# Article on relic guitars



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Some interesting food for thought here...
Someday You'll Regret That Relic Job
Agree, disagree?


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

agreed. i know some people like them, but for me, the entire reason i dont like them is because i want my guitars to look nice. if they look old and shitty, i dont like that. i want shiny new looking.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I knew I wasn't the only one who felt that way, but that's the first article I've read that put it so close to my opinions on the subject.

I love the way an old guitar looks. I love the way the nitro crackles and the specific wear marks caused by decades of playing.

I just don't like fake. The functional(ish) benefits of a relic'd guitar can be achieved without trying to give the impression that the instrument has history.

You can't buy or rush that kind of mojo. It has to be made honestly.

Just my often spouted opinion of course.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Good article. It reminded me of my Yamaha acoustic that floated by me in a creek at a party in the dunes 40 years ago. My buddy had taken it upstream a bit and put it in the water for a joke.
I took that guitar with me to all the bonfires and outdoor parties slung over my shoulder while riding my Triumph. You just don't see that anymore. I still have the guitar and the Triumph.


----------



## fredyfreeloader (Dec 11, 2010)

Agreed, I know I'm old fashioned I just believe old looking or road worn should be honestly earned not achieved with the aid of some sandpaper or what ever else one might use.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

In before the lock!


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Lock? I doubt it.

We're not to the point where voicing our opinions on a subject like this will cause a thread to be locked.


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

Nothing wrong with other peoples' opinions if you ask me. 

I was really on the fence about the whole relic thing for many years and to this day only have guitars in my possession that are pretty much in mint condition save my Jazzmaster as it was my main touring guitar for many years - so it's seen it's fair share of battle scars. My main Strat which is nitro is starting to dull and wear thin in certain areas of the paint, but by no means down to the wood and I've owned that thing for at least 15 years. 

On my latest custom build, I really went back and forth between a closet classic finish and a light relic finish. In the end I went for the relic route just because I ultimately don't mind a guitar with a bit of "history" (even though it's not authentic). I also felt that if I got this custom guitar in pristine condition that it would suck if I were to get a ding in it which I know I will as its intention is to replace my main guitar. So my awkward logic here helped me make the decision on getting it lightly relic'd. The only thing I'm not super happy with is the arm wear but it's by no means a deal breaker for me as it shows off the white undercoat that I absolutely love. The rest of it looks pretty good and "authentic" to me, but ultimately, different strokes for different folks - everyone's entitled to an opinion.

http://www.guitarscanada.com/showthread.php?58749-My-MJT-Musikraft-S-Type-Build


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

A Yamaha on a Triumph. Strange. A Tiger or a Trophy perhaps? Reliced guitars.....I'm in the "play it 'till it looks that way" camp.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

I like shiny guitars, I like relics.....natural ones. Ones that have earned the dings and scrapes, etc. When I built my own guitar, I went for an aged look with the colouring (amber dye on the neck, etc), but it is still nice and shiny. The french polish is holding up well and I like the tru-oil on the neck.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

Pasted from the article:*

"Hypocrite that I am, I own two relic instruments—a Tele and a bass. Both play and sound great, but I feel like a poser when I’m using them. I struggle to conceal my shame, knowing that a closer look will reveal that all this apparent wear is a calculated fraud. Truth is, you can tell mo-faux from the real deal 99.9 percent of the time."

I like relics and I do not feel like a poser when using them and do not have any shame.* Virtually everyone knows it is "a calculated fraud" . In the case of (for example) al3d's guitars, I prefer to view them as functional works of art. 

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I have a Road Worn strat that I enjoy playing (it is comfortable and has a swapped out neck) and I can totally relax about not getting additional bumps or scratches on it. It has a relic job that is identical to all the other Road Worn strats...so, it is not "unique" at all and actually quite poorly done, IMHO. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I tell others this when they ask about the guitar.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is refreshing to read that the owner has two relics and that they both play and sound great. He doesn't mention that he feels compelled to sell them because he feels so much like a poser and has to conceal his shame when using them.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cheers[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dave[/FONT]


----------



## julienpier (Aug 7, 2009)

That Takamine seems more beaten-up than my "Hobo" guitar I've had with me for the whole 4 month I spent living in the street across Canada!!! I like genuine relic... when I buy a new guitar, I want it to look new, pristine... until my belt buckle does its job or my pick scratches the finish!!! I people want the look of a used guitar, why not buying a used one?

I never understood the relic movement... lots of my friends have faux-relic guitars or bass which they paid the big price for!!!


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

The quote in the article that stood out to me as being the way that I have always felt about relic jobs:

"There’s the irony: People who go to the trouble of giving their guitar a relic job want to appear genuine by faking authenticity."

...but I also realize that some people 'just like the look'.

I don't rip holes in my jeans and I don't relic guitars.


By the way...I saw a nice old '74 Gibson Les Paul Deluxe the other day...it has been played hard over the years and well-treated. It has a pretty good wear mark right under the strings between the pickups on the body (no pickguard) but all of those extra wear marks that you see on relic guitars were just not there.


----------



## marcos (Jan 13, 2009)

I'm good either way,relic or shinny new, as long as I like the instrument.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

I have nothing against them and in fact think some of them are beautiful. (Too, some are gross, like the Fender Roadworns - they're generally light and play GREAT but look crappy). But I have never owned one, and none of the guitars I have owned even long term have anything more than small dings. Guess I should practice more and drag them around with me in my travels or something.


----------



## rollingdam (May 11, 2006)

I like the look of relics-from far away.

Get up close and see that there is finish over the relicing and forget it


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

J, sorry to break it to you, but you live in Edmonton where you're essentially paying via tax dollars to have your car beat up on our shitty roads. 

Jokes aside, I totally get what you're saying. I've seen some good relics and I've seen some bad ones. Ultimately, if the guitar plays and sounds amazing and priced right, that's all that should matter.



nkjanssen said:


> I'm less concerned about the authenticity or integrity issues people have with relics. My main issues with them are:
> 
> 1. I think most of them look just plain bad. There are some exceptions, of course... Danocasters, _some_ Fender custom shop stuff, the work I've seen from al3d, etc. A lot of relics I've seen, though, look to me like someone spent an afternoon throwing pennies at the guitar and then took a belt sander to it. That's just looks terrible.
> 
> 2. I don't want to pay for something like that. If I find a guitar I really like and the price is right, I don't care if it's shiny new, legitimately beat up or even reliced (unless it's a crappy relic job - see point 1). No _way_ am I paying someone to relic a perfectly good guitar or paying some kind of upcharge for relicing, though, anymore than I'd pay someone to beat the crap out of my car.


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

I'll just quote this as it saves me the time typing 



nkjanssen said:


> I'm less concerned about the authenticity or integrity issues people have with relics. My main issues with them are:
> 
> 1. I think most of them look just plain bad. There are some exceptions, of course... Danocasters, _some_ Fender custom shop stuff, the work I've seen from al3d, etc. A lot of relics I've seen, though, look to me like someone spent an afternoon throwing pennies at the guitar and then took a belt sander to it. That's just looks terrible.
> 
> 2. I don't want to pay for something like that. If I find a guitar I really like and the price is right, I don't care if it's shiny new, legitimately beat up or even reliced (unless it's a crappy relic job - see point 1). No _way_ am I paying someone to relic a perfectly good guitar or paying some kind of upcharge for relicing, though, anymore than I'd pay someone to beat the crap out of my car.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

Ouch, hopefully everyone's okay though. You should put the Mazda up on Kijiji: "RELIC Mazda - Tonnes of Mojo!"

Danocasters look pretty legitimate to me. They were definitely on my short list when I started my project.


----------



## Mr Boggie (Dec 4, 2012)

left blank


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Intrepid (Oct 9, 2008)

I have never been fond of relic guitars. Most of them look like they have been intentionally damaged. The first relics I found attractive were the ones that were completed by our own Alain. He does a fantastic job and you can understand how much work goes into a relic job when you view his work. They look fantastic. A friend of mine owns a Fender Custom relic Tele. It doesn't look so good but it plays like heaven. I could overlook the relic job if I could own that Tele. I don't think people that like or own relics are committing a fraud at all. It's their personal taste of what they like. Who am I to cast aspersions on their taste in guitars? I have a fondness for goldtops. I have had some people be critical of my GT's by saying they look gaudy or like a toy. I take it all in stride. I'm not asking them to like my guitars. I don't own any Electrics from the 50's but I own several Martin Acoustics from the 50's and they have been played hard. Although the Nitro finish is wearing thin and there are some scratches and dents and significant wear at the soundhole, they look almost brand new compared to that young ladies' Tak. Would I ever buy a relic? It depends on how they sound and play, but I would like them to look like Alain's creations. In fact if I was to purchase a relic, or have a relic job done on one of my electrics I wouldn't hesitate to use Alain Rivard's services. Yes, I think he is that good.


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

Good to hear. However, you won't be able to avoid the arm relic above your interior door panel for those times you're practicing your gangster lean in your Mazda.



nkjanssen said:


> Yah, fortunately everyone's fine. Modern safety features are pretty amazing - two cars completely destroyed and everyone walked away without a scratch. I have decided, though, that once insurance buys a new one I'm going to try to keep it shiny and stay away from the relicing.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Electraglide said:


> A Yamaha on a Triumph. Strange. A Tiger or a Trophy perhaps? Reliced guitars.....I'm in the "play it 'till it looks that way" camp.


68 Triumph 650 TR6C (trail bike, knobby tires, side pipes) Unfortunately, I chopped it and would like to restore it to original condition but the price the bike would sell for won't justify spending the money that the parts cost these days. It's been in my barn since 85.

As for relic'd guitars. I go more for the sound than the look so it doesn't matter to me what anyone does to their guitars. Hey, who knows, maybe SRV's strat was relic'd. I would be surprised if he bought it new.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

Milkman said:


> Lock? I doubt it.
> 
> We're not to the point where voicing our opinions on a subject like this will cause a thread to be locked.


Sorry it was a joke... words can hardly express how little I care about the relic debate.


----------



## dmc69 (Jan 20, 2011)

I never got why people paid more for relics than a pristine condition item. Only guitarists, right? Nobody buys a "road worn/relic'd" '67 Shelby GT500 for more than a mint condition example.

I understand many great guitarists have worn down instruments. Guitar idols are cool, and so must their guitars, right? If only guitarists would emulate their idols' dedication to music and practicing, instead of paying someone extra to fake the hours played on a guitar.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I too can appreciate the time and effort that goes into a convincing relic, they're just not for me.

I like 'em shiny and new, but honest wear on a used guitar is not a deal breaker either though.
I've had some used ones with nicks and dents, acceptable when they're many years old, expected, really.

When you think about it, if that relic plays really well, it would've played that way before the relic job too.
To each their own though, I don't look down my nose at anybodies choice of their preferred instruments.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

I wonder why there are no relic'd amps on the market?

Should be easy enough to do. Just take a new Bassman reissue, throw it down 20 flights of stairs, set it on fire twice, leave lit cigarettes all over the top, spray it with beer & vomit.....and it's good to go! Value increased!

I've got 1 relic'd guitar, but it's an actual 1960's guitar. Everything else I own is nice and shiney. I avoid getting dings as much as possible.


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

Hey I had a TR6 back in the day. Mind you it had 4 tires 



Guitar101 said:


> Triumph 650 TR6C (trail bike, knobby tires, side pipes) Unfortunately, I chopped it and would like to restore it to original condition but the price the bike would sell for won't justify spending the money that the parts cost these days. It's been in my barn since 85.
> 
> As for relic'd guitars. I go more for the sound than the look so it doesn't matter to me what anyone does to their guitars. Hey, who knows if SRV's strat was relic'd. I would be surprised if he bought it new.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i used to ride a triumph twin that you could say was relic'd. someone raked the frame and put a long front end on it, tall bars, the whole peter fonda thing without the paint. this one was krylon flat black. it was so old it still had a points ignition and a kick starter. i don't miss that bike at all. it wasn't mine, i rode it while the owner healed from a broken leg.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

cheezyridr said:


> i used to ride a triumph twin that you could say was relic'd. someone raked the frame and put a long front end on it, tall bars, the whole peter fonda thing without the paint. this one was krylon flat black. it was so old it still had a points ignition and a kick starter. *i don't miss that bike at all. it wasn't mine*, i rode it while the owner healed from a broken leg.


You can't miss something that didn't belong to you.

Off topic but: When Jimmy came out with "Purple Haze". I stripped my Triumph down to the frame, painted it purple including the frame, and painted "Purple Haze" on the oil tank. Let's see if you cool guys can top that. (sad but true)


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I can definitely appreciate the art and technical skills that go into a really well executed Relic job.

I regret that it may well seem a bit high and mighty to call these functional pieces of art "fakes".

For me, I wouldn't care who else ever knew I was playing an artificially aged guitar. It would bother me. That's not a judgement of those who like them.

I just wanted to clarify that as it may be a bit insulting to those who create or enjoy relics otherwise.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

It could just be considered as a "finish", I think Alain had mentioned that once.

It is true, it's also a pretty involved process.
Here's a good example...

http://www.guitarscanada.com/showth...istoric-Makeovers&highlight=historic+makeover


----------



## Shark (Jun 10, 2010)

Lots of posts I agree with here. Shame I can't find the 'like' button in ForumRunner.

I can certainly appreciate the work and artistry of a well done relic job, but for me, playing a relic guitar is like buying yourself a birthday present and then acting surprised when you unwrap it.


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

relic'ing isn't for me, but it's up to you what you do with your own gtr

I don't think I'd ever buy one

I do however own a MIM tele that a previous owner tried to refinish, in spectacular failure. now I'm going to be self-conscious if anyone sees me with it....:sFun_dancing:

poser!!  


*edit* hey the smileys are different now


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)




----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

sulphur said:


>


I'm surprised it got to page 4 before someone posted that picture...

Any way--I like honest relics.

I got my LP used and it was already beat up--and that was reflected in the price I paid for it.

It gave it character, but it's an honest relic, same the dents, scratches & chips in my other guitars--some of which were due to my own carelessness at times.

If you're into them--then go for it--just know you're not fooling everybody--and it you're okay with that--then go for it.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

If a fake relic is sold a few times and is eventually sold to an unsuspecting buyer. Does the guitar now become a legitimate relic? The story is lost and the buyer can then be proud of all the battle scars.
Were all looking for beat up old Gibson & Fender guitars for a great price. If we find one, the question then becomes: Do we just play it or restore it. What would you do?


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

I am in agreement with many here that if you like an instrument, play it as is and enjoy.

I have picked up pre-reliced Strats that to my hands feel exactly the way I remember used Strats felt in the 60s - nicely worn in with the right weight, smooth rounded neck and comfortable contours that make my right forearm feel free and unbound by a sticky finish. I am by no means a player that others would consider professional but I can certainly see the value of relicing an instrument to some degree.

But beyond artificial wear that improves playability like intentional body chips and what I would actually consider damage and abuse, the relicing to me can simply be to create a stage prop, an image. A guitar player is also a performer and if the onstage image requires a less than pristine, shiny guitar, that is part of the show.

I like shiny guitars for myself and while I actually do kind of like the natural, historic battle scars my guitars acquire from incidental use, my goal is to keep my guitars as pretty as possible.

I think also that a lot of VOS guitars that use some original naturally aged parts would look odd with other parts that have not been reliced to match the apparent age of the overall instrument.

To sum up my opinion, I think that in some circumstances, relicing can improve a guitar's playability or even present an onstage image, but there can be a fine line between that and blatant abuse of an otherwise fine instrument.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

I really don't understand the "over-reliccing" look where it appears that a beltsander has been run hard across parts of the guitar or some medieval torture devices applied to it in ways that no guitar could ever legitimately age. 








More like a bad camo job than a relic.

Sometimes I see these over relicced guitars and think....what kind of poor quality product would ever deteriorate to that degree, and why would I be proud of that?

But when theyre more realistically done, I don't mind it, even if it isn't "legit". Its kind of nice to not have to worry anymore about dings, scratches etc to a pristine body.

funnily enough, my most relicced guitar, an '83 Gibson Explorer that Ive had since a teenager, got most of its treatment sitting in its case in a storage unit. While it had its fair share of dings before that, I was surprised to see when I finally took her out of storage and its case, the finish had checked all over. So much for natural reliccing being the result of blood sweat and tears and playing. It can be just as much a sign of sleeping in its case undisturbed while its owner tackles home renovation projects 

On another note, I didn't notice until months later but other weird things happened in that storage unit. parts of the inside of my wine fridge had literally melted.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Another aspect that has been touched on in this thread, is the potential for fraud, whether deliberate or unwitting.

Yes, I understand Caveat Emptor, but I don't think anyone deserves to be sold what they think is a vintage instrument just because they lack the knowledge to tell the difference.

Yes, the first seller will almost always disclose that it's artificially aged, but what about the second or third time it changes hands?

The risk is not much different than a Chinese knock off. As long as it says Gibson or Fender on the headstock there's a reasonable potential that someone will sell it as the genuine article.

I actually don't like that these things even exist. I can't do much about that, but I won't ever buy or sell one.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Another aspect that has been touched on in this thread, is the potential for fraud, whether deliberate or unwitting.
> 
> Yes, I understand Caveat Emptor, but I don't think anyone deserves to be sold what they think is a vintage instrument just because they lack the knowledge to tell the difference.
> 
> ...


Do you mean that someone would try and pass off for example a 2009 fender Road worn tele as a vintage 1966 Tele?
Hmmm....never thought of that, but I don't know how likely it would be that someone would fall for it.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

sulphur said:


>


I know of the show and with Googles help I figured this guy was Relic but the show was before my time so I have no idea about the reference being made. Since I've seen this picture posted in other threads I get the drift (pun?) but don't know the history and would like to, fill me in would ya? Thanks


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

vadsy said:


> I know of the show and with Googles help I figured this guy was Relic but the show was before my time so I have no idea about the reference being made. Since I've seen this picture posted in other threads I get the drift (pun?) but don't know the history and would like to, fill me in would ya? Thanks


lol...Beachcombers.....absolutely awful.

- - - Updated - - -



nkjanssen said:


> Or maybe trying to pass this off as a '59 burst...


lol...youre much less subtle than I am


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

vadsy said:


> I know of the show and with Googles help I figured this guy was Relic but the show was before my time so I have no idea about the reference being made. Since I've seen this picture posted in other threads I get the drift (pun?) but don't know the history and would like to, fill me in would ya? Thanks


Trivia quiz (no Googling!)

I worked with Bruno Gerusi's brother, Dino when I taught guitar at Keynote Music in Surrey, BC in the late 60s. Can anyone tell me the name of Bruno and Dino's band?

Hint: it had to do with a famous piece of Bruno's wardrobe.


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

I was in a band called "Relic's Jetboat" once....great name

well this is the only pic I could find


----------



## Intrepid (Oct 9, 2008)

The toques? No that was Relic. I give up.:sSig_DOH:


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

bluzfish said:


> Trivia quiz (no Googling!)
> 
> I worked with Bruno Gerusi's brother, Dino when I taught guitar at Keynote Music in Surrey, BC in the late 60s. Can anyone tell me the name of Bruno and Dino's band?
> 
> Hint: it had to do with a famous piece of Bruno's wardrobe.


Bruno Gerusi's Medallion!!!

EDIT: not fair, really because the brothers only made guest appearances for publicity. The actual band was a serious music project.

Dino was a pretty decent keyboard player though


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Diablo said:


> Do you mean that someone would try and pass off for example a 2009 fender Road worn tele as a vintage 1966 Tele?
> Hmmm....never thought of that, but I don't know how likely it would be that someone would fall for it.



Maybe they would try or maybe just not know any better. Again, just because someone doesn't know guitars doesn't mean they deserve to be misled.

I'm not questioning anyone's ethics here, just saying that as long as there's no indication on the guitar, the potential exists for someone to buy something that is not what they think it is.


----------



## dmc69 (Jan 20, 2011)

I was expecting someone to photoshop a guitar onto this.


----------



## Greg Ellis (Oct 1, 2007)

Most of my guitars are all beat to heck, primarily because I can't afford to put real money into guitars. My sister pulled an old Japanese dreadnought out of a dumpster and had a music shop clean it up as a birthday present for me when i was about 17. I've still got it. I pulled an 80's Tokai strat out of a neighbours trash can about 10 years ago, maybe 12. It needed major surgery, but it's one of my favourite guitars. My '91 Norman B20 Folk was 15 yrs old and played HARD when i bought it. It's down to the wood on the edges of the neck up near the nut, and there's a spot beneath the sound hole that's worn most of the way through the top.

I'm not sure I'd be in a rush to pay someone to do that to a brand new instrument. The idea seems a bit odd to me. But I'm certainly used to well-worn instruments, lol.


----------



## allanr (Jan 11, 2012)

Good article. This pretty much sums it up,

"There's the irony: People who go to the trouble of giving their guitar a relic job want to appear genuine by faking authenticity. It's the guitar equivalent of $300 jeans crafted with holes in the knees, sanded threadbare by a 9-year-old chained to a table in a Mumbai sweat shop. I realize this comparison is about as fresh as a Seinfeld episode, but clichés become clichés because of their inherent truth."


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Kind of reminds me of Willie...


----------



## georgemg (Jul 17, 2011)

Diablo said:


> I really don't understand the "over-reliccing" look where it appears that a beltsander has been run hard across parts of the guitar or some medieval torture devices applied to it in ways that no guitar could ever legitimately age.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Guitars like these are so over the top that nobody would think it's an old, well-worn instrument. I actually like that they're not even pretending. The Tyler 'with bacon' and guitars are like that. Some of the Luxxtone guitars are pretty over the top too but with more of a 'Rat Rod' esthetic. There's a couple of Luxxtones that I've seen that were almost ridiculous but so cool at the same time.

Now if you want something that looks 'realistic', the best advice I ever heard (though I can't remember where it was from) is buy a guitar, throw out the case and gig with it for a while.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Maybe they would try or maybe just not know any better. Again, just because someone doesn't know guitars doesn't mean they deserve to be misled.
> 
> I'm not questioning anyone's ethics here, just saying that as long as there's no indication on the guitar, the potential exists for someone to buy something that is not what they think it is.


I also don't think anyone deserves to be scammed...but at the same time, every buyer is responsible for using common sense...looking at serial numbers, date codes etc If someone doesn't do this, then they really don't have anyone to blame. They just decided to over pay for something.

And to a certain extent if something seems like too good a deal , they should probably be asking why....Theres an old saying that really makes a lot of sense...You cant cheat an honest man. and its perfectly true....most times ppl get scammed is when they think theyre taking advantage of the seller. Greed can be at play on both sides of the scam.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Diablo said:


> I also don't think anyone deserves to be scammed...but at the same time, every buyer is responsible for using common sense...looking at serial numbers, date codes etc If someone doesn't do this, then they really don't have anyone to blame. They just decided to over pay for something.
> 
> And to a certain extent if something seems like too good a deal , they should probably be asking why....Theres an old saying that really makes a lot of sense...You cant cheat an honest man. and its perfectly true....most times ppl get scammed is when they think theyre taking advantage of the seller. Greed can be at play on both sides of the scam.



Well technically you're right, but I still don't think anyone deserves to be ripped off because of a technicality.

I also don't think a young woman, dressed promiscuously and perhaps heavily entoxicated deserves to be sexually assaulted, nor does someone who leaves valuables in their car deserve to be victimized.

Yes, we must all take personal responsibility for ourselves but I still don't like blaming the victims.

The problem is down the road, after such guitars have changed hands a few times, maybe sat under a bed for awhile.....

Just saying


----------



## Tim Plains (Apr 14, 2009)

I used to think relics looked bad, most still do, but Danocasters caught my eye and stood out. I decided to buy one and think it looks great. The aging is convincing and several people actually thought I was lying to them when I said it was made in 2012. Now that I've had it for close to a year, I don't even see it as a relic, if that makes any sense. I just see it as my Strat.


----------



## vanderkalin (Sep 4, 2009)

- - - Updated - - -



Jimmy_D said:


> In before the lock!


Wait did I sign into TGP by mistake?


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

Guitar101 said:


> You can't miss something that didn't belong to you.


he wanted me to buy it from him. i rode it almost daily for 4 months. if i liked it, i could easily have had it. i paid more for my strat than the bike woulda cost me. so i think i _could have_ missed it, even though it wasn't mine.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Well technically you're right, but I still don't think anyone deserves to be ripped off because of a technicality.
> 
> I also don't think a young woman, dressed promiscuously and perhaps heavily entoxicated deserves to be sexually assaulted, nor does someone who leaves valuables in their car deserve to be victimized.
> 
> ...


Im sure you didn't mean it that way, but IMO pulling out a rape analogy as a comparison to some moron that buys a guitar without using any basic common sense, just because it has some scratches and dings on it, trivializes rape victims.
Couldn't think of a defacto Hitler/Nazi analogy instead?
sheesh!


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

Page 4 and we're onto rape and nazi's? Like I said I was only joking about the lock but it seems you never really know for sure...

Anyway, for your entertainment - here's the whole relic thing taken to a new level, I present the "Master relic" (at best it's a $27.00 gotoh bridge), go figure.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Jimmy_D said:


> Anyway, for your entertainment - here's the whole relic thing taken to a new level, I present the "Master relic" (at best it's a $27.00 gotoh bridge), go figure.


That's crazy...


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2013)

How not to relic a guitar.

[video=youtube;mMT1kEejAG8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMT1kEejAG8[/video]


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Don't like the rape anaolgy? 

Fine, pick one you do like. Just don't blame the victims.


----------



## Udonitron (Jun 25, 2010)

The feeling of a new guitar vs an older or worn one however is night and day.
New guitars are babied to keep that condition I find vs one that is a little rough around the edges not being a concern if it gets dinged etc.
Nitro can craze easily if there are sudden temp changes.
It's like new shoes vs old or any clothing.
You want to wash it up and get it soft and worn in as it just feels better...plus the wood is dead so why not appreciate it and let it age after it has stopped photosynthesising. 

True player worn from 1982...









- - - Updated - - -

Factory aged gold top.
Made in 2000


----------



## marcos (Jan 13, 2009)

Here are a couple of pics of a Strat I got here on the forum that is my favorite.I think it was tastefully done and there is some natural relic to it. I just enjoy playing this instrument and if it was shinny and new, i would still love it


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

it is interesting to me that relicing is getting so little love in this forum. i can remember a time when the opposite was true. i wonder how many/which of you have switched sides


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

I had the opportunity this past August to spend a day with Tom Murphy learning his techniques used to age and distress guitars... Tom "wrote the book" on aging and distressing guitars and is Gibson's go to guy for their historic reproductions.

Tom started aging and distressing finish repairs at Gibson in order to match the new repair to the guitars natural wear. From there guys started asking (and paying good money) to age and distress their new guitars. Everything bloomed from there.

What is for sure is Tom is a master at his craft. If you held one of his aged guitars in your hands then held a new and shiny one, it would be hard not to understand why it is desirable to many. 

There are plenty of hack jobs out there, and those should be shunned. Tom's work is truly artful.

Personally I'm not a fan of overly distressing a guitar, but aging one to the point that it feels broken in and you are not worried about the first ding is something to which I can assign value. Done tastefully to a reasonable limit, to me aging is about enhancing the ownership and playing experience, not conveying false authenticity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## Swervin55 (Oct 30, 2009)

Go have a look at the thread here about Rich Robinson's (Black Crowes) gear. I can't imagine he cares one way or another what other folks think of his guitars (at least he doesn't strike me as the type) and he doesn't have anything to prove or anyone to impress. I presume he just prefers guitars that look and feel "broken in" as opposed to new and shiny. Each to their own, yada.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

There is no doubt that it takes a skilled artisan to do it properly. Al3d does some great work I think. Keeping a repair blended in with the finish of an old guitar is a requirement, in my opinion, for anyone working on old guitars. The main thing is to get the guitar to look and feel and sound how you like it, and that encourages playing. That is also a very individual thing, as tastes vary. I have rubbed necks down with scotch brite to get them feeling better, and I am thinking that in my next build I will be breaking the edges of the fret board (I would do it to the one I have now, and shave it a bit too but matching the dye, I think, would be really difficult). Some would call that a relic job, some would say it is a procedure to make the guitar more comfortable. They are both right. When it comes to matters of taste, there is no wrong answer.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

dmc69 said:


> I never got why people paid more for relics than a pristine condition item. Only guitarists, right? Nobody buys a "road worn/relic'd" '67 Shelby GT500 for more than a mint condition example.
> 
> I understand many great guitarists have worn down instruments. Guitar idols are cool, and so must their guitars, right? If only guitarists would emulate their idols' dedication to music and practicing, instead of paying someone extra to fake the hours played on a guitar.


Very well put. IMO relic guitars are simply a means of projecting to others, something the owner is not. I don't mean this to offend anyone; it's simply my feelings.


----------



## fretboard (May 31, 2006)

[video=youtube;3tLBGLUVYh4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&amp;v=3tLBGLUVYh4[/video]


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Steadfastly said:


> I don't mean this to offend anyone;


Be honest... yes, you do.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

or maybe "I don't mean to be disrespectful, but i must be honest".

No need to put your own spin on someone else's comment.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

Steadfastly said:


> Very well put. IMO relic guitars are simply *a means of projecting to others, something the owner is not.*


That is exactly what I am trying to do with my Road Worn Strat. 
Given my age, the projection works extremely well.... until I play it.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Answer me this boys...

If I buy a vintage guitar that's naturally relic'd, am I a real poser?

If I put together a parts guitar that gets relic'd, am I a fake poser?


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

vadsy said:


> Answer me this boys...
> 
> If I buy a vintage guitar that's naturally relic'd, am I a real poser?
> 
> If I put together a parts guitar that gets relic'd, am I a fake poser?


1. Yes
2. Yes


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

vadsy said:


> Answer me this boys...
> 
> If I buy a vintage guitar that's naturally relic'd, am I a real poser?
> 
> If I put together a parts guitar that gets relic'd, am I a fake poser?



A tree is wood
A table is wood
Therefore, a table is a tree.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

So guys like Billy Gibbons and Rick Nielsen must be posers because they collect old vintage guitars? 



vadsy said:


> Answer me this boys...
> 
> If I buy a vintage guitar that's naturally relic'd, am I a real poser?
> 
> If I put together a parts guitar that gets relic'd, am I a fake poser?





Jimmy_D said:


> 1. Yes
> 2. Yes


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

TWRC said:


> So guys like Billy Gibbons and Rick Nielsen must be posers because they collect old vintage guitars?


1. Yes






>>>never mind me I'm just hanging out stirring the pot a little, I really don't care about the actual debate... although you won't find a guitar built by me that has hardware and plastic that looks shiny new, or a finish that looks like glossy plastic... Like it says somewhere else on the web "a relic finish is a finish option, not an affront to your emotions"


----------



## sambonee (Dec 20, 2007)

Seems pretty simple. We likely enjoy playing for the satisfaction it gives. Its subjective nature causes each to be entitled to his opinion. 

Recreations are nice. Havering a Robert Bateman print isn't poseing. It's appreciating what the original must be like. 

It all comes down to being authentic to your self. Playing a relic is enjoying something out of context without the risks


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

Relics are just a matter of opinion. Some people like 'em, some people don't. That's like the age-old dispute between people who prefer Strats versus Les Pauls and vice versa. I just find it comical when people get so worked up over the topic.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

vadsy said:


> Answer me this boys...
> 
> If I buy a vintage guitar that's naturally relic'd, am I a real poser?
> 
> If I put together a parts guitar that gets relic'd, am I a fake poser?


No, the guitar is what it is.

If the parts guitar ages naturally, no.

Anyway, I don't call someone a poser because they like relic'd guitars.

I just don't like fake. If you don't mind it, enjoy.


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

Jimmy_D said:


> 1. Yes
> 
> 
> 
> ...


woah, did you build that gtr? if so...NICE JOB!!

looks like it's posing as a cross between a LPJ & a tele


----------



## Shark (Jun 10, 2010)

TWRC said:


> So guys like Billy Gibbons and Rick Nielsen must be posers because they collect old vintage guitars?


Dunno about their guitars, but both guys could do with a refinish.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Shark said:


> Dunno about their guitars, but both guys could do with a refinish.



Well a shave and a hair cut at least, LOL.


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

I dunno, Rick Nielsen looks like he may have had a refin. Plus he seems like he's always on uppers.



Shark said:


> Dunno about their guitars, but both guys could do with a refinish.


----------



## dmc69 (Jan 20, 2011)

Here's something ironic. I'm not a huge fan of relics, but apparently, my bodies are very easy to relic. No thick poly undercoat = easy. Or so my customers tell me.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

bolero said:


> woah, did you build that gtr? if so...NICE JOB!!
> 
> looks like it's posing as a cross between a LPJ & a tele


Ya that's one of mine and ya it's shamelessly posing as a cross-over, not to mention a couple of other things.

I suppose another take on the relic issue is my personal preference, the "closet classic" as someone (maybe Fender) calls it -where the finish is mint but only polished to say 1200 so the sheen is down and it feels great in your hands, all the plastic has had the corners and seam lines taken off and the shine is gone etc... the main distinction being that in my version the instrument is still in mint condition.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

What do you say we add a new dimension to this thread by adding a "relic accessory", where we post the most ridiculous reliced (and "vintage" or "old stock") parts we can find for sale on the web.

At the very least it can be entertain to see how some of these guys word their pitch in order to get guys to ante up (in some cases) many many times the actual value.

Here's a good one - "bakelite" knobs, which in Strat-talk means polystyrene, not at all bakelite (as in Phenolic resin) which could never be white.

or you could invest 132 seconds of your own time and...









Or how about Truss rod covers that will probably cost you $100 delivered to your door. As an example here's an original I sold on ebay last year, after listing it an $90 and receiving numerous lower offers, I sold it to the highest bidder for $75 - so is an $8 part that anyone with skills could "modify" worth $100 when an original is only worth $75?

Edit - even better I just noticed the more expensive boutique "beautiful recreation of the late 50s truss rod cover" doesn't really appear to look much like the original it's supposed to be so accurately reproducing. 

Conventional wisdom is that you're paying for something that the artist knows and the rest of us don't, like how to reproduce the "roll marks" (which don't even show on the original), how to "lightly age" the part, even how to source that material - meanwhile the repro part is using modern materials anyone can find (note the white plastic is the main reason the repro compares so poorly to the original), the "roll marks" are way over done and while its a matter of opinion, the "aging" doesn't do much for me.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

There's a sucker born every minute.


----------



## LydianGuitars (Apr 18, 2013)

Those knobs don't look relic'd at all. Knobs don't age like that.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

LydianGuitars said:


> Those knobs don't look relic'd at all. Knobs don't age like that.


That's true of a lot of relics.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

LydianGuitars said:


> Those knobs don't look relic'd at all. Knobs don't age like that.


Which knobs don't look reliced?


----------



## LydianGuitars (Apr 18, 2013)

Jimmy_D said:


> Which knobs don't look reliced?


The ones you posted in post:
http://www.guitarscanada.com/showthread.php?58942-Article-on-relic-guitars&p=511600#post511600

To me, they looks like they were sanded down.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

Did you notice the_* link provided*_, can you explain how they are any different than the ones in which I invested 132 seconds of my time, please.


----------



## LydianGuitars (Apr 18, 2013)

Jimmy_D said:


> Did you notice the_* link provided*_, can you explain how they are any different than the ones in which I invested 132 seconds of my time, please.


Wow! $40.00 + shipping for knobs with a roundover?

That website is full of alleged "'50's" parts. LOL!

The strat knobs you posted look a lot like those but the real question is this: Were they lovingly aged? :smiley-faces-75:


----------



## dmc69 (Jan 20, 2011)

Real relic'd knobs look nothing like the ones in the link. Real relic'd knobs are dirty from the dirt and grime that accumulate in the grooves from normal people, who happen to have hands that are softer than hard plastic. Are those knobs in the link inspired by a guitaraist named Edward Sandpaperhands?


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

Gentlemen, not to argue with you but once you've delve into who's artwork is better than who's, it's a black hole.

Sadly the knobs in my link are "real relic knobs" and their deemed such because retrospec has sold tons of those to discriminating buyers, whether we think they are "good" or not is another matter, but your point is well taken.

Even more sadly you can pay 5 or 6 times that price for a set of relic strat knobs...


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Relic = Play the shiit out of a guitar for years. Bang it into a wall or two, drop a screwdriver on it changing the pickups for the 14th time, sweat so bad on it that every screw is seized onto the body, wear the most abrasive shirt /jewellery/wristband to most gigs so that the finish is literally flaking off the body...honest wear or no wear at all.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

Jimmy_D said:


> View attachment 5505


Not wishing to derail the thread, but is that some type of reamer in the chuck of the drill in the pic?

If it isn't, what is it and what is it used for?

Cheers

Dave


----------



## LydianGuitars (Apr 18, 2013)

Jimmy_D said:


> Gentlemen, not to argue with you but once you've delve into who's artwork is better than who's, it's a black hole.
> 
> Sadly the knobs in my link are "real relic knobs" and their deemed such because retrospec has sold tons of those to discriminating buyers, whether we think they are "good" or not is another matter, but your point is well taken.


No, they're not "real" relics. They are fake relics  In saying that, I'd say your artwork is definitely at par with that retro site. I'm curious though... have you ever tried a UV treatment to yellow the white plastic?

I've looked at the knobs on my 1986 Strat and they look nothing like that. Same goes for the '97 and I've played that thing in a LOT of shows. The '87 Jem knobs are also nothing like those and I've played the hell out of that guitar: Its gone through 3 re-frets and a new fretboard.

*rel·ic*

/ˈrelik/


Noun



An object surviving from an earlier time, esp. one of historical or sentimental interest.
A part of a deceased holy person's body or belongings kept as an object of reverence.

Synonyms

remnant - vestige


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

I think the knob goes on the drill and then you can use the drill to turn the knobs against some sandpaper etc.



greco said:


> Not wishing to derail the thread, but is that some type of reamer in the chuck of the drill in the pic?
> 
> If it isn't, what is it and what is it used for?
> 
> ...


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

TWRC said:


> I think the knob goes on the drill and then you can use the drill to turn the knobs against some sandpaper etc.


Thanks! I should have put 2 & 2 together...doh!

Cheers

Dave


----------

