Vintage Martin destroyed in hateful eight

[Andy Volk]

https://reverb.com/blog/cf-martin-respo ... -eight-set

This is unbelievable. There's a chorus of musician outrage on the web. It's head shaking that they didn't just build props. Bad decision on Martin's part as well. Another irreplaceable piece of our musical heritage gone.

[Brad Bechtel]

Also discussed here.

[Barry Blackwood]

As a result of the incident, the company will no longer loan guitars to movies under any circumstances.”

There you go... There won't be any "hurt me twice, shame on me..."

[Damir Besic]

idiots

[Donny Hinson]

This is unbelievable. There's a chorus of musician outrage on the web. It's head shaking that they didn't just build props.

They did have other double or "prop" guitars, and they had them on the set, but the parties involved didn't bother to use them. I think we should keep in mind that 100+ year-old Martin parlor guitars like (or even better than) the one destroyed in the film appear regularly on eBay, so I feel everyone should drop the big moral indignation thing, and put this in perspective. It wasn't like they burned the Mona Lisa.

[Barry Blackwood]

I think we should keep in mind that 100+ year-old Martin parlor guitars like (or even better than) the one destroyed in the film appear regularly on eBay, so I feel everyone should drop the big moral indignation thing, and put this in perspective. It wasn't like they burned the Mona Lisa.

If the guitar had little value as you suggest, then why bother with the props?

[Jan Viljoen]

Hi Blokes, I dont think Martin would have loaned a museum piece to a cowboy movie, to be destroyed by accident.

This is just a hoax and could be a publicity stunt. I saw the movie and the name on the headstock could not be read. So?

Let the games begin.

[Donny Hinson]

If the guitar had little value as you suggest, then why bother with the props?

Barry, I didn't say it had little value. I said it didn't have tremendous value, and that I didn't feel it was a "one-of-a-kind", irreplaceable instrument. I stand by that. I own a very similar (but older) Martin parlor guitar. Mine is a better quality model than the one in the movie, and it's in excellent shape. I know the value of the guitar, and it's nowhere near what many other (but far newer) Martin, D'Angelico, and Gibson guitars would fetch in today's market.

Uninformed people often equate extreme age or the rarity of an item with tremendous value. But as any savvy collector will tell you, that's not always the case. Most all Martin guitars from the 19th century are worth a tiny fraction of what a 1930s model D-28 would bring. That's just the way it is. And if you don't believe me, buy a price guide, or go to a big auction of musical instruments...and prepare to be enlightened.

[Alvin Blaine]

I've watched the scene a few times, and from what I can tell it's a standard base model 0-16. You can buy those for $1500 if you look around, or pay top dollar for one in good shape for about $3500. I don't get Martin saying that it was priceless, unless it was owned by someone famous and they can prove provenance. I'm guessing the replica guitars, that were on hand for the take, cost more to make than the $1500 you could get an 1870s Martin 0-16 for.

[Andy Volk]

After thinking about this a bit, after all is said and done, this was just a mistake made on a film set. Lots of nice old things are undervalued, destroyed or left to lie fallow these days. There are plenty old guitars in the world. We should spend our time being outraged over climate change, which will ultimately affect all of us and our future generations much, much more than some old Martin.