# How about relic?



## hapsall (Jan 6, 2010)

I personally think its cool...

I think relic is a finish nothing more IMO.

I my self have relic'd a 96 "62" Japan stratocaster..

It was fun too.

What do u think about relic?

:smile:


----------



## Guest (Jan 11, 2010)

Arrr. What be this Relic you speak of?


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

iaresee said:


>


I knew that I should have combed my hair before that pic was taken...


hapsall...I think relic'd guitars are cool. They suit my age and relic'd look.
however, some of the relic'd stuff is not well done and expensive. 
Have a look at (forum member) al3d's relic work...superb, IMHO.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Gene Machine (Sep 22, 2007)

*no.*

I don't like the relic thing myself. I don't baby my guitars, but I am consciencious about not bashing them into the wall etc. That said, well earned dents and wear is fine. I dont' like unnecessarily speeding that process along. Kind of like buying pants with holes worn in them. ?

The only 'relic' work that I would possibly consider would be taking the finish off the back of the neck, not refinishing a maple fretboard after a refret, and darkening white plastic parts. Some of the new white is TOO white. 

YMMV

Gene


----------



## Tim Plains (Apr 14, 2009)

I'm not too fond of the overly relic-ed ones but something like a Murphy aged Les Paul looks pretty good to me. My next LP will most likely be a Murphy R9. The only thing I'm not too fond of is how the checking on the headstock looks but I'm sure I'll get over that fairly quickly.


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

threads on this topic show up on every electric guitar site I hang at and they always end badly...seems the word brings out the worst in people and once the name calling and berating comes to a close...or the threads get locked...they conclude the same way...some people like relics some don`t. Personally I couldn`t care any less about what guitars people wanna play, unless of course they`re bidding against me on line.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

iaresee said:


> Arrr. What be this Relic you speak of?


I'm surprised Gibson doesn't have a "Inspired by..." guitar for the guy...:smile:


----------



## Steve Adams (Dec 31, 2009)

it would be made from beat up aluminum and have a jet nozzle!


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

well....i got to say i love reliced instrument..


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I think "relic" is pretty much like fake bullet holes on the tailgate of your pick up truck or stickers on your guitar case from places you've never been.


It's fake. If you don't mind that, go for it. Personaly I like to relic my guitars the natural way, by using them. I don't worry about a few dings and scratches, but to deliberately damage a guitar to make it look like an old battle-worn instrument seems pretty wannabee to me.

Sorry. I know some will find that a bit offensive, but it's my honest opinion and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Milkman said:


> I think "relic" is pretty much like fake bullet holes on the tailgate of your pick up truck or stickers on your guitar case from places you've never been.
> 
> 
> It's fake. If you don't mind that, go for it. Personally I like to relic my guitars the natural way, by using them. I don't worry about a few dings and scratches, but to deliberately damage a guitar to make it look like an old battle-worn instrument seems pretty wannabee to me.
> ...


You're right. You're not the only one. To me it's like taking your new car out and denting it and scraping the paint off and scratching it just so you have a vintage looking car. 

What's so crazy about it, is people PAY to have this done.kqoct


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

FlipFlopFly said:


> What's so crazy about it, is people PAY to have this done.kqoct


TO each his own basicaly.


----------



## Gene Machine (Sep 22, 2007)

Milkman said:


> I think "relic" is pretty much like fake bullet holes on the tailgate of your pick up truck or stickers on your guitar case from places you've never been.
> 
> 
> It's fake. If you don't mind that, go for it. Personaly I like to relic my guitars the natural way, by using them. I don't worry about a few dings and scratches, but to deliberately damage a guitar to make it look like an old battle-worn instrument seems pretty wannabee to me.
> ...


+1

I agree

-Gene


----------



## StevieMac (Mar 4, 2006)

al3d said:


> TO each his own basicaly.


+1. 

Honestly, I would _never_ buy a relic BUT that doesn't keep me from admiring the result of efforts made by folks here (*al3d*) and elsewhere (*DANOCASTER* on TGP).


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

I'm pretty sure we've discussed this topic at least 5 other time on these forums. At least 1 that had to be locked. I guess the Search function is broken?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

I'm not a relic fan my self but I can understand the desire some folks have for it. If you're my age and want a well worn guitar you really wouldn't have alot of time to relic it. If it takes you 20 years to relic a guitar, I'd be 70 when it was just starting to look good. Personally I like new looking guitars. My Custom shop Nocaster is a closet classic which is supposed to be a very light relic. But it looked very new to me when I first got it. But I can see where the natural relic process is going to be very quick compared to a new Telecaster with those heavy poly finishes.
The fact that relicing is so popular should make it an irrelevant point when selling guitars with dings in them. To a relicing fan it should be worth more.


----------



## six-string (Oct 7, 2009)

i like relic'd guitars. 
and i will relic yours for free.
just ship me any guitar you want relic'd (at your expense of course) and i will be happy to give it that special mojo! :smile:


----------



## Tim Plains (Apr 14, 2009)

Here's a question to the guys who don't like them and call them fake...
What if you played one - a relic, a Murphy aged, whatever - and it was just an incredible guitar. 
Would you buy it if you could spare the money, even though it's artificially aged?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Are Nine said:


> Here's a question to the guys who don't like them and call them fake...
> What if you played one - a relic, a Murphy aged, whatever - and it was just an incredible guitar.
> Would you buy it if you could spare the money, even though it's artificially aged?


No, because there's really no need to buy a relic. I don't think ANY guitar is THAT unique.

I have absolutely no doubt that I could find an equally great guitar in new condition.


I'm not knocking others who choose to go this route. I am merely stating my personal tastes and the logic behind them.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Are Nine said:


> Here's a question to the guys who don't like them and call them fake...
> What if you played one - a relic, a Murphy aged, whatever - and it was just an incredible guitar.
> Would you buy it if you could spare the money, even though it's artificially aged?



If its a great playing guitar I would have no hesitation to buy it as long as I'm getting a deep discount for the rough finish on it.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

Buying a relic instrument is not different from forking out more cash to get a crazy ass quilted top on a guitar or a special paint job..it's a different look basicaly. Nothing else.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> I'm pretty sure we've discussed this topic at least 5 other time on these forums. At least 1 that had to be locked. I guess the Search function is broken?


Yea. However, it is a "popular opinion" driven question, and popular opinion shifts and changes with the weather.

I think people need to know, if they are still wearing their bell bottoms and butterfly collars if they are still hip. So they will ask "hey, what is up with..." every 6 or 9 months.

As to the entire issue of "relic" well, the practice of making things look old is 1000's of years old in our culture already. Modern day "relic" work is even more important and difficult because so much of our modern day everything is so plastic and disposable. It may be that once upon a time you could get a nice finger burnishing to the drawer pulls on your desk giving it that "grandpa used this all his life" look simply by the expedient of using the desk. Now, you get a cracked plastic handle instead, and you throw out the 20 dollar desk and by new 20 dollar desk because by the time the handle cracked the draw itself will be wobbly and the runners near wore through and ... etc. Getting the "grandpa look" upfront is important because what you by wont make it until you are a grandpa even if you are starting out as a grandpa @[email protected]

We, as a people, have become out of touch with our past. We toss so much into the trash, keep too little, and what we do keep really we keep because it isn't as broken yet but even that will eventually break too. It is like becoming an orphan when you have nothing that connects you to any generation that came before you, let alone anything you had 10 years back. So, we wrap ourselves in "aged" jeans, and buy "distressed furniture" and play "relic" instruments...

Hehe and yes, it is no less "a look" as quilted maple, or tattooed instruments, or bumper stickers


----------



## Tim Plains (Apr 14, 2009)

al3d said:


> Buying a relic instrument is not different from forking out more cash to get a crazy ass quilted top on a guitar or a special paint job..it's a different look basicaly. Nothing else.


Great point!!


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

I've said it before but there is more to a relic than the worn asthetics. The checking of the finish artificial or natural has an affect on the sound and feel of the guitar.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> I've said it before but there is more to a relic than the worn asthetics. The checking of the finish artificial or natural has an affect on the sound and feel of the guitar.


That's very true..but trying to convince someone that think it's "fake", is a TOUGHT job..


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Same with ripping holes in your jeans...you want it to look natural and not like you just ripped them purposely so therefor you must think about how and where to rip them so that it looks like wear from use and age.

I have worn holes in jeans...never ripped any on purpose.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

smorgdonkey said:


> Same with ripping holes in your jeans...you want it to look natural and not like you just ripped them purposely so therefor you must think about how and where to rip them so that it looks like wear from use and age.
> 
> I have worn holes in jeans...never ripped any on purpose.


Yet if you know what you're doing..making a pair of levis look 30 years old is quite easy..


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

OK...we`ve had the car thing and the jeans thing...this is now an official relic thread. These two analogies have come up in every relic thread I`ve read but just how they tie into guitars remains a mystery.


----------



## LarryLimerick (Nov 23, 2009)

I'd personally never buy a relic guitar, I can appreciate the hard work that goes into making them look that way and really don't mind how they look, but it's just not something that I would want to buy.


----------



## monty (Feb 9, 2009)

My take?
I like them. Sure it's easy to bash relic players, but most people assume too much. I'm a 25 year player, and in that time I've naturally reliced 2 former number 1s. Went on a hunt for a new Strat last year and nothing felt just right to me. Picked up a Roadworn and it hit me-I'm not very used to new anymore. The neck felt awesome. It was what I was used to.

Grabbed a RW neck and threw it on my current #1 and now I cant stop playing it. If you look at it you may think "poser" because the scratchplate is shiny new but the knobs are yellowed and dirty, but those were off my old Strat-I made them that way.

Play what you like-it aint that hard.


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

monty said:


> My take?
> I like them. Sure it's easy to bash relic players, but most people assume too much. I'm a 25 year player, and in that time I've naturally reliced 2 former number 1s. Went on a hunt for a new Strat last year and nothing felt just right to me. Picked up a Roadworn and it hit me-I'm not very used to new anymore. The neck felt awesome. It was what I was used to.
> 
> Grabbed a RW neck and threw it on my current #1 and now I cant stop playing it. If you look at it you may think "poser" because the scratchplate is shiny new but the knobs are yellowed and dirty, but those were off my old Strat-I made them that way.
> ...


yeah call me old fashioned...and I`ve been called worse...but sound and playability come way before looks, I`m funny that way.


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2010)

sneakypete said:


> yeah call me old fashioned...and I`ve been called worse...but sound and playability come way before looks, I`m funny that way.


You cannot discount the psychological effects holding a particular instrument has on your mind when you do start to play. We sort of touched on this in the fancy cables thread. The touch and feel of an instrument in your hand, your assumptions about its past and future, are as much a part of the music you put out in the moment as are the type of day you had, your current stress level, and the way you feel about the weather outside. It's the intangible human element that connects us to the music we make by way of the instrument we're holding.

For some it's just easier to bring forth the emotions on an instrument that looks a particular way. For others it doesn't matter. Such are the oddities of the human psyche.


----------



## bluesmostly (Feb 10, 2006)

Some of this guys work just bakes my biscuits! brilliant! I have seen a few relic jobs that I find very attractive. I appreciate skill and good craftsmanship in almost any form.

I took a look at al3d's stuff on his linked thread - nice work.


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

iaresee said:


> You cannot discount the psychological effects holding a particular instrument has on your mind when you do start to play. We sort of touched on this in the fancy cables thread. The touch and feel of an instrument in your hand, your assumptions about its past and future, are as much a part of the music you put out in the moment as are the type of day you had, your current stress level, and the way you feel about the weather outside. It's the intangible human element that connects us to the music we make by way of the instrument we're holding.
> 
> For some it's just easier to bring forth the emotions on an instrument that looks a particular way. For others it doesn't matter. Such are the oddities of the human psyche.


nah...I just like to play em.


----------



## hapsall (Jan 6, 2010)

Well I think it is a difficult issue to discus taste, and that is the matter here..

We have also here in Denmark discussed this subject over and over again..

But I still think that its all about finish and looks of an instrument..

I have guitars in both relics and also shiny clossy finish, and if I like a guitar, then I want!..(pure gas.) or atleast dreams about that certain guitar..

But I will never have an signature guitar F.ex. Clapton, Knopfler, SRV etc..

I think that looks stupid with a signature on headstock...

Sry back to topic...Taste is personal thats it! :smile:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

al3d said:


> Buying a relic instrument is not different from forking out more cash to get a crazy ass quilted top on a guitar or a special paint job..it's a different look basicaly. Nothing else.


I disagree. The fundamental difference is that with a relic you're trying to put forth an image of experences and "paid dues" that you didn't have.


Not a big thing, but whether you like quilts, spalting, flames or whatever, you're not standing behind a fake image.

Like I said, if that's cool with you, go for it. What matters most to me is how you play.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

Milkman said:


> I disagree. The fundamental difference is that with a relic you're trying to put forth an image of experences and "paid dues" that you didn't have.
> 
> 
> Not a big thing, but whether you like quilts, spalting, flames or whatever, you're not standing behind a fake image.
> ...


I've seen good argument..but now you're reaching a bit..LOL. it's just a guitar, that looks beat-up, no different then if you'de find a beat-up real 65 strat for exemple....does it mean you are shallow if you play it?...since you're not the one who messed it up?


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2010)

sneakypete said:


> nah...I just like to play em.


Uhh...maybe you missed the part where I said:

For some it's just easier to bring forth the emotions on an instrument that looks a particular way. *For others it doesn't matter.* Such are the oddities of the human psyche.​


----------



## Eric1623 (May 20, 2009)

I would get a Fender 51 Nocaster Relic if I had the 3K, But that is just me


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

al3d said:


> I've seen good argument..but now you're reaching a bit..LOL. it's just a guitar, that looks beat-up, no different then if you'de find a beat-up real 65 strat for exemple....does it mean you are shallow if you play it?...since you're not the one who messed it up?


I'm not reaching at all. There are already plenty of good analogies in this thread.

Here's one more. Playing a relic'd guitar is like wearing your grand dad's war medals.


If it's "just a guitar", why work so hard to create the illusion that you're playing a guitar that has been around and been played for decades?

As you say, to each his own. When you post such a topic, expect to get responses like mine. 

Again, I can only explain why I would not buy a relic'd guitar. I'm not offering advice.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

al3d said:


> Yet if you know what you're doing..making a pair of levis look 30 years old is quite easy..


I never said that it didn't take a little knowledge.. In fact, I said you have to think about it..

...and I never said it wasn't "quite easy"..

..

..

..


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

smorgdonkey said:


> I never said that it didn't take a little knowledge.. In fact, I said you have to think about it..
> 
> ...and I never said it wasn't "quite easy"..
> 
> ...


Sorry..I misunderstood you then..


----------



## LowWatt (Jun 27, 2007)

Personally, I love the artistry that goes into it. I love relic picture threads. And a good relic neck feels way better to me than any other neck on a new guitar. 

My issue with relicing is because of my own vanity. Every time I've played an old beat up guitar I've had someone really love it and want to ask me about how old it was and the story behind it. I love telling those stories and I would feel weird saying "Um, ya it's only 2 months old, I bought it that way." No judgement on anyone else, it's just how I feel.

There is just a certain satisfaction to look down at a beatup guitar and know that every mark on it was made in effort to make music (or in the crazy sh!t that can happen in and around making music). I can't give that up, though I do love relics and when I see other guys playing with them live, I always think the guitars look great. It's just not for me I guess.


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

iaresee said:


> Uhh...maybe you missed the part where I said:
> 
> For some it's just easier to bring forth the emotions on an instrument that looks a particular way. *For others it doesn't matter.* Such are the oddities of the human psyche.​


nah, I just like to play em.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Steve Adams said:


> it would be made from beat up aluminum and have a jet nozzle!


A perfect "Relic" guitar that one would be...


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> I disagree. The fundamental difference is that with a relic you're trying to put forth an image of experences and "paid dues" that you didn't have.


Maybe the perfect balance is my CS Nocaster "Closet Classic". The "Closet Classic" series is supposed to be lightly relic'd. But to my eye it looked brand new to me. More like an NOS. However after lightly sanding the back of the neck smooth a few times it looks as thought the necks has been played about 5 or 10 years. I've had the guitar about 8 months and there is already a tiny bit of chipping and a bit of discolouring where my right forearm rests. The thin skin really wears faster then the thick poly finishes I've had on my other Teles. So I figure in about 5 years It will look about 10-15 years old.


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

guitarman2 said:


> Maybe the perfect balance is my CS Nocaster "Closet Classic". The "Closet Classic" series is supposed to be lightly relic'd. But to my eye it looked brand new to me. More like an NOS. However after lightly sanding the back of the neck smooth a few times it looks as thought the necks has been played about 5 or 10 years. I've had the guitar about 8 months and there is already a tiny bit of chipping and a bit of discolouring where my right forearm rests. The thin skin really wears faster then the thick poly finishes I've had on my other Teles. So I figure in about 5 years It will look about 10-15 years old.


thing is, anybody can take sandpaper to a guitar neck and make it feel better. i did it when i was 11 years old- long before the internet made it cool. and i do it whenever i find a new neck is "sticky". im also a careless and often impaired musician, so my stuff gets beat up just from casual use. do i care? not one bit. but i pay maybe $400-$700 tops for any of my guitars, so i can afford not to care. when i put them together myself, i use nitro and oil type finishes, real thin. just because i like it, its easy, and its cheap. 
i like to see guys making relics, it looks cool, and i love cool looking guitars. and in any case, supply and demand, everybody needs to make a living.
but i dont see the value dollars wise in it, personally, and i wont buy any of it.
same goes really for any of the u.s.a fenders- if they cost $1000 or more, why bother when i can put together the same but better for that money, or less?


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

I ain`t puttin` forth any image, I play for strictly for my own enjoyment sittin` on my sofa singing to the plants in the window and not giving a rats butt what any people who I don`t know think about it. Still, if some wanna presume I`m some kinda poser, please, by all means knock yourselves out...me, I`m just having a ball with my guitars and do not pass judgement on anybody else choices. But thats just me.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

sneakypete said:


> I ain`t puttin` forth any image, I play for strictly for my own enjoyment sittin` on my sofa singing to the plants in the window and not giving a rats butt what any people who I don`t know think about it. Still, if some wanna presume I`m some kinda poser, please, by all means knock yourselves out...me, I`m just having a ball with my guitars and do not pass judgement on anybody else choices. But thats just me.


Very Good post man. basicaly exactly how i feel.


----------



## monty (Feb 9, 2009)

al3d said:


> Very Good post man. basicaly exactly how i feel.


Ditto here.
Heck, I dont even own any "fake" relics and I'm defending them, lol.


----------



## faracaster (Mar 9, 2006)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> I've said it before but there is more to a relic than the worn asthetics. The checking of the finish artificial or natural has an affect on the sound and feel of the guitar.


In the beginning of the relic fad (Cunetto era) Fender actually aged the wood with a sonic "tube" (for lack of a better word). Fender would bombard the bodies and necks with sound waves to simulate years of vibrating strings (Taylor acoustics does this too.). So it was more than aesthetics. 
I have owned dozens and dozens of Pre-CBS Strats and Teles. Not as a collector but as a player. From the early 70's till the early 90's, I only played old guitars. I never liked new Fenders, they felt awful (IMO) and sounded sterile in comparison. Until the early relics. These guitars had the sonic mojo recipe. At first I was dubious, and didn't trust my own instinct but, after a year or so, I was convinced. I bought a very early Nocaster relic and Strat relic. They were both sonically superior to any other new Fender of the period. The ironic thing is this......those early Fender relics are not very well done as relics. Not like a REAL aged guitar at all. At some point, they became much more realistic looking and continue to get better and better, more authentic looking. But sonically (at least in cases of the Strats) have become thin sounding. More like new guitars. 



iaresee said:


> You cannot discount the psychological effects holding a particular instrument has on your mind when you do start to play. We sort of touched on this in the fancy cables thread. The touch and feel of an instrument in your hand, your assumptions about its past and future, are as much a part of the music you put out in the moment as are the type of day you had, your current stress level, and the way you feel about the weather outside. It's the intangible human element that connects us to the music we make by way of the instrument we're holding.
> 
> For some it's just easier to bring forth the emotions on an instrument that looks a particular way. For others it doesn't matter. Such are the oddities of the human psyche.


TOTALLY AGREE !!!!!



Milkman said:


> I disagree. The fundamental difference is that with a relic you're trying to put forth an image of experences and "paid dues" that you didn't have.


Putting forth? Where? In their own basement? In the pub down at the corner? 
Men buy Corvette's, BMW's, Lexus' as fine cars or big dick symbols? Men that are losing their hair shave it all off, to be cool or to avoid their own insecurities? Men that have become overweight (like me) either never tuck in their shirts to hide their gut or to look casual? Men's hair goes gray, do they colour it to feel better or to look better? 

I have paid dues and I'll play relics if I want. If my neighbour who has never played a gig in their life or is a weekend warrior plays a relic, I'm good with that. They bought a guitar that works for them on either a sonic/playing level or "paid dues" level.
To me relicing is just another finish option. But.....in general I prefer the feel of a worn in instrument where by playing or by sanding. PRS and other builders can attain this without relicing. 






Milkman said:


> I
> Here's one more. Playing a relic'd guitar is like wearing your grand dad's war medals.


Oh come on !!!! That is just insulting.



I like well done relicing. As I said, I look at it like another finish option. 
Beyond that (as I said earlier) some reliced guitars sound better than non-reliced. Just recently (and some of you may have seen my post) I bought a Mike Bloomfield, Murphy aged Les Paul. I compared the VOS version of the Bloomfield against 6 other Gibson historic R8's and R9's. It was by far the better sounding guitar. Then I played the Murphy aged one. It blew away the VOS version. So out of 8 Gibson Historic LP's the Murphy was the king.....why? Was it my subjective opinion because I liked the way it looked and the worn in feel in my hand? Well I took a pal with me (who is a very accomplished player and fellow tone freak that hates the idea of reliced guitars) and he just listened (did not play them till I had made up my mind) to me play them all through a Super Reverb reissue. 
He agreed by a long shot the the Murphy aged LP sounded superior to all the rest. Now this is just two guys of the same age and same influences picking the same guitar. Surprising? Not really. And I would think that two teenagers wouldn't even consider any of those guitars. 
In my opinion, it is market driven finish option that appeals to some. But to become as polarized, for or against a finish on a freakin' guitar is just crazy.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

Well thought out and well written Pete. :bow:

Thanks

Dave


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

faracaster said:


> In the beginning of the relic fad (Cunetto era)



the earliest relics I`ve seen were Burny Les Paul types from the mid 1970s so if it`s a fad it`s been around a long time, wasn`t F/USAs idea.


----------



## infinitemonkey (Jan 20, 2008)

Well, this is a bit of a tangent, but as a huge Ramones fan I always hope my old jeans would rip out in the knees. They never do though. They rip out in the ass, or in the crotch, but never at the knees.

I have to admit I have considered using artificial means. That wouldn't be very punk though, would it?


----------



## Guest (Jan 17, 2010)

infinitemonkey said:


> Well, this is a bit of a tangent, but as a huge Ramones fan I always hope my old jeans would rip out in the knees. They never do though. They rip out in the ass, or in the crotch, but never at the knees.
> 
> I have to admit I have considered using artificial means. That wouldn't be very punk though, would it?


 Mine always seem to give around the top corners of the back pockets first. Weird. Some strategic knee-ripping would be sweet, but ya, never happens for me.


----------



## rhh7 (Mar 14, 2008)

Faracaster's post above is one of the most well written, well thought-out posts I have ever seen on this topic. I have seen flame wars on several forums over this issue. It boils down to a matter of taste, does it not? I respect your taste, no matter how greatly it differs from my own.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

faracaster said:


> P
> utting forth? Where? In their own basement? In the pub down at the corner?
> Men buy Corvette's, BMW's, Lexus' as fine cars or big dick symbols? Men that are losing their hair shave it all off, to be cool or to avoid their own insecurities? Men that have become overweight (like me) either never tuck in their shirts to hide their gut or to look casual? Men's hair goes gray, do they colour it to feel better or to look better?
> 
> ...


Obesity and hair loss? 

LOL, I think you're reaching a bit there but you're entitled to your opinion.


Insulting? Nope. It's the same as the fake bullet holes on the back of a pick up truck. Trying to look like a bad ass.

The reality is that if these "superior" relic'd guitars had the same tone and playability but didn't look like a road worn veteran 99% of the people who buy them wouldn't give them a second glance.

It's cool if people want to buy them. It's not my money. Lots of people like to dress up like bikers on the weekend and drive their Harleys as well, and then go back to their jobs at the bank or wherever. It's their right to dress up and pretend.

It's my right to snicker.


----------



## jimmy peters (Nov 29, 2006)

what,s the different between this and counterfeiting. how do you relic the serial numbers. i play a relic --57 gretsch- caddy green, and you are suggesting in this thread, makes me sick.---another get rich quick idea.

jimmy peters


----------



## bagpipe (Sep 19, 2006)

jimmy peters said:


> what,s the different between this and counterfeiting. how do you relic the serial numbers. i play a relic --57 gretsch- caddy green, and you are suggesting in this thread, makes me sick.---another get rich quick idea.
> 
> jimmy peters


Who are you directing these comments at?


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

My god..this thread is like watching A teen drama. people like what they like...that's it. you don't like relic gear!...good, move on.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I agree Al3D

However, when someone creates a thread on an issue that is well known to be contentious they shouldn't be surprised or offended when people respond with their honest opinions. I don't recall seeing any posts that did anything other than that.

Don't ask the question if you can't handle the answer.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

sneakypete said:


> the earliest relics I`ve seen were Burny Les Paul types from the mid 1970s so if it`s a fad it`s been around a long time, wasn`t F/USAs idea.



I recall not long back when this issue came up googling the art of making things look old. As I recall, there are Egyptian hieroglyphs that depict the activities of daily life. Including antiquing and relicing.

Nope, not a fad nor is it something new under the sun.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

nkjanssen said:


> My thoughts...
> 
> 1. Most relic's don't look very good, in my opinion. Even some of the highly regarded stuff like K-line just looks bad to me.
> 
> ...


Stick with the same guitar, and give it about 10 years :rockon2:


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

nkjanssen said:


> Exactly.
> 
> And if I buy a 10-year old guitar that has 10 years of wear on it, I'm going to get a discount from the "like new" price because of the wear. If I buy a brand-new guitar that is "relic'ed" to look like it's 10 years old, I'm going to have to pay a premium over the "like new" price due to the relic work. THAT's what just doesn't work for me.


Ohhhh I hear you on that. Like asking that you get the mauve paint job instead of the plain red on your car and dealer hemming and hawing and wanting to charge you an additional 1000 bucks "special order" or "set up" or whatever they want to call it fee, when the cars just roll through an automated computerized paint booth anyways :| and the total set up/programming is less work than this post I just typed up.


----------



## Guest (Jan 18, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> Exactly.
> 
> And if I buy a 10-year old guitar that has 10 years of wear on it, I'm going to get a discount from the "like new" price because of the wear. If I buy a brand-new guitar that is "relic'ed" to look like it's 10 years old, I'm going to have to pay a premium over the "like new" price due to the relic work. THAT's what just doesn't work for me.


Unless you live in Ottawa, in which case you'll be asked to pay a 20% premium over new on that 10 year old instrument because it got touched occassionally by someone who thinks they're much more important than they really are. (Yes, that was a poorly veiled rant at Ottawa CL/Kijiji prices these days...).


----------



## six-string (Oct 7, 2009)

iaresee said:


> Unless you live in Ottawa, in which case you'll be asked to pay a 20% premium over new on that 10 year old instrument because it got touched occassionally by someone who thinks they're much more important than they really are. (Yes, that was a poorly veiled rant at Ottawa CL/Kijiji prices these days...).


does that mean i should relic my old tv set before i put it up on kijiji?


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

the only people who give a rat`s butt about any of this are other guitar players. I`ve been a painter for most of my life and have never encountered this type of attitude in that world..."you bought a brush made of sable? what a poser!" I doubt people who go to listen to live music even notice the guitar...unless they`re a guitar player, the belittling of another`s instrument or talent has really surprised me since I`ve joined the guitar community, I had no idea about any of this even though all my friends back home are players I never heard any of them debating these issues the way they are on line. Do trumpet players have threads about relics too? In the greater scheme of things...they`re just guitars eh, it`s not a life or death thing and isn`t the music the goal? Should be in my opinion, I`m no guitar god, never will be and I`m OK with that, there are lots of players far better than I`ll ever be but I guarantee youse...nobody has more fun than I do and thats why I started playing in the first place, it was something I`d always wanted to do but grew up concentrating on my painting then one day over here I got so fed up with the crap radio in this city I bought a guitar `cause that was the only way I was going to get to hear the music I liked...I was going to have to play it myself... and I`m gettin` there and can`t wait to get back home and play with the guys I grew up with, and I`ll bet money they will not care less about what guitar I have. Still, I doubt I`m the only member here who thinks this will not be the last thread on relics...and the posers who play them :wave:


----------



## Maxer (Apr 20, 2007)

You know, I'm pretty sure I've not read enough on the topic of relicing to make a judgment one way or another... there's just no enough information at this point.


_[ducking, running]_


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> Exactly.
> 
> And if I buy a 10-year old guitar that has 10 years of wear on it, I'm going to get a discount from the "like new" price because of the wear. If I buy a brand-new guitar that is "relic'ed" to look like it's 10 years old, I'm going to have to pay a premium over the "like new" price due to the relic work. THAT's what just doesn't work for me.


That's how I feel about it as well, and I remember someone once asked what happens to a relic guitar if you bang it up--does it increase or decrease the value?

And I've adopted that question in this regard.


----------



## jimmy peters (Nov 29, 2006)

bagpipe said:


> Who are you directing these comments at?


the whole thread in general.
not the title, but there are too many to pick 1 person.


jimmy


----------



## harrym (Jan 19, 2010)

I don't care for the reliced look but that is my opinion. To each his own, different strokes for different folk. Whatever you enjoy is what you should have.


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

harrym said:


> I don't care for the reliced look but that is my opinion. To each his own, different strokes for different folk. Whatever you enjoy is what you should have.



true however it seems, we still gotta have this debate every now and then...just to keep the balance of the universe n` stuff.


----------

