Guitar--Years of Manufacture.

Subject: RE: Guitar--Years of Manufacture.
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 04 Mar 26 - 05:49 PM

The only advise I can give is to follow your ears and don't overlook Eastmans. A few months back I bought a used E20D that I liked so much I sold my Bourgeois Country Boy which I'd bought used for almost 4 times the price of the Eastman.

Subject: RE: Guitar--Years of Manufacture.
From: GUEST,Ray
Date: 04 Mar 26 - 03:52 PM

There is conjecture about certain makes having bad periods/years mainly amongst the major manufacturers. I don’t think it happens so much with the smaller shops; i.e. Santa Cruz, who have had the same person at the helm since their inception.

Santa Cruz is still a relatively small outfit and I suppose I should declare my interest insofar as I have three of them!

Subject: Guitar--Years of Manufacture.
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 04 Mar 26 - 01:43 PM

I got a bug up my ass about maybe getting a Santa Cruz guitar. Which doesn't make much sense because I have several guitars that I already don't play much. (I haven't ruled it out. But I also haven't ruled it in at the moment.)

But if I was actually considering it, I wanted to see about other axes in the ultra class. In contrasting them with other makers, I came across many discussions of the specific years a guitar was made. (And some reviews say that many "lesser" guitars are also superior at considerably lower prices.) And folks have mentioned that the year a given guitar was made is not insignificant. Like the degree of hand work that went into making it versus machine work. And how the manufacturing techniques changed--wood, bracing, etc. And who the specific luthiers were.

So I'm wondering is there any kind of reference that designates the differences among the popular makes and their best periods and lesser periods and what the distinctions were/are?

Thanks for any insights.

Saul