The idea of Making a Martin a better Martin

[ken cierp]

Well I watch all the antique and collectable shows and read a little about that topic, yes including pawn stars -- I got to thinking about this notion of taking a Martin guitar and trying to retro it into a vintage replica. From what I understand the quickest way to devalue anything is to do some sort of modification. But maybe a Martin guitar is different – but how would I know? So I decide to email George Gruhn (the expert re: guitar values) to get his thoughts -- our exchange follows:

From: Ken Cierpilowski [mailto:kencierp@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:02 PM
To: gruhn@gruhn.com
Subject: so called conversion

Hi George,

I have a general question I am sure you can address, I am beginning to see so called 1937 conversions where a Martin guitar is torn apart then re-assembled using hide glue and supposedly re-topping with X forward Red Spruce bracing (which John Greven tells me Martin never used Adi bracing, he has very strong views re the hide glue issue as well) Anyway, in your view will this sort of retro likely increase or decrease value in the long term?

Thank you in advance for any insight you can provide.

Ken Cierpilowski

February 11, 2013 4:23 PM
From: "George Gruhn" <ggruhn@gruhn.com>
To: "'Ken Cierpilowski'" <kencierp@yahoo.com>

The evidence appears to be quite clear that Martin used red spruce tops prior to World War II, but that they used Sitka spruce bracing. I personally like red spruce for both tops and bracing and I certainly like hide glue, however, I would never recommend disassembling an original Martin guitar of any age and doing the sort of reassembly with a new top which you have described. Anyone good enough to do such a job well would also be good enough to build a guitar from scratch which is exactly what they should be doing. The value of the guitar reworked in the manner you described would be greatly reduced if it had any collector’s item appeal to begin with. In any event it would not be cost-effective.

George

[Dave Bagwill]

I was unaware of the practice of converting a new Martin into a 1937 spec Martin. Sure seems like a gimmick - the 1937 has had over 70 years to age and mellow; newer Martins have not had that chance. Maybe I'm missing something.

[Tim Benware]

I was unaware of the practice of converting a new Martin into a 1937 spec Martin. Sure seems like a gimmick - the 1937 has had over 70 years to age and mellow; newer Martins have not had that chance. Maybe I'm missing something.

From the ones I've seen Dave, they are usually converting older 60-70's Martins and not the newer ones. Heck, Martin is making one now that is advertised as being based on a 1939 (not 37) D-18 model and it's retail is $6749. Crazy. I just built one to 1937 specs (no hide glue, fish glue and no nitro, Target Em6000) and sold it for $930. I'll post a pic in a couple days as the owner got it for his wife for Valentine's Day and she is known to lurk on some of the forums. Here's a teaser pic:

[Dave Bagwill]

Still seems a little gimmicky to me.

Not Your guitar - that's a beaut and I hope we get to see and hear more!

[ken cierp]

Yeah if one is leaving the Martin label on -- "conversion" seems to being used as an acceptable code word for counterfiet or forgery. Twenty years from now one of these having been passed around will go up for trade and the shop owner will tell that poor soul he got screwed, its not a real "what ever." "Modified" Martin to me would be more fitting since conversion is the inference its being made into something it simply is not, plus as Dave points out one of the key tone producing factors is 75 years of aging. -- make sense?

And yes Tim very nice looking guitar!

[TonyinNYC]

I have some opinions on this topic.
Martin made an arch top guitar that utilized a traditional flat top rim and back. I have never seen one, but I have read that they sounded pretty lousy. If you were to "convert" one of those to a flat top, I understand they sound pretty good. They have Brazilian back and sides and are not worth very much in their original form. Normally, the top is caving in and would require serious work to get playable anyway, so why not convert it to a flat top with nice BRW back and sides?
Martin made a lot of guitars with BRW backs and sides that have not survived the years. The top is cracked, the back might be cracked as well. If you were to re-top one of those and repair the cracks, you are not "converting" it to anything other than a retopped, repaired guitar. But, it was a guitar that needed a re-top anyway, so why not?
If you are taking one of the thousands of sub-par, sitka topped, bridge glued on in the wrong spot, Martins from the 70's and retopping it with an Adi top that utilizes 1937 spec bracing, you are still not "converting" it to anything. You are rebuilding a guitar that was made with premium BRW back and sides and putting a new, modern top on it. A top that is not old growth red spruce, has not aged 75 years, with bracing that has not aged 75 years, and glue that has not aged 75 years. You are, if you have any skills at all, going to end up with a guitar that sounds better than the original simply because the Martins of the 70's were not, by a long shot, their best guitars. Is it fair to dupe someone into thinking you have magically "converted" their 70's Martin into a 1937 Martin? No. It is unethical, and it is a flat out lie. You have not magically converted anything except the ownership of a large sum of money. You played on the desire of many, many guitarists to own a pre-war Martin, and you have sold them on the idea that their sub-par 70's Martin will now be a pre-war cannon. A Bluegrass machine. It might, but a "conversion" is no guarantee that you will get what you paid for. Likely, the guy who paid for such a rebuild, will hear a vast improvement, real or imagined, in the sound of their "converted" guitar. But it will never really be a pre-war Martin no matter how much hype, snake oil, or hyperbole is tossed around by the guy who wishes to hack up a perfectly good guitar, void the warranty, and charge a lot of money to preform the conversion.

One instance when this alleged "conversion" might be warranted, and that is when the owner steps on the guitar, putting his foot through the soundboard, but doing no other damage to the guitar. In that case, the guitar needs a re-top. Would I choose to re-top it with lighter bracing? Yes. Would I call it a conversion? Maybe. But it was "converted" from a wreck into a playable guitar again. Not from a mediocre guitar into a pre-war Martin. But, there is a seat for every ass. If a luthier has decided that the money they can make doing these "conversions" is worth selling out their ethics in order to make a few bucks, then there will be people lined up to have their average guitars "converted" to retopped guitars. Whether they are better or not is up to the owner to decide. After all, it is their money being taken. Personally, I will probably never own another store bought guitar unless it is left to me in a will. Otherwise, I will keep on building the best guitars I can, and I will sleep well at night knowing I have not sold anyone a bill of goods just to increase my profit margins.

[Tim Benware]

If I understand the decision making process it goes something like this:

An older Martin comes in (let's say it's a 1956 D-28 with BRW B/S) and the owner is unsure if he wants it "restored" to a 1956 D-28 or "converted" to a pre-war style D-45. It is my understanding that the usual decision factor is the top condition. If the top does not need to be replaced it is not usually "converted" but "restored." If the top definitely needs to be replaced it can be restored or converted. Now of course the owner has the final say either way into what kind of work they want done.

So now let's say the owner has always wanted a Martin D-45 and doesn't have $8000 to purchase one but does have $1500 to "convert" his 1956 D-28 to a D-45 with an Adirondack top and pre-war bracing, binding, tuners, headstock logo and all the custom pearl work that makes a D-45, I find nothing wrong with that at all.

These are Martin owners that are driving the demand for conversions of this type and they know exactly what they want and what they will be getting in return. They want "somebody" to do the work for them. I sure wish I felt competent to do it.