cause I can't be having some fool plowboy knocking my axe over. I'm only preserving it so I can use it for it's intended purpose in generating some more income.
-
Geez, and I always thought its intended purpose was to make music. Live and learn. Originally Posted by DawgBone
-
My motivation is getting paid to make the music I like. I wouldn't spend 3-4-5 hours day in and day out with a guitar in my hands if there was no money involved. There's more to life than that. But it's paying the bills this weekend. Originally Posted by FourOnSix
-
I was born and raised in Pasadena, CA. I'm 70 now and remember going down to "Guitar Row" with my friend Bob November in Hollywood, Sunset and Gardner in the 60's and 70's. Guitar Center was a small (by todays standards) shop on the Northwest corner, and there were some other small shops, Larchmont and Stein on Vine across from the AFM building. Originally Posted by jads57
Nobody wanted acoustic archtops. They were stacked up like firewood at Guitar Center. It was even worse for non-cutaway guitars. I went through a stack and found a mid-30's L-7 with picture frame inlays for $125. That was a lot for me at the time, like $1,000 in todays money. I offered $100 and they took it.
-
Understood, and a perfectly legitimate reason to wield the tools of the trade. It's just that, for most of us, and for virtually all of us who play jazz, there are certainly shorter paths to riches than playing music for audiences. But I don't want to cause thread drift, so I shouldn't say any more on the subject. Originally Posted by DawgBone
-
I wouldn't worry about it. Originally Posted by FourOnSix
I saw this old vintage ES-335 for sale a while back...obvious touring instrument. Tons of play wear. On the heavily worn case was a sticker from every state the guy had obviously gigged in. It was so well done, so deliberate. Who was the owner? What were his dreams? How much of his heart did he pour into that instrument over the course of his life? Mucho. His love and life emanated from that guitar and it quickly sold hopefully to someone who would carry it's legacy. To me that's much more exciting than a bunch of mint stuff left inside a glass case. That's what I want a part of when I buy used, or what I hope to create when I buy something new. Just some thoughts....
-
I probably have about 90K or so in my guitar collection (18 guitars). I have used them all on paying gigs and I figure playing gigs has earned them for me. If I wasn't a performing musician, I probably would only have 2 or 3 guitars to play at home, but now I have an art collection of trophy guitars that I have earned. And depending on how they look at it, my wife and daughters will have an incredible windfall or burden when I am gone. But until then, I am going to enjoy them, and even though I am officially "retired", I will still play the occasional paid gig (I am not leaving the house with a guitar for less than $200 these days), so my art collection of guitars will still generate income. Originally Posted by FourOnSix
As to antique guitars, remember that today's new guitars will be antiques someday. I would rather have a properly maintained vintage guitar that was well made in the first place than a modern guitar that is sloppily made and won't stand the test of time.
-
I use mine on paying gigs so I can only afford to have a few axes and one of them is for sale right now, LOL. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
The difference between you and some joke collector is you can actually play a guitar well and you actually use them for the intended purpose. TBH though if I had 18 guitars to maintain I'd be overwhelmed cause I sure don't wanna be changing strings, adjusting truss rods, and intonating guitars when I could be playing them. I've had to spend some time tweaking a truss for this wet spring weather on my #1. That's enough cutting into my play time right there!
-
As far as acoustic archtops I don't think it matters most of the time. However, guitars have to be evaluated each individually regardless because not hard and pat. I can say the some very old guitars are quite stable and need no adjustments. I have mentioned this many times, my 1949 Dangelico NY has a truss rod on the earliest ones with a truss rod. I have owned the guitar 41 years and have never touch the rod, never made and adjustment or had a truss rod wrench near it. The action is stable rarely needs any adjusting goes years between sometimes a turn of the bridge wheel up or down minutely.
New guitars certainly acoustic archtop needs a break in period. The 1st year is the biggest change, and the owner is doing themselves the best favor if they play the guitar a lot. After maybe 2-3 years things usually settle in for the long-haul change is very small may not even change. Guitars that are 90 years old and have been played a lot still have 90 years of incremental changes and it adds up.
I am like you these days I rarely ever plug the guitar in they have floating PU's. I just pull it out of the case and play mostly tunes and through changes. It is all I want very simple and direct. To me a person like yourself could find this on many guitars. If I were you I would stick to guitars that say Gibson on the head stock. If you budget cannot do big things then a nice L7 or L4 can be wonderful. They many times sound as good and better than their bigger brother L5's. There is one on the forum now. As far a a new one you are regulated to something overseas or a luthier. I am just not buying any guitar that is not American made, not because I am glorious patriot in buying American, but that they still are the world standards.
Oh, that reminds me. You probably would be best buying a Heritage the old Gibson Guitar starting point. To me these are sleepers and have critics but let tell you when we are dead and gone in 50 years players will say............wow great guitars. In 1980 a noncut dangelico was looked at as almost a second cousin, everyone wanted the cutaway. The tune has change for sure.....
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos