Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

[Aceman]

mg: This thing was amazing

:eyecrazy: The tone was warm, like a great blanket wrapped around you in front of a crackling fire on a winter night.

mg: The highs were bright and clear and strong, yet smooth and round at the same time

:eyecrazy: The sound was superb in every possible way, just even, clean, clear, defined....

:cool2: I wish I had the chops to make that thing sing!

One of the coolest acoustic sounds I have heard period. It looked a little old/worn and I was ready to be unimpressed. Well, it kicked my @$$!

 

[AlexR]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

There is good reason why those old guitars command the price they do......

 

[Boogie Bill]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

My high school choir instructor had a 1947 D-28, which I got to play on a couple of occasions. It was an incredible guitar...everything you describe, and only twenty years old at the time. Beautiful guitar, and my first experience with G.A.S.

I had an opportunity to buy a '56 about ten years ago, but passed because it needed quite a bit of restoration.

The Martins I have are really good, and I wonder how well some of the newer ones, like my HD-28V, D-18GE, and my Custom Shop D-35 will age.

My 1975 Martin has mellowed into a very sweet guitar, but it doesn't have that "ping", or the clarity of a Brazilian rosewood guitar. Indian just doesn't have the same tone.

Bill

 

[AlexR]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

^ even on youtube clips you can hear that Indian is a little 'flatter' tonally than Braz.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Where did you get a chance to play it?

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Where did you get a chance to play it?

It was during nap time, hence no NGD.

 

[ehdwuld]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I played a 56 Tele a few months back
Sounded ok
Neck was THICK
Rough fretboard
7.5 radius was really round
Surprisingly heavy

Did I want it?
Oh yea
Years of mojo on that thing
But I couldn't justify th 4k asking price

 

[dystrust]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I played a 56 Tele a few months back
Sounded ok
Neck was THICK
Rough fretboard
7.5 radius was really round
Surprisingly heavy

Did I want it?
Oh yea
Years of mojo on that thing
But I couldn't justify th 4k asking price

$4K is crazy cheap for a '56 Tele. Did it have non-original electronics or a refin or something?

I've played a bunch of vintage guitars and some are magical while quite a few of them aren't. There are fewer lousy ones than with current production, but they aren't all magic just because they're old. The most amazing one I ever played was a '56 LP Goldtop that had been re-topped, re-sprayed and had the electronics re-done in the 70s. The pickups were supposedly hybrids created from a bunch of PAFs; the bridge was in the upper 8K range while the neck was right around 8K. It played great and sounded better than every real burst I've had my hands on. The asking price was $20K, and I'd have dropped it in an instant if I'd had the money.

 

[Obsessive Compulsive]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Seriously, does acoustic guitar's tone improve with age? I have a 1995 Charvel 125S, solid spruce top, laminated mahogany sides, $350; it should topple any 2017 Martin or Taylor, no?

 

[ehdwuld]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I just can't spend that much on my hobbies

They are cool , not used car cool
Not new car.cool

Heck 20k was the asking price for my house 17 years ago

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Seriously, does acoustic guitar's tone improve with age? I have a 1995 Charvel 125S, solid spruce top, laminated mahogany sides, $350; it should topple any 2017 Martin or Taylor, no?

IME I've become convinced age can improve an acoustic. (Though the laminate sides would be working against the Charvel's age). I played a 1929 Washburn parlor guitar that was louder and punchier and prettier sounding than just about any acoustic I had tried up to that point. The wood on that one was dry and I think that contributed to how loud and clear it was. Might be part of the reason old violins are desirable. I was doing a studio recording with a violinist once and their little violin was twice as loud as my acoustic. Now loud isn't the only thing - these instruments sounded beautiful also. But just as a point of comparison, all my cheaper/newer acoustic instruments lack that kind of projection and tone that sings like that.

 

[ehdwuld]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I think acoustics age more gracefully than their electric counterparts

for just the reason Beau mentioned

the bracing and tops age the glue loosen
the top sings and flexs

my Martin sounds better today than it did 20 years ago when I got it
I remember taking it out of the box
and being disappointing
it felt stiff and harsh like a hundred dollar fender

now it has warmed up
sweetened

 

[Mincer]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I played a '53 prototype Strat. It was a terrible guitar, btw.

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I played a '53 prototype Strat. It was a terrible guitar, btw.

Was it this one?

https://sites.google.com/site/1953stratocaster/

 

[AlexR]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Seriously, does acoustic guitar's tone improve with age? I have a 1995 Charvel 125S, solid spruce top, laminated mahogany sides, $350; it should topple any 2017 Martin or Taylor, no?

It does......but its not going to turn a pumpkin into a coach. You get deeper tone of whatever the guitar started off as.
And who knows....maybe you like cheap guitar tone better than more expensive guitar tone in the first place - otherwise 'toppling' is all in the ear of the beholder.

 

[Boogie Bill]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Seriously, does acoustic guitar's tone improve with age? I have a 1995 Charvel 125S, solid spruce top, laminated mahogany sides, $350; it should topple any 2017 Martin or Taylor, no?

It probably won't. An acoustic guitar's tone will change with age. Guitars with laminated woods, less so. Your bet bet would have been to compare them when new. I bought a 2002 Standard Series Martin D-28 new; it had been in the store about 6 months. I got it for a very good price; I had some funds rattling around and decided it was too good a deal to pass up. Didn't really need another guitar, and frankly, it wasn't really one that blew me away in the store. But, it did have something about it.... So I brought it home and after a minimal amount of time with a luthier for a set-up, the guitar just BLOOMED. It got louded, more responsive. The bass notes began booming. It didn't take long for it to open up, and when it did it was a TOTALLY different guitar. Probably if I had been looking to buy a really special D-28, I would have passed on this one, but because of the great price I took a chance and got an exceptional guitar.

I have certain things that I look for in an acoustic; some is quantifiable, but mostly it's feel and a bit of magic, luck and "guitar whispering". I've been very fortunate to have bought some really great and "special" guitars over the years. It's always a bit of a gamble, but there are keys and clues that help me identify the ones that will be great 20-30-40 years down the road.

I just wish that when I buy a new guitar, it would not continue to make the same clunker notes as my other ones!

Bill

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

I have an HD-28 that's over thirty years old now and definitely has mellowed with age- it looks quite golden despite some minor checking and the tone is larger-than-life yet very sweet. My oldest acoustic is a '49 Gibson that feels amazing but doesn't project like the Martin- wasn't a high end model to begin with and it has ladder bracing. But the neck is one of the nicest I've ever had in my hands. Great blues guitar. And even though it doesn't sound especially big, it has its own sonic advantages: the mellow highs & relative lack of boom allow it to stand comfortably in the voicelike midrange where dreadnoughts can tend to be a bit scooped.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

Re: Played a Martin 1951 D-28 today

Finding the right strings, pick, and setup for an acoustic is way more important than on an electric, as well. An acoustic guitar is the guitar, amp, pedals, and everything all in one. My acoustic heroes are bluegrass guys, with that big, punchy tone. That means high-ish action, 13-56 strings, and a fat pick. A guitar setup like that isn't the easiest thing to play, but once you get used to it the tone is totally worth it.