It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
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!
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
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
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.
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!).
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.
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.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c1/c9/c9/c1c9c947396564b838c3e800c2665c21.jpg
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.