Would you buy relic or non relic

Majorscale

Owned quite a few reliced and non relic CS fenders in my time. The reliced ones have consistently felt, played and sounded better although I can't claim to know why and is the reason why my 3 fenders are relics.

Lookswise I'm  not hung up on the finish although probably prefer a light to medium relic over a shiny NOS style finish so I avoid any first ding angst when it happens!

tone1

Relic all the way for me..... Hate brand new shiny stuff

goldtop

The best thing about having a relic is that when you put another ding into your guitar, you don't get depressed about it

ICBM

goldtop said:

The best thing about having a relic is that when you put another ding into your guitar, you don't notice

FTFY

thermionic

I'd only buy a relic if it was mint.

ToneControl

If relic'ing was a good idea, they'd do it for people 

guitars4you

Jez6345789 said:

I was reading recently that demand is declining and manufacturers are no longer chasing the relic or distressed finish. 

I wondered what the view was around here thesee days I like a genuine vintage guitar played in, minor wear and lacquer checking are all nice. I can cope with a bit of Gibson VOS at a pinch but I would have something new and shiny over a custom shop relic or fake ageing with chipped off paint and razor scored weather checking. 

The bulk of the Fender Custom Shop business is aged - be it heavy relic, beat the crap out of it relic, or subtle relic and when I say the bulk of the business we are talking over 80% - I'm led to believe last year (2016) was their best year - I've had the chat before with Fender about the bubble bursting and to be honest all of us have thought this might happen, but it hasn't 

I agree with @richardhomer comments about a thinner nitro finish on a relic v thicker on an NOS and somehow more 'spring' in the tone or its vibrant acoustic voice and the whole played in nature

I believe the new shiny finish is 100% correct on a new style PRS or new modern Fender, Gibson, Suhr etc etc etc, but to those who hate an aged finish on a 50's or 60's Fender replica and think it is fake, to a large degree I think you could say a new shiny gloss finish (NOS) on a 50's or 60's model is equally fake - If a parent had brought a Strat in 1957, played it for a couple of months and left it under the bed and it remained undiscovered until today then it would not look NOS - It would have lacquer checked and oxidized - Granted it would not be full of wear and tear, dings and dints, so something along the lines of a lightly aged closet finish, but as new, it won't be 

Only my opinion but jeans, T-shirt and a leather jacket don't look right with a new finish on a vintage Strat/Tele

Ravenous

Jez6345789 said:

What is your preference

I'd never buy a new "relic" guitar. I just don't see the point.  Why pay new for something that looks second hand?  I think it's just a silly fashion. (No offence intended to people who like it of course.)

Used guitars, or scratches on my own ones, I don't mind at all.

RandallFlagg

Relic. Fender CS relics feel great and are so comfortable to play.

Majorscale

Ravenous said:

Jez6345789 said:

What is your preference

I'd never buy a new "relic" guitar. I just don't see the point.  Why pay new for something that looks second hand?  I think it's just a silly fashion. (No offence intended to people who like it of course.)

Used guitars, or scratches on my own ones, I don't mind at all.

You are looking at it from the same aesthetic point of view as I once did...and then I played one. Relics are a cut above from a feel perspective which adds to their playability. 

guitars4you

Majorscale said:

Ravenous said:

Jez6345789 said:

What is your preference

I'd never buy a new "relic" guitar. I just don't see the point.  Why pay new for something that looks second hand?  I think it's just a silly fashion. (No offence intended to people who like it of course.)

Used guitars, or scratches on my own ones, I don't mind at all.

You are looking at it from the same aesthetic point of view as I once did...and then I played one. Relics are a cut above from a feel perspective which adds to their playability. 

relic or non relic is just like Marmite -  I hear both sides so many times and to be honest don't get many converters once they have made up their mind - But I have seen a few relic haters one day try a relic , then after they'll say they don't like to admit it, but based on feel, playability and tone, they do say WOW !!!!! followed by 'I did not know they were so good'

dindude

Prefer my own dings so have never gone for a relic. I could just about cope with a subtle relic paint job but dirty / rusty hardware is several steps too far.

Sassafras

An aged finish as opposed to a relic job is fine as long as it's done in a convincing and restrained manner like this:

axisus

I hate shiny new guitars. If they are expensive you hardly dare touch them, fret over little marks etc. It is not a joy to own them. You can't generally age them over time either, modern finishes on the whole seem much to resilient. Likewise, I would never waste money on a new car. I've had 20 old cars, and I'm usually not that bothered when they get scratched/dented by other people.

I'd take the mojo look every time personally. Having said that, each one has to be judged on its merits, and I don't like a large proportion of the ones I have seen. When I built my guitar last year I made it look old and worn and I couldn't be happier with it, it turned out perfectly as far as I'm concerned. Others may hate it but I don't mind, it's my guitar and it won't ever be sold (in my lifetime!).

adamm82

Jez6345789 said:

I was reading recently that demand is declining and manufacturers are no longer chasing the relic or distressed finish. 

I wondered what the view was around here thesee days I like a genuine vintage guitar played in, minor wear and lacquer checking are all nice. I can cope with a bit of Gibson VOS at a pinch but I would have something new and shiny over a custom shop relic or fake ageing with chipped off paint and razor scored weather checking. 

What is your preference

I haven't bought any reliced guitars but I think I would. Because I like the vintage look on certain guitars but don't want to pay the vintage guitar prices. I hate over the top relicing though. I've seen some guitars that look like they've been at the bottom of the ocean for 50 years and it's too much. it has to be done well and not some take a screwdriver to the guitar job like you see on ebay. 

However rather than reliced I will see if I can find an older model with natural wear sometimes. 

I know it's best to play the guitar for a long time and let it happen naturally but I play just at home and my playing style doesn't really lead to much wear and tear. apart from a bit of dirt her and there my guitars are always in good condition. 

crunchman

I never liked the relicing concept but I did then end up with a Heavy Relic Tele for a couple of years - as it was the best sounding Tele in the shop.

Having said that, the relic job on that one was completely over the top.

The other major gripe was that the tuners were really stiff.  I don't know for certain if that was linked to whatever treatment they used to rust them, but if it was then it was definitely a step too far.

I wouldn't rule out owning another relic, but I'd rather have a really thin finish new one looking one.  The thin finish might mark and ding more easily but at least they would be honest rather than fake.

57Deluxe

No - but I would buy a Raygun Relics and most deffo this Tele which in this colour would look nauseous if pristine...

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c1/c9/c9/c1c9c947396564b838c3e800c2665c21.jpg

Lewy

I'm not sure accusations of lacking legitimacy or authenticity hold a lot of water in the relic/non-relic debate. If you've got a pristine looking guitar with a standard poly finish then that's just as fake as a relic finish....it's faking being an expertly applied lacquer finish on an immaculately sanded and prepared piece of wood, when it is in fact a layer of plastic over an often not very well sanded at all bit of wood. A relic is deceptive when it purports to have seen more action than it has, a "pristine" poly finished US Standard or whatever is deceptive when it purports to have been finished with more care and expertise than it was. There's no moral high ground there as I see it.

Personally my choice of whether to go relic or not would depend on the guitar....Fender - light relic all the way, Gibson...no. Any acoustic never, never, never. Purely emotional responses, no particular logic being applied.

Whitecat

Lewy said:

I'm not sure accusations of lacking legitimacy or authenticity hold a lot of water in the relic/non-relic debate. If you've got a pristine looking guitar with a standard poly finish then that's just as fake as a relic finish....it's faking being an expertly applied lacquer finish on an immaculately sanded and prepared piece of wood, when it is in fact a layer of plastic over an often not very well sanded at all bit of wood. A relic is deceptive when it purports to have seen more action than it has, a "pristine" poly finished US Standard or whatever is deceptive when it purports to have been finished with more care and expertise than it was. There's no moral high ground there as I see it.

Personally my choice of whether to go relic or not would depend on the guitar....Fender - light relic all the way, Gibson...no. Any acoustic never, never, never. Purely emotional responses, no particular logic being applied.

Not to mention the fact that this is "showbiz" and if you gig, well, your instrument is as much a part of your look as your ripped jeans... or not, as the case may be, so feel free to choose appropriately. Image is important.

57Deluxe

you can gig a relic with no fear of it getting a ding!