# Vintage?

- Site: Analog Industries
- Author: Chris Randall
- Date: 2007-04-29
- URL: https://analogindustries.com/2007/04/vintage/

Okay, I'll admit that I'm getting on in my years. I'm 38, which makes me too old for pop music, just right for jazz, and not old enough for blues. But I wouldn't refer to myself as "vintage." That said, the word "vintage" is sort of like "fuck" inasmuch as it is a word entirely empty of meaning without context, and even then, it is suspect.

For instance, look at [this auction](http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Lexicon-LXP1-Stereo-Digital-Reverb-Unit_W0QQitemZ160110621572QQihZ006QQcategoryZ23792QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) on the 'bay. Maybe I'm crazy, but when I use the term in a music gear context, I use it kind of like one refers to better wines. An '01 Laffitte is vintage, while an '01 Gallo is turpentine. I mean, there's nothing wrong with an LXP1, really, but it is to effects as Gallo is to wine; it'll get you drunk, but you'd really rather be drinking something better.

In that light, I submit that there is no hard, fast "vintage event horizon," a specific date, and if a piece of gear is manufactured before that date, it is vintage. Vintage is rather a descriptor, and means the same as "desirable," I think. Or "has a certain something" or "peer reviewed and approved." And that's the difference between something vintage and something that's just plain old.