Nitro on poly... what's the point?

rsvmark

Please excuse the lack of knowledge but I take it from the comments above that PRS are a poly finish? Not judging or anything but would they benefit from a nitro finished range?

ICBM

rsvmark said:

Please excuse the lack of knowledge but I take it from the comments above that PRS are a poly finish? Not judging or anything but would they benefit from a nitro finished range?

What is "poly"?

Read what Corvus said...

richardhomer

ICBM said:

rsvmark said:

Please excuse the lack of knowledge but I take it from the comments above that PRS are a poly finish? Not judging or anything but would they benefit from a nitro finished range?

What is "poly"?

Read what Corvus said...

The actual composition of their finish is (probably deliberately) obfuscated. 'V12' is meant to be a 'best of all worlds' combination of urethane and nitro (iirc). It feels 'thin' and isn't 'tacky' like a lot of modern Gibsons feel.

As to what it actually is - I'm not sure it matters. It looks (and feels) good - and the guitars are not required to match 'vintage' specs, as they aren't reissues.

ICBM

richardhomer said:

The actual composition of their finish is (probably deliberately) obfuscated. 'V12' is meant to be a 'best of all worlds' combination of urethane and nitro (iirc). It feels 'thin' and isn't 'tacky' like a lot of modern Gibsons feel.

As to what it actually is - I'm not sure it matters. It looks (and feels) good - and the guitars are not required to match 'vintage' specs, as they aren't reissues.

Sorry, I was being a bit pet-peeve-ish . The whole "poly" thing annoys me because there are at least two distinct finishes with names starting with "poly"- polyester and polyurethane - and they aren't the same… other than in the minds of guitarists.

The correct answer is: it depends on the age and sometimes the part of the guitar!

Yes, the current finish is called V12 and is some sort of acrylic urethane as far as I can tell. Originally PRS used a polyester base coat with an acrylic urethane topcoat - but the models with maple necks had the necks done in nitro. There are some all-nitro models too.

I have to say I'm not a big fan of nitro - due to its tendency to react with stands, straps and anything else containing certain types of organic compounds that it comes into contact with.

streethawk

As already mentioned, nitro isn't the same nowadays anyway. The whole nomenclature of finishes is smoke and mirrors and not even worth exploring imo.

I will say this: lacquer ages nicer than poly, just as nickel plate ages nicer than chrome plate. Obvious example would be some of those jaggedy 70's fender maple fretboards. 

Evilmags

Their is a big difference between the thin poly coats on top end stuff and the thick level of glob on cheap stuff. The quantity of finish will have a much bigger impact on tone than whether it is nitro or poly. 

Loobs

'Lets it breathe' is the biggest load of tosh I've ever heard. Does a guitar have lungs?

90% of electric guitar sound comes from the pickup, bridge and scale length.

I also very much doubt the influence of say, rosewood versus maple fingerboards on the tone of the guitar. Rosewood sounds darker - really? 

I do agree that nitro ages and looks better, generally. More resonant? Dunno about that. 

I have a Baja that is marvellously resonant and has a ton of plastic on it. 

Marketing hype, I think. 

WezV

richardhomer said:

Strat_a_tat_tat said:

Surely, with a poly basecoat, the 'nitro lets your guitar breathe' type of argument is null and void (??).

If poly didn't allow wood to breathe, 70s Fenders wouldn't need truss rods, as the moisture content of the wood would never change - so I don't accept that from the proponents of nitro.

That assumes moisture content is the only variable that could cause necks to move - you will find the internal tension of the wood, string tension and even temperature are much more important on a "dry"  and stable piece of wood that is totally sealed by a finish

Moisture content comes back  into it when the instrument changes between extreme environments or is stored incorrectly - and the type of finish will determine who susceptible the guitar is to these changes.

I would safely assume, all else being equal, that a "poly" neck would be more stable than a "nitro" neck, and both would be a lot more stable than an "oiled" neck .... but all things are never equal when talking about woo and guitar abuse, and i love an oiled neck.  So I would say its only worth thinking about if you are having issues in this areas

FelineGuitars

Being in the unique position of being at a repair bench we get to see guitars of all descriptions pass before us and all sorts of finishes too.
So we see pure Polyester, Polyurethane, pure nitro and nitro over a poly base etc etc
Do we have an out and out favourite....no
Do we love nitro more ...no - we often see it melted when put against stands or resting against a strap or the lining of a case and reacted and causing problems.

The final question  .....does a nitro finished guitar have more sustain, does it allow for a better sound, does it breathe better etc etc
In my experience/opinion: No - sometimes it can sound amazing, other times not so hot
Sometimes you are blown away by some "cheap as chips" Squier or suchlike that just needed a decent fret dress or set-up.

In fact if you went into a big guitar shop blindfolded and played loads of different guitars that had all been fret dressed and set up by the same expert technician to allow them all a fair chance playability wise you may get a few shocks as to which guitars you bonded with.

Sometimes we can all be at risk of being "theoretical guitar experts" where what we believe is sometimes based on taking someone else's assertions as gospel, whereas if you just go out and play a bunch of guitars you may be surprised to find you like ones better that break all the "rules"

Strat_a_tat_tat

FelineGuitars said:
Sometimes we can all be at risk of being "theoretical guitar experts" where what we believe is sometimes based on taking someone else's assertions as gospel, whereas if you just go out and play a bunch of guitars you may be surprised to find you like ones better that break all the "rules"

Yeah... totally agree. Sometimes we buy with our eyes (brand bias)... sometimes we buy with (perhaps misplaced) 'technical expertise' (geeky-theory bias).

That said, over the years, most of the guitars I've bonded with have had nitro finishes... but not all of them. On various shop visits, I've picked up a guitar that 'on paper' was unlikely to appeal to me.... but it's then come home with me.

In general, I guess I try to understand what features etc make me prefer one guitar over the next... but it's also important to remain open to stuff that doesn't necessarily fit in with my pet theories.

guitars4you

Loobs said:

'Lets it breathe' is the biggest load of tosh I've ever heard. Does a guitar have lungs?

I know where you are coming from - Yet most builders agree a thinner finish will not dampen down the guitars natural vibrant character - I've seen and heard many guitars that have a really 'crap' home made' refin - Take that off and the guitar is so much more more vibrant, instantly - So the word breathe is more about a natural vibrant character

I had a chat with PRS once and he stated that his guitars sound better acoustically with no finish on them - but you can't sell guitars 'IKEA' style - But the pursuit of a quality thin finish has surrounded many builders for many years

Wood is 'porous', so without any base coat it would sink and probably de-laminate, so a base coat is required - yet a thick base coat can strangle the guitars natural 'vibrant character'

Violins and indeed many acoustic guitars now use ultra thin based finishes to maximise the guitars natural vibrant character

maybe we should not use the word breathe, but what it implies is correct - IMO

rze99

It only makes sense to me if the outer nitro layer is going to age and yellow, which would be aesthetically pleasing on say, Lake Placid Blue, Ice Metallic Blue, etc.

impmann

Oh but it sounds better - can't you hear the difference in sustain between this Nitro painted guitar and this Poly painted one? Its chalk and cheese - much like the tonal differences of different glues used to assemble the guitars. Hot hide glue always resonates better than Titebond or similar. It sounds so much more authentic and better.

If you believe any of the above - have a word with yourself. Its all bollocks - and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Snake oil and horsefeathers come in many guises - and sadly the guitar industry is full of the worst kind of flowery, mystical, non-scientific bullshit. Dry it out you could fertilise Africa.

Sassafras

I neither care nor can tell the difference between poly and nitro.
As long as the finish isn't so thick that it bends light around the guitar, I'm happy to just have some sort of protective covering on it that doesn't weigh a ton and doesn't stifle resonance.

Loobs

guitars4you said:

Loobs said:

'Lets it breathe' is the biggest load of tosh I've ever heard. Does a guitar have lungs?

I know where you are coming from - Yet most builders agree a thinner finish will not dampen down the guitars natural vibrant character - I've seen and heard many guitars that have a really 'crap' home made' refin - Take that off and the guitar is so much more more vibrant, instantly - So the word breathe is more about a natural vibrant character

I had a chat with PRS once and he stated that his guitars sound better acoustically with no finish on them - but you can't sell guitars 'IKEA' style - But the pursuit of a quality thin finish has surrounded many builders for many years

Wood is 'porous', so without any base coat it would sink and probably de-laminate, so a base coat is required - yet a thick base coat can strangle the guitars natural 'vibrant character'

Violins and indeed many acoustic guitars now use ultra thin based finishes to maximise the guitars natural vibrant character

maybe we should not use the word breathe, but what it implies is correct - IMO

There's some logic to that, but to compare acoustic guitars and violins to electric guitars, designed to be played at volume, ampified with all of the variables (speakers, cables etc) that brings into the equation isn't really a fair comparison - IMO.

Yes, wood is porous, but the tonal differences between filling those pours with one slightly thinner type of lacquer vs another have so far eluded me. 

Also, I am dubious of what PRS says. That man is a master businessman, and I've never been convinced by any of his guitars. I find him extremely smug. He's like the Tony Blair of the guitar world. 

YMMV, IMHO, etc. 

Sporky

Loobs said:

Also, I am dubious of what PRS says.

He told me his favourite biscuit is the Pink Wafer.

For realsies.

guitars4you

Loobs said:

guitars4you said:

Loobs said:

'Lets it breathe' is the biggest load of tosh I've ever heard. Does a guitar have lungs?

I know where you are coming from - Yet most builders agree a thinner finish will not dampen down the guitars natural vibrant character - I've seen and heard many guitars that have a really 'crap' home made' refin - Take that off and the guitar is so much more more vibrant, instantly - So the word breathe is more about a natural vibrant character

I had a chat with PRS once and he stated that his guitars sound better acoustically with no finish on them - but you can't sell guitars 'IKEA' style - But the pursuit of a quality thin finish has surrounded many builders for many years

Wood is 'porous', so without any base coat it would sink and probably de-laminate, so a base coat is required - yet a thick base coat can strangle the guitars natural 'vibrant character'

Violins and indeed many acoustic guitars now use ultra thin based finishes to maximise the guitars natural vibrant character

maybe we should not use the word breathe, but what it implies is correct - IMO

There's some logic to that, but to compare acoustic guitars and violins to electric guitars, designed to be played at volume, ampified with all of the variables (speakers, cables etc) that brings into the equation isn't really a fair comparison - IMO.

Yes, wood is porous, but the tonal differences between filling those pours with one slightly thinner type of lacquer vs another have so far eluded me. 

Also, I am dubious of what PRS says. That man is a master businessman, and I've never been convinced by any of his guitars. I find him extremely smug. He's like the Tony Blair of the guitar world. 

YMMV, IMHO, etc. 

we might as well use a tin of Dulux for primer undercoat and top coat then - I personally don't have an issue on my guitars as to what the finish is - I have a few guitars and some are nitro some aren't - I agree a nice guitar is a nice guitar - But a thick finish will dampen the guitars natural vibrant character - My first test when trying a guitar is always an unplugged test - it tells me so much - In fact the last guitar I purchased, only 2/3 weeks ago, I never plugged it in - an unplugged acoustic test told me all I needed to know and it has an ultra thin finish - courtesy of @FelineGuitars ;

I agree we can all have opinions as to who we like and dislike, but sorry in my view the comments about PRS v Tony Blair is below the belt - I don't expect everyone to like his guitars, but his guitar knowledge, on his own guitars and others is immense - Yes he is a good business man but he is also a very good builder/designer and a credible guitar player

stickyfiddle

The whole "breathe" thing is clearly just bollocks. I like nitro because it looks and feels better and generally wears in a more appealing way. Soundwise I'm quite sure there's next to no difference between thin nitro and thin "poly".

stickyfiddle

guitars4you said:

I agree we can all have opinions as to who we like and dislike, but sorry in my view the comments about PRS v Tony Blair is below the belt - I don't expect everyone to like his guitars, but his guitar knowledge, on his own guitars and others is immense - Yes he is a good business man but he is also a very good builder/designer and a credible guitar player

Agree with this. I'm not a big PRS fan but there's no doubt they make fantastic instruments and that's largely driven by Mr PRS himself

guitars4you

stickyfiddle said:

The whole "breathe" thing is clearly just bollocks. I like nitro because it looks and feels better and generally wears in a more appealing way. Soundwise I'm quite sure there's next to no difference between thin nitro and thin "poly".

I think you are probably right about the tonal difference of a thin poly or thin nitro - but the key point is thin - I have never indicated nitro is better than modern finishes - But I will endorse the thin finish that won't dampen the guitars natural vibrant character - It is this vibrant character that I believe is what we call 'breathe' - I do agree nitro wear in a more appealing way

- Many builders agree with the thin aspect - I suppose the only true test is to compare the same guitar - So start with a poly finish, then refin it with nitro and find out - Otherwise hard to compare directly as two pieces of wood will sound different anyway

I have sold many C/Shop Fenders and it is clearly noticeable how much more of a vibrant acoustic character you'll find on an aged finish, v a new shiny gloss finish (NOS) - clearly noticeable on an unplugged test in most instances - A NOS finish is thicker (albeit by a negligible amount)