# Seagull Guitars - Old or New?



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

Any thoughts about the standard series Seagull guitars? S6/S12 cedar top, wild cherry b/s

Do they get better with age? 

Has Godin made so many little manufacturing improvements over the years that a new one could actually be better than one made in the 80's or early 90's? 

Do they develop a belly bulge over time just like anything else?


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

Cedar generally doesn't "open up" over time like spruce does and the wild cherry is likely laminate, so it's not going to get substantially better with age.

Can't speak to quality improvements, but I would hope that today's instruments are better quality than the ones built in the 80s.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

bw66 said:


> Cedar generally doesn't "open up" over time like spruce does and the wild cherry is likely laminate, so it's not going to get substantially better with age.
> 
> Can't speak to quality improvements, but I would hope that today's instruments are better quality than the ones built in the 80s.


That pretty much echoes everything I've been thinking as well. 

What occurred to me after reading your response, is looking at it from the value aspect. If those early Seagulls were all that & a bag of chips, they would be worth more used than a new one is. They aren't. Guess that answers my questions. I'll give myself a "Duh" for this one.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

Lincoln said:


> That pretty much echoes everything I've been thinking as well.
> 
> What occurred to me after reading your response, is looking at it from the value aspect. If those early Seagulls were all that & a bag of chips, they would be worth more used than a new one is. They aren't. Guess that answers my questions. I'll give myself a "Duh" for this one.


In fairness, they do generally represent good value. Aside from Gibson and Martin, there aren't many vintage acoustic guitars out there that sell at higher than new prices. That's the big knock on all Godin guitars: they don't hold their value terribly well.

Nothing wrong with cedar, it just doesn't really change over time, but if you want that cedar "punch" it's there. And wild cherry laminate is still a fine material, it's just not solid wood. I recently repaired a Norman dreadnaught made of those same materials for a friend. It was a fine sounding and playing instrument, for something that would have cost about 3-400 dollars back in the day.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I prefer cedar top for my own playing, although my Simon & patrick Cedr 12 has a real beat up top.
But doesn't sound any worse for it.


----------



## StevieMac (Mar 4, 2006)

I have direct experience with both. Up until a year ago, I owned a well played S6 from the 80's (paid $100 ~7 yrs ago w/o case) and a recently built S6 that was virtually new. After playing them back to back for some time, I doubt _anyone_ could have distinguished one from the other in terms of either sound or playability in a blind test....that's how close they were. The sound, overall, was _quite_ respectable. Their playability was not impressive however as the action seemed unusually high on both (though not due to "belly bulge" as mentioned earlier).

My takeaway then was: 1) they do not "age" sonically; 2) their playability doesn't appear to change much over time (but at least doesn't seem to worsen); and 3) they clearly don't hold their value and the chances of appreciation are about nil. I ended up keeping the one with the case and, after a proper set up, I'm pleased with the guitar for the money I spent. The other S6 I donated to a member here when he was looking to get a friend started on guitar.


----------



## Dorian2 (Jun 9, 2015)

@Lincoln I have a 2001 S6 cedar and a 2006 Maritime 12 String with Spruce top if you need a direct reference to new vs old sound. Both are worked in so much that I'm not sure if the sound is a lot different than a new one as I haven't had a chance to test that. But the playability and feel are more than likely to be a lot different. For the S6 cedar, I'm pretty sure the harmonic overtones on it are vastly different than when it was new. That might just be me though as I'm a better acoustic player now than when I got the S6.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

zontar said:


> I prefer cedar top for my own playing, although my Simon & patrick Cedr 12 has a real beat up top.
> But doesn't sound any worse for it.


@zontar Does your S&P 12 have a flat area on the back of the neck from the first to about the 5th fret? 

I owned an S&P Songsmith12 with that type of profile, and I've always wondered if they are all like that. Or did I get one that was modified by someone, for someone?


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Lincoln said:


> @zontar Does your S&P 12 have a flat area on the back of the neck from the first to about the 5th fret?
> 
> I owned an S&P Songsmith12 with that type of profile, and I've always wondered if they are all like that. Or did I get one that was modified by someone, for someone?


Nothing I'd call a flat spot
Could be wear or customization or different profile at the time it was made.


----------



## John McMillin (Aug 5, 2018)

I'm something of a bird collector. Currently I own a Seagull and an S&P, but I've owned five others from the brands. Mark my vote for "Old." 

The latest Seagull models don't have the ideal neck specs I prefer, short and wide. My 2017 SWS Mini Jumbo is the last of the MJs and one of their last large guitars with that spec. It sounds magnificent, but it has an epoxied neck joint that makes a normal neck reset impossible. That's a big deal to some buyers of traditional brands who presume a neck set is necessary every 20-30 years, but at my age, that's not likely to be a problem I'll face. 

I just gifted my 2002 Seagull CW GT to my talented daughter, and she's over the moon about it. That had the now-discontinued Qll pickup, with internal mike and and undersaddle piezio transducer. That one was capable of a wide range of good tones- the best pickup system I've tried yet. If you see one of those, buy it, but know it's a risk, since repair parts aren't available. 

Seagull's recent trends trends longer, skinny necks and finishes such as denim and black leave me cold. They're obviously aimed at young hipsters, so I guess I'm not supposed to like them.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

I don't even know the age of my S6+Cedar. I played it once, and had to have it immediately. Something about the tone spoke to me, warmly and richly. I still haven't looked up the age, as I can't help but play it when I pick it up. It converted me away from being a Yamaha man, dreaming of Martins.


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

I personally can't get past the Seagull headstock. Don't get me wrong, I totally understand it's functionality. Very smart, but visually unappealing to me. I do own a cedar-top Simon & Patrick 12 string. Bought it mid 90's. I keep it at A-440, and it is as sturdy now as the day I brought it home. A little wear right in front of the pickguard where I guess I frequently "miss" in my strumming. I'm thinking a spruce top with heavy varnish wouldn't show this as bad. Still, awesome instrument!


----------

