GodBlessTexas Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I just don't understand why anyone would want to buy a new guitar that looks like it's been used. I can certainly understand the appeal of a vintage instrument, but I can't understand why people want to pay extra money to take a new guitar patterned after an older instrument and beat it up so that it looks used. I'd much rather get the guitar in a new state and put that wear on it naturally by playing it; breaking it in, so to speak. Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TenderSurrender Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I sort of agree, i mean i CAN understand why as a PERSONAL PROJECT someone might want to relic a guitar but perhaps only on a cheap Squire or something that isnt worth much else... I mean for example if someone had a £120 Squire strat and decided they wanted a slightly different finish, relic'ing it might be pretty cool... However thos ewho pay Hundreds of pounds to relic a £1000 guitar because it looks "cool" i dont understand... Perhaps ill be flamed for my views but what ive posted is what i beleive... ~~ Slain Angel ~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodBlessTexas Posted August 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 (edited) Yeah, that's what I mean. I've seen expensive custom shop guitars that were basically new instruments that they put sandpaper and other materials to just to make them look aged. I could understand if you wanted say an exact copy of SRV's #1 Strat, Claptons ES 335 (which Guitar Center is now selling as a limited edition), or a Rory Gallagher Strat. But doing it just to have the appearance of a vintage instrument confounds me. Maybe it's because I can put enough wear on a new guitar myself that I don't think I need someone else doing it for me. Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas... Edited August 5, 2005 by GodBlessTexas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhoads56 Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 they used to do a relic replica of the SRV strat, its not in the latest frontline catalogue though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewrathofraf Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 i agree completely. i think its lame. and the idea of battle scars makes the guitar yours. its been through something with you, not simulated. -RAF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank falbo Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 The only possible reason I could think of is if you were famous, and you already owned a great vintage instrument, and you were associated with it. You wouldn't want to play your great old guitar every night live, so you'd have replicas made to keep the vibe going, and to eliminate the possibility of theft or damage. Then you could bring out the real one secretly for special shows and sessions. Take Willie Nelson for example, he could have replicas made and that would be fine. If he showed up on TV with some brand new Taylor I'm sure people would start freaking out. It's part of his identity now. In the furniture and housewares industry, they've been aging and antiqueing for a long time. There's just something about referencing an older time that brings about certain feelings. I can understand it with furniture to some extent, because it might invoke a state of mind that you associate with your grandparents, or your childhood, or whatever. Or you just think it's the latest fashion trend so you're buying into it. But for guitars, I think it's ridiculous. I have great respect for this instrument, so to me, I like my guitars to look as new and clean as possible for as long as possible. And if it's going to show wear, I want it to be actual wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 One of the projects on my "future build" list is a replica of a 1950 Fender Broadcaster (which would later become the Tele), just because I've enjoyed learning about that whole bit of Fender history (and I don't have a Tele...). The goal will be to make as close a replica as possible with modern wood & parts. But of course, it wouldn't look like a 1950 guitar unless the finish & hardware looked appropriately aged & beat. I also have similar plans for a 1958 Les Paul (lemondrop burst). Both guitars will strive to be as close as possible to the originals, but with one or two obvious features that would identify them as a less-than-vintage (e.g. modern) guitar built by me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tirapop Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I can see the appeal of a guitar that appears to be vintage. As far as the economics, if it's cheaper a real vintage guitar then it makes sense. But, guitars are all about fashion, right? When the Stones go out on tour, Keith Richards was plays a relic-ed Tele. They're disposable and replaceable, and spares vintage guitars from damage and theft. So, if a fan wants to own the same guitar Keith does... sure why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodBlessTexas Posted August 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 (edited) But of course, it wouldn't look like a 1950 guitar unless the finish & hardware looked appropriately aged & beat. Right, but instead of simulating play wear, couldn't you give it some real playwear? That's my point. I'd rather say "you see that nick there? I got it doing..." than "yeah, I did that with some shoe polish and some 120 grit sandpaper." That's real character, and easily done, especially if you play out/gig, aren't careful with your axe, or have kids. Is the appeal having a guitar that looks like a 1950's guitar found 50+ years alter, or a guitar 50 years old that looks new that can age with you? I know guys who'd give a testicle to find a perfectly preserved 40-50 year old Strat that's been stored in a case by some Grandma. Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas... Edited August 5, 2005 by GodBlessTexas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksound Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I know guys who'd give a testicle ... ← Testicle, spleen, liver, you name it. I went to a jam last Sunday (still a bit hung over from the gig the night before) and the guy in the host band had a 61 Strat that looked like it had been played twice a year whether it needed it or not. I couldn't talk him out of it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Beer Man Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I agree also, why would u want to buy a beat up guitar? I would just play it till it got beat up its self, i like relics, i think they look badass, but i hate pre relic'd relics lol if that makes since lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I can see the appeal of a guitar that appears to be vintage. As far as the economics, if it's cheaper a real vintage guitar then it makes sense. ← 1950 Broadcaster + 1958 Les Paul lemondrop, for the pair (all original) you're talking about half a million buck$. You won't be seeing those on eBay... The main thing for me will be to enjoy the process of trying to get everything dead-on accurate to the original specs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 it really doesn't matter if you don't "get" it...i "get" it,and so do the guys who do it or buy them that way.... some people don't get the appeal of a vee,or a warlock...i don't get the appeal of a strat or tele.... but that does not make them less valid as instruments.everyone thinks it is okay to demean what they don't like... would it make sense for others to dis you for loving your brand new looking instruments? you will never get most modern guitars to look reliced through playing...not since they started using poly finishes...maybe you could get that to happen with a nitro guitar naturally... take hammett's guitar...he "reliced" it by beating the crap out of it,dragging it around stage....but i bet he doesn't do that with his jackson rhoads vee... i personally like the look of a relic...it is all about art anyway,is it not? and what is art if not subjective? if you aren't careful,i'll go get my carvin strat i just bought this year and relic the dog*** out of it...it needs some charachter anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marossy Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 The way I see it, they are just capitalizing on "vintage mania". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southpa Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 (edited) Its been discussed before and I always say, "each to his own... I guess". I don't feel like looking for that picture of the strat being dragged behind a pickup truck again. I can see someone wanting to have replicas of Rory Gallagher and SRV strats and maybe even Hendrix's Monterey strat (get out the lighter fluid!), but otherwise it should be done for the right reasons in mind. That is, you can relic the guitar so "the guitar" looks cool. But don't relic the guitar so you think "you" will look cool, especially if you can't play it very well in the first place. Edited August 5, 2005 by Southpa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I already look cool. No guitar looks better than when it is strapped on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff B Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 (edited) I agree with the to each his own thing. But nere is my issue. people think having an old strat is cool, and I agree. So people think it is just as cool to have a reliced strat. To me, being a punk rock type, a reliced strat is like the preppie in leather and studs. He is not a PUNK no matter how much he looks like one. And he aggrevates me for trying to be something he is not. So why not just be what you are ? even if it is a new guitar it will be cool in its own way. Edited August 5, 2005 by Jeff B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Churchyard Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I don't feel like looking for that picture of the strat being dragged behind a pickup truck again. ← This has been done for real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodBlessTexas Posted August 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 it really doesn't matter if you don't "get" it...i "get" it,and so do the guys who do it or buy them that way.... some people don't get the appeal of a vee,or a warlock...i don't get the appeal of a strat or tele.... but that does not make them less valid as instruments.everyone thinks it is okay to demean what they don't like... would it make sense for others to dis you for loving your brand new looking instruments? But I do have a better understanding of it now, even if I don't agree with it. I can understand the appeal, but I believe character on an instrument is earned by putting it to use. As was stated after your post (I read ahead), relicing is like posing. It's like some kid who shaves his head and says he's always been punk, or a kid who put away his dockers and claims to be "metal" the day he heard a Children of Bodom or Killswitch Engage track. It's a fabrication. My new instruments don't stay "new" for long. Sure, I clean them, pamper them as best I can, and try to take good care of them as best I can, but there isn't one that I actually play that doesn't have scratches, a ding or two, and a few more imperfections. The thing is, those imperfections got there by playing the things. That "appropriately aged" look didn't get there with sandpaper, a chain, or any other artificial aging process. I'd love to get a 57 style strat (though I prefer the 70's headstyle), but I'd want it new so that what character it developed came honestly from me, or from someone else if I bought a used instrument. Hell, my favorite used Jazz bass has enough character to border on abused/neglected because it was gigged and played the hell out of. I guess I just value that type of genuine character. you will never get most modern guitars to look reliced through playing...not since they started using poly finishes...maybe you could get that to happen with a nitro guitar naturally... My Jazz Bass, my Warlock, and my Strat would disagree, depending on your definition of relic. If I still had them, my old SG, transition Roadstar (Roadstar II body with era correct RG style modern neck), and Mockinbird would all beg to differ, as they had enough dings, dents, and love taps to show they were played out and often. Hell, just do a search for "relic" on ebay under musical instruments and look at all the modern beater instruments you can find. i personally like the look of a relic...it is all about art anyway,is it not? and what is art if not subjective? Absolutely. I'm not trying to change anyone's opinions. I'm just trying to have a better understand of what people appreciate about them. I certainly have a better understanding now, but my opinion of reliced instruments still hasn't changed, even if my understanding of the draw to them has. if you aren't careful,i'll go get my carvin strat i just bought this year and relic the dog*** out of it...it needs some charachter anyway ← To each his own, obviously. But would it help if I dared you? Ok, somewhat off topic on guitars, but not relicing. Last year my church wanted some crosses to display with a worn, weathered look. One of the guys in my Sunday School class has a construction company, and he spent a couple hours one day building three of them. Then he drug them out back of the shop and proceeded to beat them with a chain while his foreman and the crew, who are almost all Hispanic, watched. He said they were horrified at what he was doing, with many of them crossing themselves and muttering prayers. We got a big kick out of it at church. Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 As was stated after your post (I read ahead), relicing is like posing. It's like some kid who shaves his head and says he's always been punk, or a kid who put away his dockers and claims to be "metal" the day he heard a Children of Bodom or Killswitch Engage track. It's a fabrication. don't you understand?that is an elitist attitude.when i was a punk kid i had this same attitude..everyone was a poser except me...some people truly ARE posers...but you can't lump relicers all into that category. who are you to decide a relicer is a "poser"?what makes you "the real thing" and the relicer just a punk pretending to be something he is not? relicing is NOT posing...what you don't "get" is that there ARE relicers on this board,and they HAVE done a very good job "distressing" their instruments. why don't you run a search on "relic" and read what you find.Alexvdl made a relic and got much crap about it from a bunch of children trying to be clever...and he is "the real thing"...maybe more so than you. and your assumptions are insulting,to you even more so than the relicers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewrathofraf Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 i think every one is entitled to have an opinion and no one should be attacked for having that opinion. i by no means agree with "relic-ing" a new guitar. i think it should be reliced over time through playing and gettin hit against things and whatever else happens while u have the instrument. thats what truly defines the character of YOUR instrument. not what some one has done to it because u want it to look old and weathered. i have an esp flying v ( old style) that i have had for 5 years. that guitar has many a battle scar from shows and just rockin out, but never would i compromise the character of my instrument by relicing it. -RAF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 think every one is entitled to have an opinion and no one should be attacked for having that opinion. and yet that is exactly what this entire topic does...it attacks those who relic as being "posers",and you post attacks people who do it as compromising the charachter of their instruments"...and that is not what this forum is about. i suggest you guys read up a little and maybe you will find there is more to it than what you want to believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts