Are there any relic instruments that truly get as beat up as this Custom Shop guitar?

#61
Handyman said:
Raw wood is a choice too, unless you're stuck on a desert island or something. :D

Anyway, I am curious why the nitro finished Fenders seem to end up in this sort of state more often than other contemporary nitro finished instruments. Do the Fender finishes from that era not wear as well as those put on by say Gibson, or are owners of vintage Fenders just more likely to beat the crap out of their instruments / be comfortable with the results?
Click to expand...


There are a ton of nitro finished Gibson instruments that have worn just like the fenders. You have to remember that fender sold way more instruments and Gibson and the other contemporary instruments of the time, so of course there are more examples of worn out ones. Fender was a working man's instrument, and theyre often gigged throughout their life.....whereas Gibsons might be a little less so. Things like Gibson basses were never even close to as popular as fender ones, so there are of course Fewer examples.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wisebass and Sartori
#62
Dark Horse said:
There are a ton of nitro finished Gibson instruments that have just like the fenders.
Click to expand...

This statement doesn't seem to mirror my own experience with older Gibsons that I've owned or seen over the past 35+ years. The only ones that age *somewhat* similar to what one is accustomed to seeing on Fenders are gold tops. Gibsons most certainly ding easily just like any nitro-finished instrument, and finish checking is omnipresent but the lacquer seems to hold on better to the wood than it does on Fenders. Guilds are pretty much in the same boat, can't say anything about Rickenbackers since I don't have enough experience with them.

Does any of this really matter at the end of the day? Not in my book. Personally, I pick the instrument by the way it feels and sounds, the looks have always been the least of my concerns otherwise I wouldn't have owned the scary amount of "molested kittens" with various brand names that I've played, loved and cared for throughout my career.

My experiences only.
 
#63
Many folk don't realize the kind of wear and tear an instrument takes when it is being gigged almost everyday and the beating equipment takes from constant travel, set up, tear down. Only the big-timers had guitar techs and Anvil cases back in the day
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sartori
#64
CocoaThumper said:
I'm a big John Mayer fan, and did kind of dig his custom relic that Fender did several years ago.

Fender John Mayer Limited Edition Black1 The Black One Custom Shop Stratocaster - SOLD | The Fender Reissue Shop

But now that I really sit and think about it. Ive never seen a bass or guitar truly get THAT beat up. Theres almost no paint on the back of that thing. Has anyone here ever seen a Real vintage electric bass or guitar (from the 1950s and forward) get in that condition?

Is it possible for instruments that at most are 65 years old? Heck, with todays poly finishes....will we ever see an instrument get into the condition of some of these custom relic jobs we see all over the net and in stores?
Click to expand...

But it costs more and comes with a certificate
 
#65
1962

IMG_0484.JPG
IMG_0483.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: Son of Wobble, Sartori, Dark Horse and 5 others
#66
Gilmourisgod said:
I appreciate an honestly worn paint job, but "mojo" consisting of a gummy mix of dirt, rust, partly dissolved nitro, dead skin cells, and dried sweat kinda grosses me out. "Mojo" = Filth?
Click to expand...

I cleaned said "mojo" off of my '66 P before using it - it's a hygiene thing. (dirt/grime should not be confused with mojo)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sartori, Medford Bassman, Smelly and 1 other person
#69
Chico Ruger said:
I'm feeling fiesty today.

The concept of "created relicing" is a very large load of crap. (Disclaimer: IME, IMHO, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YMMV, SMILEY FACES, etc., etc, ad nauseum.)

It is fake, like a someone with orange hair, an air-brush tan and phony capped teeth. Fakes can't be trusted and should be avoided by real folk.

An instrument with some legitimate wear-and-tear can play, sound and look very nice. But the key word is "legitimate".

Edit: Ooops. I forgot, I do own a RW Fender. Yikes! Please be gentle on me. I have been into the Jack Daniel's a bit this afternoon.
Click to expand...

Plus that John Mayer relic doesn't even look cool.
 
#71
One disclaimer and then my personal opinion; like any finish on a guitar or bass, there will be a good version, and a not so good (DIY) version - there will be a superlative version (a couple custom finishers out there), and there will be a generic version (as in Fender's VERY POPULAR Road Worn series). Those critical of faux distressed finishes who just can't get enough of letting everyone know their distain for this 'finish style' are in the same camp as those critical of 'tort' - nobodies forcing you personally to own one, like one, or even look at one and those who happen to own one, like one and enjoy looking at them are pretty bored with the never ending beating of this dead horse. YOMV
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sartori
#73
CocoaThumper said:
But now that I really sit and think about it. Ive never seen a bass or guitar truly get THAT beat up. Theres almost no paint on the back of that thing. Has anyone here ever seen a Real vintage electric bass or guitar (from the 1950s and forward) get in that condition? Is it possible for instruments that at most are 65 years old?
Click to expand...

Absolutely, yes.
Every non-sunburst, pre-CBS Fender I've seen that didn't spend most of it's life locked in a closet has holes worn through the paint into the wood. Or it looked like that at one point and has since been refinished. Because people have only been fetishizing wear marks for the last 15 or 20 years. Before that most people wanted their instruments to look new, not used.

CocoaThumper said:
Heck, with todays poly finishes....will we ever see an instrument get into the condition of some of these custom relic jobs we see all over the net and in stores?
Click to expand...

Only bad imitations.

Fake wear always looks like fake wear. It's like a portrait done by someone who hasn't studied anatomy. It doesn't make sense. With genuine wear you can read the type of music and kind of techniques the person who used it played. With fake stuff, it's usually random.

One of my main gigging instruments is a P bass I got new in the 80's. Thick poly sunburst. It has two holes through the finish. Sharp edged chunks that broke off when someone else dropped it or knocked it over. One that's 20 years old looks identical to the other that happened less than 5 years ago. And a handful of dings and creases. Those you barely see unless the light shines on it just right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajkula66
#74
lz4005 said:
Only bad imitations.
Fake wear always looks like fake wear. It's like a portrait done by someone who hasn't studied anatomy. It doesn't make sense. With genuine wear you can read the type of music and kind of techniques the person who used it played. With fake stuff, it's usually random.
Click to expand...

This is correct and those who have studied anatomy can draw a very creative portrait - emphasis on creative. Fenders Road Worn basses/guitars are like cartoons of the subject. I say this objectively because I give them credit for attempting to automate/mass produce something unique. Of course it's a dichotomy and right out of the box somewhat absurd, but very frankly - it's a look, a style, a recent take on how a bass/guitar can be 'finished'. To subject moral or macho diatribes on "not real" (as in "real wear for real men"), or "fake mojo" (why exactly should you care?) - basically there's no need to get this personal about a guitar finish you would never own, or "the people at Fender are all laughing ..." about selling a lot of instruments? (as in the Road Worn series) - yah, I bet they are hysterical. As this dead horse gets beaten time and time again - there is definitely a sore spot for those who 1) want their guitars shiny and spotless, 2) have a player worn bass and because they feel all self righteous they judge all others from their "I created this wear by PLAYING it perch (again, why should anyone but you care?)

So is Sting a poser because he bought a very player worn '56 P-bass? Is Keith Richards a poser for having FCS create a worn-looking guitar (the first "road worn" Fender made) for him to tour with? Or how about Fender making a Barry Oakley "Tractor" replica J for his son to tour with?

Time to let the poor horse die in peace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaolee and Sartori
#75
John Mayer already came out and said he had his guitar tech strip the paint off that guitar so it was more comfortable to play. Less resistance on his right forearm while strumming. It's very common among pro players.
 
#79
Slpbass81 said:
John Mayer already came out and said he had his guitar tech strip the paint off that guitar so it was more comfortable to play. Less resistance on his right forearm while strumming. It's very common among pro players.
Click to expand...



Bovine excrement.

You can flatten the finish with wet sandpaper 2000 grit should do it well enough. Makes no sense to take it down to bare wood that, being untreated will react more to moisture.

It also would look better. You could also flatten it a rebuff and make it smoother with a coat of wax BUT the bigger issue is the new finish composition.

Smoother means less resistance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rezdog
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back