Martin D-18 Authentic 1937 - Aged or Not Aged, Which is Better?

[@bosse641]

Lovely. Like the aged one more.

[@Rainingdogs56]

Love the aged finish. Dollar for dollar I’ll always take the pretty one. They both sound great.

[@markjohnson6485]

I bought the D18 1937 authentic not aged very nice I have owned 3 standard series 18s and one 18 modern deluxe all sound good love the 1937 authentic I do notice it takes awhile to play in the Adirondack tops even though they say VTS makes it sound broke in from the get go that is not my opinion at all . I have owned over 30 new Martins and that is my opinion across the line Good video and review

[@Randorita]

I would take the aged one all day long! I love the honey color better than the almost white color. Add in the sound which may be a bit fuller sounding and you have a winner. I prefer the chunky necks. Nice comparison, guys! It amazes me to hear the differences in sound between two almost identical guitars.

[@anthonyb2334]

Lovely guitars. I would go for the aged finish. To my eye it just looks cool. Thank you for your videos

[@texhaines9957]

Like the aged one. However, this year I found a 1972 A Loprinzi LM-15 (spruce top, mahogany back and sides), a "New Jersey Martin." I like the Adirondack VTS top on these. I think I'll keep with my LM-15, but if my son wants one... Thanks Quinton and Paul.

[@jeffcortnimullin3210]

I’m really shocked at the significant sound difference between these two guitars. I’m not a huge fan of guitars that have gone through a relic process, but the difference in finish makes a huge difference. I played the aged version in a local shop, and it was magical!

[@roytube10]

both are cannons, i like the non aged better though. curious what strings they are using and if they are using martin's Retro ones.

[@gregweber3387]

OK, so a regular D-18 lists for $2,399 on Martin's website. The D-18 Authentic 1937 is $6,299 and the D-18 Authentic 1937 Age is $7,999. I'm not sure I hear enough differences in these 1937 D-18's that would entice me to pay the premium that these go for compared to a standard series D-18.

[@sure5871]

The standard has just set a bar that left the custom shop with little headroom

[@dreamsR4real]

‘Regular’ Martin D-18 has a list price of $2799 not $2399; I didn’t fact check the other two, but just wanted to let you know…

[@apegrasshoplizard]

​@@dreamsR4real3400 €uros in Spain. 😅

[@twinpearsondesign]

The Authentic has wider Bridge String Spacing at 2 1/4".

[@charlesbolton8471]

⁠@@dreamsR4real The satin finish D-18 is $2,399 and it is technically a “standard” also.

[@vangmx]

I have a 2023 D18 (I love this guitar) and from my ears, the D18 authentic does sound different (is it better? I would have to play it myself), but you’re gonna have to pay premium for that extra sound enhancement. Btw, the authentic comes with a solid Adirondack spruce top while the normal D18 is a solid Sitka spruce top.

[@merseybeat1963]

They are better

[@coreyjohnston4673]

J45 for me. I think it depends on what kind of music you play. Both are great!

[@TheThinker39]

I prefer the aged one, which has more low frequencies.

[@booswalia]

Huge difference in them. The aged one sounded a little duller to my ear.

[@Bigdavemusic76]

Fantastic sound from both but I agree the aged sounds better. Good job guys

[@TheFatCottonwood]

Great guitars! I believe I like the aged a bit better. They were trees now they are guitars, awesome!

[@uvp5000]

Were I in the market for instruments like these, I would purchase the instrument without the aged toner top. I am grateful I am not choosing between these two. The aged toner D-18 has a nicer tone, while the other instrument has the bass response and big sound that I seek.

[@gair1944]

The Aged tone was sweeter and the non aged treble strings were a little more 'metallic and stringy' sounding to me. I would award the first place to the Aged D-18. Nice comparison!

[@billboedeker406]

I liked the sound of the un-aged a little more. But like the color of the aged one. I was at my local shop and saw an aged one. The color was great. Then I saw three small divots in the lower bout and just couldn’t get past them. I would go for the in-aged one and put my own marks on it, and save some money.

[@FloyDZeD]

That's part of the aging, Martin puts some scratches and dings in them to copy the appearance of the vintage Martin they have in their museum.

[@mikebauer6917]

I’ll take both… for testing.

[@juanblackwell8801]

Everyone I know hates the new necks. we all love the Big thick necks.

[@MatteoTorgy]

I can't for the life of me figure out why Martin changed the necks throughout its Standard line to make them so thin. My wrist hurts from no hand swell support after only minutes of playing them. It's worth noting that these Authentic guitars have the larger necks. Not Gibson J-35 chunky, but certainly bigger than the Standard line necks.

[@joepayne7843]

I would be happy with either one.

[@hrbcaster]

The standard’s tone will develop while the aged stays almost the same. I have tried😊

[@michealofloinn2539]

You're saying that aged guitars don't age anymore? I think I'd go for standard so.

[@Bds737]

They both have VTS tops…

[@hrbcaster]

@@Bds737 Jupp, but as I said, the D-18 standard has not.

[@randallstevenson1973]

Aged wins, the other has to open up with age!

[@brazilianrosewoodguitars6336]

I like the not aged and after 10 years the sound will better than the aged vts (vts lost the details of the spruce only enhance the boxing energy. the tone and the character loss)

[@BobPerrone]

More throaty tone to the aged one. Both great, but aged wins.

[@fuzzyip]

both have no truss rods, correct?

[@Bds737]

They have non-adjustable truss rods.

[@chanpeter3608]

Any chance compare Martin d18 authentic 1937 aged and d18 authentic 1939 aged ? Thanks a lot

[@TheAcousticLetter]

That would be a great comparison but the trick is having both in stock at the same time.

[@chanpeter3608]

Thanks

[@craigdiamond5518]

Aged has much more midrange, is less scooped and a tad less highs. I like it! Yup, alot of $ for tearing into an old instrument -- however that is done -- to replicate what they can. I understand both tops are VTS and will age similarly (or not!). Interesting that the finish may make that noticeable a difference in sound. Maybe it is just these two that are just different enough even before putting on the gloss. You do have to trust the artistry of the Martin neck given there are no truss rods here; neither my 1962 O-16NY or 1974 D-35 have rods and they still maintain minimal relief.

[@TMoody]

Aged all the way..... hands down.... no comparison.

[@francismarcela6207]

i wonder if it is as good as the actual 37.

[@pauldulaney35]

Find a Standard Series D-18 with a Lutz spruce top and never look back.

[@jaepark8922]

Aged sounds better, deeper, more defined bass nuance. Just like in another D18 comparison by Alamo. Probably the best D18 made today at a price that is a fraction of the real deal. A guy I know has a 1941 D18 and says the 1937 Authentic but the Aged one sounds very much the same to him.

[@garychen483]

The way he plays doesn’t show the true tones of the guitar.

[@dave7010]

8 grand !!!! . D28 for 4. Thats Martin. 5 g for the name & 3 for the wood. What's that i hear , no adjustable truss rod.

[@soofitnsexy]

its actually a very good price...go buy a real one from 1937.........

[@charlesbolton8471]

@@soofitnsexy Exactly, and that’s the very reason that legacy instrument makers have been so successful with reissues. This is especially true for higher end “aged” reissues.

[@Dave-rk2nl]

what Im hearing is the aged one sounds like 2005 - 2012 models, and the non aged has a bit of a regular tone of the D18 and sounds like its breaking up earlier...could be the woods

[@Dave-rk2nl]

Who can afford an authentic now...there 7300 bucks from 6299

[@rabbadatz]

Non-aged to me...