I think that is a supro S525 or S535. some cooler ones:
an S535
an S555
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2011 3:40 am
by westtexasred
The one vintage "budget" guitar worth considering is the Harmony H-44 Stratotone
[youtube][/youtube]
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2011 4:19 am
by nyck
[quote="Mages"]I think that is a supro S525 or S535. some cooler ones:
an S535
I used to own that exact guitar! Main street vintage had a booth at some guitar show I went to when I was 16 (4 years ago). I didn't know what I was looking for at the time and ended up paying way too much for it. The neck was complete shit. It had no adjustable truss rod. That thing was super discouraging to play.
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:10 am
by A_saVANT
theworkoffire wrote:Without hesitation, for me it would be a Yamaha SG-3
Quality-wise, they're easily on a par with 60s Fenders. Just properly great guitars.
That is fucking gorgeous. Do wantz.
I like the Yamaha SG's...I guess 80's count as vintage now.
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2011 5:24 am
by paul_
BacchusPaul wrote:I don't regard seventies Fenders as vintage, because whilst there are good ones, and whist they often look very seventiesey, they don't represent a particaraly strong brand at the time. They're just old guitars, some of which are good.
+1
'70s Fender/Gibson isn't real vintage. It's also easy for me to remember because I remember when they were cheaper than the vintage reissues of either are now, well into the vintage guitar market boom.
That's why indie bands with no money always have 3 brown, wonky-looking SGs on hand.
My local Guitar Center has a '66 Musicmaster for $800...
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:11 am
by Will
Was it ever answered as to why you want an old guitar? Do they offer some advantage over a current one?
Because I think of vintage as the best of a particular type. So vintage Fenders and Gibsons are from the 50s/early-60s. A vintage Danelectro is from the late 50s, but not the early 50s. A vintage Taylor is from this decade. It's about when the maker hit the peak of their quality.
It seems like semantics, but it becomes important because we're just coming down from a fevered peak in the old guitar market. Guitars that are vintage - the best quality - will retain and continue to grow in value. Ones that are merely old will start to fall. An early-60s Supro is vintage because those are the best Supros; a 70s Fender is old.
The spirit of getting a vintage guitar is in making an investment in the best version of the thing you want. Sometimes that means a current or recent model. So figure out what sort of guitar fits you're needs and buy the best one you can afford, regardless of the name or year.
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:01 am
by nyck
So I just got this '66 stang off the bay for 725. I'm not sure what these typically go for, but that's cheaper than the reissues are new.
The reason I prefer older fenders is mostly because of the roundedness of the fretboard/edges. None of the newer ones seem to have that.
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:09 am
by UlricvonCatalyst
To answer your original question, some of the best vintage bargains widely available in the UK for less than the price of a car would be Shergolds.
Fantastic necks one and all, the Masquerader has a great range of tones on tap. For £500 you might even be able to get the modular one which allows you to swap built-in FX. The only downside is they're not shortscale and they're pretty fugly. If you can handle that, start searching for Shergold and Hayman. Maybe look at original Burns's too.
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 1:35 pm
by Viljami
UlricvonCatalyst wrote: they're pretty fugly.
PHILISTINE!
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 6:08 pm
by Nick
I was playing my '65 Vox Tempest at practice last night and felt compelled to mention it in this thread as a suggestion. I paid $700 (well, more like my Gibson LP Studio) for it and it's a nice solid guitar, the pickups are louder and brighter than my Rickenbacker Hi Gains (though they are somewhat microphonic)
Some of the 6 string versions can sell for around $500-600, they're not the prettiest things in the world but they're a solid vintage guitar as opposed to cheapos of that era and something pretty unique.
Will wrote:Was it ever answered as to why you want an old guitar? Do they offer some advantage over a current one?
Because I think of vintage as the best of a particular type. So vintage Fenders and Gibsons are from the 50s/early-60s. A vintage Danelectro is from the late 50s, but not the early 50s. A vintage Taylor is from this decade. It's about when the maker hit the peak of their quality.
It seems like semantics, but it becomes important because we're just coming down from a fevered peak in the old guitar market. Guitars that are vintage - the best quality - will retain and continue to grow in value. Ones that are merely old will start to fall. An early-60s Supro is vintage because those are the best Supros; a 70s Fender is old.
The spirit of getting a vintage guitar is in making an investment in the best version of the thing you want. Sometimes that means a current or recent model. So figure out what sort of guitar fits you're needs and buy the best one you can afford, regardless of the name or year.
I see your point, but I have a few vintage/old guitars, and have played loads more, and the best of the lot IMO is my 73 Mustang - not their best year, but TBH going by your rationale almost none of the Mustangs would be vintage as they were in the CBS era. The same is true of Tele thinlines and Deluxes.
I don't know what the market is like at the moment, but you should have no trouble getting a nice shortscale Fender for £4-800 depending on model etc. Some may not be 100% original, but bought sensibly should hold their money. Fuckit though, I bought mine to play, and the prices were good compared to new US models.
