Vintage Guild acoustics

[Br1ck]

Thank goodness Martin has maintained such high standards, bringing us refinements such as HPL bodies with pictures of real wood, micarta fingerboards & bridges, stratabond necks, and ten years worth of detached waist bindings.

The time is 1970, about the time us older players were either buying or wishing we could buy acoustics, and the demographic that has the money to play in the old guitar game now. The fashion at the time, certainly not back in pre war times, was close straight grained spruce. I do not recall ever seeing a Martin with even the slightest "defect. " Martin did not want nor did they need to build a lower cost Martin. The great preponderance to play Martin drove demand plus they had the long and storied history coupled with the tonal aspects we were hearing from our heroes. This formed the basis for holding value that exists today. All the aberrations that came later were good business decisions for survival. By the eighties, Taylor was eating Martin for lunch with their low cost options cementing customer loyalty. Martin would not be the company it is today had they not had the revenue stream from low cost alternatives and strings.

Guild has staggered along from ownership to ownership group, factory to factory. It survived Fender, an amazing feat in itself. Decades and decades of missed opportunity, and one wonders how it has survived at all. So we arrive at a D 40 from 70 being worth what, $1500-1800? I have not seen a 70 D 18 less than $2000, and that is one needing $1000+ worth of work. That is $3000, twice the D 40's value. It is not twice the guitar, but the market has spoken. When that 70 D 18 is worth $5000, a D 40 will be wort about $2500. Speculation of course.

I'm just glad Guild threw perfectly good wood into the pile for D 25s and D 35s. Who knows Guild didn't buy Martin rejects? I know I saw Guilds in 70 that a student could buy and eat for a month on the money saved not buying a D 18. We can debate quality all day long. Suffice to say I don't own a D 18 today because I have my D 35.

 

[Prince of Darkness]

Roger Hodgson, of Supertramp, is very much associated with Guild 12-strings and I've also seen Buddy Guy play Guild acoustics from time to time.

 

[Br1ck]

Having the baseball card from a World Series year signed by a utility player on The Yankees and having one signed by Mickey Mantle is the analogy I'd choose. Richie Havens playing a Guild vs. Stephen Stills on a Martin.

 

[Guildedagain]

Are vintage Guild acoustics worth as much money for the same year Martin or Gibson?

Depends

On how you define "worth". What it's worth to one may not be the same to another as some people feel better being like everybody else, and some feel better with something a bit more unique, so there's that worth, and letting your ears be the judge, rather than choice based on brand.

To me, the worth is in that they are not worth as much so I can have them. The poor man's guitar does not disappoint, even at higher price points I hear.

 

[fronobulax]

Are vintage Guild acoustics worth as much money for the same year Martin or Gibson?

"worth" is a value judgement that can pretty much only be meaningfully made by someone with means and intent to buy.

Guilds are not like cars with model years where specs change. For the most part neither are guitars ;-) So "same year" is probably not a valid comparison.

To stop picking on your choice of language and answer the implied question, if a Martin guitar, Gibson guitar and Guild guitar are considered comparable - similar woods, specs, case, cosmetic condition, age, etc. then the marketplace usually assigns a lower purchase price to the Guild.

Even then, though, the issue of comparability is important. Many people hear a "Guild sound" or are looking for tonal balance across the full range of the instrument which is different for Guilds and Martins and Gibsons. If that is what drives the choice of instrument then the Martin and Gibson, with a different balance, are almost by definition not comparable or "worth less".

To give a generalization that has as many holes as a colander someone who is looking at vintage Guilds in the used market is doing so either because they want the Guild sound or the Guilds are lower priced.

 

[twocorgis]

I'm a little late to the party, but I must say that I get a little tired of people trying to make Guilds look better by denigrating Martins, and Gibsons to a somewhat lesser extent. Are Martins perfect? Of course they're not, but they've been making guitars since 1833 under one family's control, and they're still on top of the game. I have three of them ('69 D28, '02 D18 David Crosby Signature, and a '13 000-17SM), and all three of them are terrific guitars. I also own a '03 Gibson WM45 that I love, along with a '17 Lowden O22 that some days I swear is better than any of them. They're not Guilds, and that's fine with me. I still own 19 other Guild guitars and basses, and I love all of them too. It's a big tent.

 

[GGJaguar]

It's a big tent.

Yes, this.

 

[golfnut]

"worth" is a value judgement that can pretty much only be meaningfully made by someone with means and intent to buy.

Guilds are not like cars with model years where specs change. For the most part neither are guitars ;-) So "same year" is probably not a valid comparison.

To stop picking on your choice of language and answer the implied question, if a Martin guitar, Gibson guitar and Guild guitar are considered comparable - similar woods, specs, case, cosmetic condition, age, etc. then the marketplace usually assigns a lower purchase price to the Guild.

Even then, though, the issue of comparability is important. Many people hear a "Guild sound" or are looking for tonal balance across the full range of the instrument which is different for Guilds and Martins and Gibsons. If that is what drives the choice of instrument then the Martin and Gibson, with a different balance, are almost by definition not comparable or "worth less".

To give a generalization that has as many holes as a colander someone who is looking at vintage Guilds in the used market is doing so either because they want the Guild sound or the Guilds are lower priced.

I guess I should have been more clear. I meant on the market do they compare in value. For example a 1960 D-28 commands X number of dollars. How close is a comparable 1960 Guild? Nothing to do with the worth to an individual.

 

[fronobulax]

I guess I should have been more clear. I meant on the market do they compare in value. For example a 1960 D-28 commands X number of dollars. How close is a comparable 1960 Guild? Nothing to do with the worth to an individual.

Well I could have been clearer too. I have tried to say that if the instruments are comparable then the Guild will be priced lower. I am not going to say that in the market if the Martin is $X then the Guild will be $X - $10 or $X -$500 or 75% $X or whatever.

But there are so many caveats that the lack of context is not helping to narrow down to a more concrete answer. If you just want the generic opinions of random people on the internet to validate something you believe is probably true then you have it. If you are going to use the information to make a purchase or make an investment or open a business or a side hustle then the more context you give us the better the answers will be.

 

[Br1ck]

Don't pretend the envy factor doesn't apply. Walk into a room of 20 hobbiest guitar players with your D 55 from when they were custom ordered and you'll get a, nice guitar. Walk in with a 67 D 28 and it's oooh, ahhh, what's it worth?

 

[bobouz]

I'm a little late to the party, but I must say that I get a little tired of people trying to make Guilds look better by denigrating Martins, and Gibsons to a somewhat lesser extent.

Per the OP’s original question re the ‘70s marketplace, there’s no doubt that Martin was the gold standard in flattop guitars at that time, with top notch build quality & resale value. But a comment regarding Martin’s commitment to quality materials made me bristle a bit as I think of the road traveled - thus my earlier response.

For 23 years, I played an amazingly sweet 1970 00-18. When it needed a neck reset in 2001, I began looking at trade possibilities, and discovered that Martin had just downgraded many 16-Series models from a striped ebony board & bridge to Micarta. This was done without notification to dealers or updating online specs.

During this time, I was participating on a forum where Chris Martin was a frequent participant. Buyers were unhappily being surprised after purchasing 16-Series instruments, in what appeared to be a somewhat stealthy attempt to move quality-of-materials to the backseat. Forum members enjoyed having Chris participate, but when rather pointed questions started being asked about the change to Micarta, he quietly packed his bags & left. It was the first in a set of disappointments, culminating in the company’s hands-off approach to the popped binding issue, a systematic failure which it had not fixed or formally addressed after many years of customers struggling to address the problem. The issue is ongoing, as a quick visit to UMGF will confirm.

Does Martin still make some of the finest guitars on the market? Of course they do, and I still own two Martins today. But imho, their commitment to quality has wavered, and opportunities to take a higher road have sadly been missed.

 

[chazmo]

Per the OP’s original question re the ‘70s marketplace, there’s no doubt that Martin was the gold standard in flattop guitars at that time, with top notch build quality & resale value. But a comment regarding Martin’s commitment to quality materials made me bristle a bit as I think of the road traveled - thus my earlier response.

For 23 years, I played an amazingly sweet 1970 00-18. When it needed a neck reset in 2001, I began looking at trade possibilities, and discovered that Martin had just downgraded many 16-Series models from a striped ebony board & bridge to Micarta. This was done without notification to dealers or updating online specs.

During this time, I was participating on a forum where Chris Martin was a frequent participant. Buyers were unhappily being surprised after purchasing 16-Series instruments, in what appeared to be a somewhat stealthy attempt to move quality-of-materials to the backseat. Forum members enjoyed having Chris participate, but when rather pointed questions started being asked about the change to Micarta, he quietly packed his bags & left. It was the first in a set of disappointments, culminating in the company’s hands-off approach to the popped binding issue, a systematic failure which it had not fixed or formally addressed after many years of customers struggling to address the problem. The issue is ongoing, as a quick visit to UMGF will confirm.

Does Martin still make some of the finest guitars on the market? Of course they do, and I still own two Martins today. But imho, their commitment to quality has wavered, and opportunities to take a higher road have sadly been missed.

My only input to this conversation is that while Martin and Gibson have had periods where quality sagged, I don’t think there’s a period at Guild where you can make the same claim. Yes, of course there have been Guild duds, and don’t get me started on the Tacoma shuttering where bad guitars were released to MIRC. But US-built Guild guitars are high-quality from every era. In stark contrast to M & G, I don’t recall ever seeing a post where someone claims “that was a bad period for Guild.” This is one of the reasons why I love Guilds. 70+ years of consistently great guitars is really something to be proud of.

By the way, in the 21st century, there are indeed stories about onesy/twosies of the Corona- and Tacoma- era guitars that aren’t flattering, There were even a New Hartford and Oxnard two that weren’t up to snuff. But, those are anomalies.

Anyway, just my take.

 

[Br1ck]

There are certainly periods in Guild's history where I personally don't care for them nearly as much. It tends to coincide roughly with periods of other makers faltering. An 80s F 40 I owned was not IMHO, a good guitar. I've played D 55s from every era that I've liked, but D 40s I've played were far more inconsistent.

The micarta fretboards I've played on were very good, but I would want to know what I was buying.

 

[davenumber2]

There’s nothing wrong with Micarta as a fretboard material, Richlite either. I had a Martin D-16GT with it. If you didn’t tell me I would have thought it was ebony. If they were switching it out and not saying anything or trying to pass it off as wood then I guess that’s a problem. Martin has made some efforts, similar to Taylor, to use sustainable or alternative materials and I applaud them for that. That said, it would never happen on the Standard series and above unless the traditional wood supplies ran out.

 

[Rickenmaxer]

Unlike my 9 year-old Martin CEO-7, I've never had the binding come loose on a Guild acoustic, but, in any case, I've always appreciated the road "less traveled," especially when it's a relative bargain compared to the main highway.

 

[Br1ck]

When asked, I always caution that one should like the guitar in question, be it a Guild or any other brand. Buying a Guild while wanting a Martin is a poor use of funds. Unless, of course, you don't have the funds. You have to accept the situation. The things people might not like on my 70 D 35 are, the tuning keys, the 1 11/16 nut width, the neck carve, and various bumps and bruises. It doesn't have the base Martin tone. All this is subjective and can go either way. There is a nice savings generally on a Guild over some others. The same might apply to Larrivee and Breedlove.

I must admit my Guild has a tone I've grown to love. It wasn't instant like my Santa Cruz.

 

[nielDa]

I bought my Guild D50 new in 1971 (still love it) and I don’t remember wanting a Martin or Gibson instead. It wasn’t a cost issue, Guild had a following. Also I don’t know how available Guild guitars were worldwide, given their production numbers, which could have been a factor in who did or did not play one. Anyone know?

 

[steveintampa]

A couple of years ago I decided that the guitar I was playing with my wife was tonally sounding too similar to hers. They were both Gibson mahogany dreadnaughts.

I also wanted a cutaway, so I started looking at what I could get in a price range suited for a "utility" instrument. I wanted a rosewood or maple body, and preferably an ebony fingerboard with a 12' radius. I found everything I wanted in a used but not abused Guild DCE5.

It made a very nice contrast with her Gibson. To me, having an instrument is a tool, so I found the right one for the job.