Older instruments sound better, ate this true and why
 

Hello everyone

Several times I heard that musical instrument sound better if they are older and it is mainly the reason they are expensive.I would like to know why and whether it applies to the electric basses.
Some say, they sound better if played often

Old basses
 

I think for electric basses it's a total package, for instance fender early pre c s 60's jazz basses are way more sought after than 70's mainly because of the quality & the electronics. W/ double basses & tone woods "Open up" & developed over time. But there are alot of 200 year old double basses that aren't worth more than $4000 just because they aren't very great basses the are just old. Usually older double basses are worth money just the same way because they are old & there sound has developed the maker is probably dead & gone and not producing instruments anymore.

The conventional wisdom for all acoustic instruments is that as the wood vibrates it loses its "tightness" and resonates better, and that as the sap dries out further over time this also contributes to the resonance improving. I've not had the pleasure of owning a double bass long enough for this to happen, but it definitely has occurred on my two acoustic guitars I've owned for years, one fairly inexpensive, and one fairly expensive, the common denominator being that both have good quartersawn spruce tops to begin with.

As far as solid body instruments, hindsight is everything. I'm sure there are some good basses out there which, again, due to the wood continuing to cure over time, sound better as they age. But -- I'm not so sure about the electronics. Parts corrode, coil wire insulation can break down, the dielectric of capacitors can break down, and magnets (rarely) can lose their gauss. It's my opinion that when it comes to solid body electric basses, that the old good ones are good because they were good to begin with, with well seasoned wood and good quality electronics properly executed into an instrument at the beginning, not through the aging process.

Forum..
 

This is the Smith Bass forum. For electric basses all threads should be about Smith basses, not general brands or instruments. For that, you have other Forums out there. If you have a specific question about Smith basses and/or its woods, ask me. If you are on some kind of fishing expedition, swim down stream a bit!:eek:

A thousand apologies for suggesting this, but I think they were just talking about wood and how parts of an instrument age. It is an interesting question with electric basses because of their youth (60 years or so), and the fact that they contain electrical components. If one wonders whether electric basses improve with age, I suppose one must examine the older makes. We are all bass enthusiasts here who seek only knowledge of our loved instruments.
Back home we have a saying,
"When the well is full we can all drink, even if the sand makes the water taste different to some."
Again apologies if my remarks are out of line.

Bin you make a good point.
The history of any instrument goes beyond the comercial thing. I think the other posters were only trying to see the historic perspective.
Hey but I'm not a great fan of sand in my coffee, or my water. Just joking there, no cultural insensitivity intended.

I've only ever laid my hands on one Ken Smith bass; some time in the nineties - it was a six string and the guy who owned it played it very well. It sounded great. It must be one of very few in the country, if not the only one. Ken needs to get Down here (NZ) and bring some of those basses. I'll give him a bed if he comes through Wellington. That's a promise Ken.

whew..
 

In light other basically supportive posts on the subject of age and sound affect regardless of the brand I will allow a general non-brand specific discussion here which however will shine a light on Smith basses in the end because of how they are made and why age will improve a Smith in time more so that other brands made more in the Guitar school of building rather than the Violin school of building. Ok with everyone?

I will make a comment here to start this and that is, we build with less of a thick smothering finish on our wood which allows the bass to breathe better. The wood tone when a string is plucked is what the pickup (microphone) amplifies and what the circuit EQ's if using the controls. We use basically 'colorless' sounding pickups that we designed for these basses back in 1982. If using these pickups in another bass, they will not make a bad singer sound like a good singer so to speak.

Than you Bin and the others for your instant wisdom here!;)

Various bass makers & brands
 

Ken, my apologies for dropping the "F" bomb in one of my previous posts on this thread I was just using those basses as an example. Smith basses are the best in the world in my opinion & I would never downplay them in any way. Aside from all, I respect the fact that you want to keep this section smith bass specific, my bad...I was just chatting bass & hadn't thought about that discussing other brands on this forum might not be prudent (being a bassist, you know how it is).

Best regards

Joshua phelps

ok..
 

No problem. Now that I have slightly amended the Thread, do you still have questions or comments?

Hi Ken,
To your opinion, for the sound to be changed over time, is there a need for strings to be vibrating on a bass?
Taking into account the time your neck and body blanks sit aside, waiting for their time, I would expect that by the time a bass is built the woods has already stabilized.
How significant would be the change in sound (over time, on a bass) with such woods?
Do certain woods tend to change in sound more than others?...

1, yes/no

2, yes but only as single pieces, not as a bass.

3, such woods? which woods?

4, maybe, not sure. Everything changes. Many things to consider.

I meant your woods which has been sitting for a while, already cut and glued more or less to their final size (necks & bodies/wings), waiting to be assembled.

Most of the wood here is not glued yet. We do have quite a bot of wood glued up in neck and body parts and some of them do sit a long time but, sitting un-glued is aging as a piece of wood close to size. Glued up, the pieces get to adjust to each other. So, I think wood should age in Lumber, then cut parts and then in billets. Neck woods are much more crucial than body woods as far as stability goes. For tone, the longer the better I feel in all stages.

Here is a new factory Tour photo array done by my friend Lou who visited this past weekend; http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...8027828&type=1

32 year old K. smith bass
 

There is a 1980 k. smith #13 on eBay for 7k if anyone wants to try a vintage smith & let us know how it's aged :)

Ken..
 

What type of glue do you guys use on smith basses? Is it similar to the 192 gram hide glue used on double basses?

no..
 

We use Titebond II now. Before 1992 we used Titebond, the only one they had. We tried some Fingerboards glued with Hide Glue in the early 90's but in some climates, that will not be as stable with warm sweaty hands playing up and down the neck as well. The Titebond keeps the bass together just fine. No real magic here, just really good glue joints.

Hello Mr.Smith
I asked this question just out of curiosity because I thought that Smith bass have many experienced bass players. I know that Smith is not made of bass wood that is not old enough to work like other producers
Sorry for my english

??
 

Sorry, I don't understand that comment.

Bass wood as in wood for making basses or Bass wood, a kind of wood called basswood, a soft hardwood used in civil construction?

I though the wood for making basses, many other commercial producers now make instruments from wood that is not sufficiently prepared