No, but that might have been a better idea!Originally Posted by Blackbird
Without a doubt.
No, but that might have been a better idea!
Without a doubt.
You are conflating arguments here. A nick from actual use does not compare to willful destruction. It is one thing to sand a neck to make it smooth and playable, it is an entirely different thing to sand the body just to make it look old.No problem.....I've been sitting on the fence reading this thread. I'm assuming here, BUT I have a feeling that those that are dead set or feel this guitar was ruined are the first mamby/pamby's that are ready to jump off a bridge when their prized piece of collectable art gets a nick in it..... I've played NUMEROUS vintage Goltops and I owned a 57 for about 4 months until I found out it was a stolen guitar I wasted all my summer lawnmowing money on as a kid. I asked Shawn and the PTC guys to IMHO make an already good guitar great. I knew it would be a project they would be into as it wasn't anything that they'd done before. Not only does it LOOK like my old 57, it FEELS and plays like a Vintage guitar. The finish is the real thing....and all the tweaks Skitch,Miles and the Evil Genius did are amazing. I say to each his own and if you don't have something nice to say....keep it shut!
Perhaps I missed the object of the video. But I'm pretty sure the owner was going for looks and not playability. The only part that actually seemed to be done solely to enhance playability was the rounding of the sharp corners on the nut. I'm pretty sure that the rest was for show, not for go.
edit: I just watched the entire video again, just to see if there was anything which enhanced the playability or the feel of the guitar. I wanted to give those who think this is cool their due. The only playability enhancements would be the nut dressing and the smoothing of the neck - everything else was for fake provenance and remains incomprehensible to me.
edit: I don't know Todd and I also don't know what journey his guitar made. I find that I don't fully understand the reasons people do these things to guitars. I'll retract my labeling of the owner of the guitar in the video a 'moron'. Please forgive me. I suppose it was the shock of it all.
Perhaps someone will point me to a thread that details Todd's guitar's journey. I'm interested. From what I can gather from bits and pieces here, it was a very different journey than depicted in the video.
Last edited by rugerpc; 12-04-2012 at 02:16 PM.
Thbbbbbt...
It bewilders me.
Sh*tter's full
Stepping away from the authentic versus repro argument for a second...
You see this in my opinion is very important. It is the appeal of a specific instrument to the player. We use many different senses when buying a guitar...many times what we see is the first step...second is tactile...third is auditory....sometimes it is the smell of the lacquer...others its the taste...err umm I mean.
This is why I think that relic'ed guitars have their place.
In Todd's case he clearly stated it was reminiscent of the experience he had playing a '57 Lester. In addition the experience of working with our friends at the PTC, as well as his generousity in allowing the guitar to go from player to player in the community also imparted something special attributable to the instrument. I think the way a player feels about the guitar he or she is playing can be very important in the music that he or she may create.
...For what it's worth.
-Bob
My Cunetto relics are the same way. They feel old...
I also have a Danocaster "Keef" tele that feels the same way...
Jamie
BADASS!!!!My Cunetto relics are the same way. They feel old...
I also have a Danocaster "Keef" tele that feels the same way...
Jamie
-Bob
I still maintain that it's a function of the artisty involved. Jamie's guitar above (to me) looks really cool. The guitar in the video, not so much. Me personally? I like minty fresh stuff. Even my vintage guitars are pretty minty. But if I saw Jamie's guitar out someplace, I'd do a double take and think that it looked great.
What it looks like when the PTC does it right!!!
PRS Guitars Endorsee....White and Relic'd Ones !
The thing that's so bad about the CE getting relic'd is that after 40 years of everyday play it will never look like that one in the video.
The poly finish does not wear. I have 20 year old CE that has tons of gigging and abuse and it still looks almost new.
I'm all for people doing what they want to their guitars but this is something I would never do to a PRS.
I can understand getting proper relic done to nitro finished guitar to make it feel and look old but it just doesn't work for me on poly finished guitars.
2007 SCT RW Amber
2004 SE Soap SC Red
1993 CE 24 Maple FB Black
1990 EG Black
,
I'm on the fence with relics
I love aged finishes and wood but I'm not a fan of grotty looking metal
THIS is what real provenance looks like:
Thbbbbbt...
I don't get why people care about this. It's just finish. The instrument itself probably plays better.
People don't get offended by antiqued furniture, or pre-faded t shirts. Why is this different?
I thought the original finish was beautiful, but it's not my guitar. Maybe he's not a poseur, pretending the guitar has had a harder life--he just likes the way it feels to play a worn guitar. I don't make that choice myself, but I don't get why it's not a valid choice.
It is a valid choice if he is doing it for himself.
If it is to fool other people, that is something else.
Thbbbbbt...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
