The Finish Thread

dindude

This isn't a Poly vs Nitro debate, that's been had many time over, likewise relic vs non-relic.

We tend to lump finishes into these categories though, Poly (largely these days polyurethane as opposed to polyester), and Nitro. But not everything in the Poly world is equal and this debate is rarely covered.

I will chuck out there from the start that I like Nitro finishes generally, I think they look and feel better (nothing to do with tone), just more fitting for a musical instrument, but I also like them intact - there's not many companies other than Gibson and Fender (and Fender less and less these days) who do non-relic'd nitro.

Then there's Poly - now this really frustrates me, as opening up to a Poly finish brings into contention a whole raft of guitars but I think so few do it well, even at the high end.

My USA Schecter is Poly and it does not bother me in the slightest (in fact it's opened up the world of Poly to me) as its so well done, doesn't have that horrible dipping in plastic look, it's vibrant yet subtle all at the same time. Just looks and feels like quality.

I also have a Godin that has satin back and sides and a solid gloss Poly top - if you told a stranger to the guitar that it had a solid plastic top rather than maple, they would believe so plasticy does it look and feel. It's a really good guitar but really let down in this area.

But most others I see are also nasty, I don't like PRS finishes for this reason, the solid colour Suhrs I've seen look similarly cheap, etc etc.

Just interested in people's comments really, if you're not a die hard Nitro person, do you still take the quality of the finish into consideration when buying, and am I the only one put off by the ultra shiny plasticy look, enough that it would stop you buying an otherwise great guitar.

And which companies do Poly well In your opinion.

Discuss.....

monoamine

In terms of "feel" which, for me, is what makes me play and love a guitar more... only nitro ticks the box. And old nitro at that... the kind that has thinned and seeped into the grain and cracked and worn. But that is just me.

stimpsonslostson

For me is about feel. I don't care what the finish is so long as it feels good "in hand", particularly the neck.

 I generally don't like the thick poly found on some Squier necks, but happily lived with the finish on my old Epiphone LP. 

All my current guitars have oil or thin nitro finishes, but the nicest n neck I've played was that of the Trohman telecaster. It was a satin poly I believe & felt amazing. 

axisus

I'm not massively bothered, I don't dislike PRS finishes, other than the fact that I'm not into shiny new guitars. What I hate is 'plasticy' finishes with lumps missing off of them. Horrible.

JookyChap

I like how nitro ages, but as long as it isn't sticky I have no great hang-ups about anything. Oiled wood for a neck is very hard to beat though

Whitecat

I think PRS does poly really well actually - the current "V12" being even better than their previous formulation as it does seem thinner. 

Nik Huber has the best poly, whatever it is. It's ridiculously thin and feels lovely whether gloss or satin. 

BilT does poly really well too. 

Nitro is good, but only if properly applied and cured. I've played some Fender guitars where the neck got sticky as f*** after an hour or two and it's not pleasant and makes it more difficult to play. This implies that the finishing process was rushed... 

I do like the way nitro feels in general if it's done well but the fragility of it annoys me a little. Having to be careful about stands, leads, straps, you name it... it's too easy to burn...

WezV

I said in another thread recently... we should talk about how it's applied more and actual type a bit less.

i would rather have a thin and slightly sunken finish than perfection