Artificially aged guitars... what do you think?

[bruno]

Never understood. Generally, they look like some one has had a go at a perfectly decent guitar with a angle grinder. Tragic. Do people think it makes them look like a better player, without putting in the years??? I'm sure playability is improved by spending money on a decent (new) guitar, rather than paying for someone hacking a new guitar (proportionally you are paying for this, so costs will come from the build - so less bang for buck). Also - I've had my strat for 30 years - it doesn't look beat up in any way, shape or form. Would I take some sandpaper to my Brook??? That would kill me!
Simplez.
B

Here it is my 30+ year JV Fender Squire Strat, everything is original, including the wammy bar, bought new in 1982, been gigged and recorded and played ....

[AndyR]

"Am I missing something?"

Yes, guys, you are. And it's this: it's a finish option, plain and simple, that's all it is.

Some folks like it, some folks don't, but it always seems to be the folk who don't like it who go on about it. And while they're doing it they question the taste and musical credentials of others who do like it. They invariably seem to make sweeping statements like a guitar should be this or that... of course it shouldn't!! A guitar's just a tool, a musical instrument, that comes alive in someone's hands. There are no rules about what it should or shouldn't be. All there are (just like the rest of life) are people's insecurities driving their prejudices, and then looking to their peers for shared prejudices so that they can shout down other people's tastes or inclinations - this is VERY depressing coming from a bunch of people who otherwise seem to be creative types.

I come at these guitars from a position of "who gives a sh1t? Obviously enough people like/want them, otherwise it wouldn't be financially viable to make the things. Oh well, each to his/her own...".

I've always been able to see why folks might like them, but I'm not particularly interested in them myself.

The thing is, I do own two of the early Roadworn strats, but in spite of the aging, not because of it. When I bought the first one I had to really struggle to get over the aging. I tried it because the reviews were saying "omigod these are amazing guitars for the price". I loved the look of it, but not the holes in it. I struggled for hours in the shop having to re-align my views on the holes... because the guitar felt, played, and sounded like the guitar I've been dreaming of since 1980 or so (I have one of those JVs as well, although mine is the cheaper Squier by Fender version). I found that these guitars were a cheap way of getting a lot of guitar, but unfortunately they only came in one finish - half-f@cked. I gave in and bought it, polished and loved it, and now I hardly notice the holes.

What owning these guitars has done, though, is placed me in a position of having sympathy with the folks who actively seek out relic'd guitars. And so when the folks prejudiced against them decide to have another "I don't get it, they should do it honestly, not proper, etc, etc" rant... well - I feel they're talking to me as well, and it upsets me that folks can be so bigotted, blinkered, and... well, plain stupid and uncaring for fellow musicians and their tastes.

Interestingly, Bruno, you do realise you have a guitar there with "artificial aging" on it, don't you? (although the story/explanation is now lost in the mists of time). First of all, when released, those guitars were a mass-produced copy of a 62 strat, because a bunch of people were lusting after the old guitars and obviously someone perceived a market for them. Yes, they were bright and shiny and new, but made as close to the old specs as possible (there's a 50s one as well). And one of the specs was the finish option - that sunburst. Leo and the boys originally developed that sunburst finish to... you guessed it, to make the guitars look old and lived in.

Live and let live, guys.

[kenny mac]

Sometimes I really don't get this site,I have removed any of my personal input and comments about relic guitars in case I offend anyone who owns one.
Peace

[bruno]

Hey guys, I don't want to offend anyone, but I do reserve the right to express an opinion :-) Andy, I am happy that you love your aged strat. And yes, I do know that the Squire was a reproduction of an earlier model (57 Strat in my case). The difference (in my head anyway) is that when I bought it, it was a brand new guitar - it didn't attempt to look aged, it looked like a brand new guitar and it was a model that looked nice to my eyes, had great reviews, played and sounded great.

I hate with a passion the act of destroying instruments al la Blackmore, the who and even Hendrix. They did so for showmanship and publicity. However, as a kid growing up with no money - it was the worst thing in the world to me. To me, the act of ageing is evokes similar feelings; I can't help how I feel, but that is how I feel. I've  looked  at aged guitars, and close up, well lets say I didn't enjoy the experience. I will say, one man's meat is another man's poison - so will say I personally don't get it. I do get the point that if you pick a guitar up, and it feels great and sounds, how it looks is kinda irrelevant. Life is full of contradictions.

B

[bruno]

I do my best to keep my guitars in pristine condition so why would I want one that looks like it has it's finish sanded off and then beat with a hammer? I wouldn't. I'd rather have an old vintage guitar the looks new because it was taken care of on the road.

Farrell

+1

[Farrell Jackson]

I do my best to keep my guitars in pristine condition so why would I want one that looks like it has it's finish sanded off and then beat with a hammer? I wouldn't. I'd rather have an old vintage guitar the looks new because it was taken care of on the road.

Farrell

+1

Here's a picture of my 1974 Telecaster Thinline. I bought it used in 1976 and it's seen a lot of gigs hanging on my shoulder over the last 40 years and it still looks good. The only wear mark is where my right forearm wore away the finish at the top edge and the natural finished has faded to a slightly darker color....probably from the smoke filled filled clubs I used to play in.

Farrell

[Gnasty]

I think this subject can go with anything. I sure don`t want my girlfriends boobs to be aged but slowly through real time i wouldn`t care or notice as much 

On a serious note, I agree with you AndyR. Your guitars must be great the way you play them. Comments and opinions can offend anyone. Oh the beauty of the internet and forums(read Youtube comments and sigh).

This is a poll thread though and majority of us don`t like the looks of these guitars. As i`ve seen them up close, it does not look like an aging process to me but more that it was humanly made to look that way unless someone can show me guitars that look otherwise. But in my opinion, we cannot emulate time. I have a bedroom set that i`ve had for years where they tried this aging process and they just punched little holes in areas. It looks stupid if you look closely. Now where i threw my keys down in one spot over the years  looks real because it is. Just an example.

Anyway i see dudes playing pink guitars these days. Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.

[chapperz66]

Artificially distressed guitars don't offend me and as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have played roadworn strats.  They were fine guitars and very reasonably priced.  I think, on balance, that I prefer pristine guitars but I wouldn't be put off by a bit of deliberate "aging" and would certainly consider a road worn Fender if I were to be in the market for another.

Having said that, I struggle to understand paying big money for a Custom Shop Relic.  If ever I am in the market for such a guitar, it would have to be perfect.

Talking of old guitars (and since Farrell has put up a picture of one of his) here is my black strat that I bought new in 1976.  As you can see, it is in perfect original condition.  Apart from the replacement gold Schallers, the replacement brass bridge, the gold jack socket, the scratch plate that I made myself, the single EMG humbucker, the Gibson speed knobs (2 only), no selector switch (not much point with only 1 pickup), the routed body and the Roland GK3 pickup.  Apart from that it is as new!    But very few dents, and believe me, it has seen some action!

I know I have completely destroyed any residual value it might have had, but in my defence, with the exception of the GK, most of the sacrilege was performed in my youth when I knew no better.  It is still my fave guitar and I love it.  

[Farrell Jackson]

Talking of old guitars (and since Farrell has put up a picture of one of his) here is my black strat that I bought new in 1976.  As you can see, it is in perfect original condition.  Apart from the replacement gold Schallers, the replacement brass bridge, the gold jack socket, the scratch plate that I made myself, the single EMG humbucker, the Gibson speed knobs (2 only), no selector switch (not much point with only 1 pickup), the routed body and the Roland GK3 pickup.  Apart from that it is as new!    But very few dents, and believe me, it has seen some action!
I know I have completely destroyed any residual value it might have had, but in my defence, with the exception of the GK, most of the sacrilege was performed in my youth when I knew no better.  It is still my fave guitar and I love it.  

Hey Paul, that is a good looking Strat and the gold hardware sets it off nicely! You've customized it in your youth but you still love it like an old friend and that is all that really matters.

I forgot to mention that my 1974 Thinline has also been modified by me from it's original state. It has jumbo frets on it, Schaller tuners, a brass bridge and saddles, and the bridge pickup was rewired for a hotter sound by Seymore Duncan in the 1980s. I still have the original hardware but I'm not sure how much the mods have affected the collectors value either.

Farrell

[AndyR]

Having said that, I struggle to understand paying big money for a Custom Shop Relic.  If ever I am in the market for such a guitar, it would have to be perfect.

Yep, that's the position I'm in. I personally don't get the Custom Shop Relics at all - obviously some people do, otherwise they wouldn't be making them. I also don't understand the market for boutique builders making relics... In fact, I tried one Custom Shop for comparison when I was deliberating over my first Roadworn - yes, it was nicer made, felt more expensive, but it wasn't in the same ballpark for the sounds I could get out of it... and it was three or four times more expensive than the cheap Roadworn in my hands! I also tried the bog-standard Mexican strat that was comparable to the same Roadworn. It was cheaper (by about £100), but it was no where near as well-built () or solid feeling as the Roadworn, and the sound was just... "OK" ... and for me, compared to the Roadworn I was about to buy, it was "meh" and really not worth getting my wallet out. The Roadworn in my hands was something else, eventually I decided I'd have to put up with the relic stuff on it, because I had to have the guitar.

To be honest, I'm very close to the views of most folks on here, I'm not likely to buy a deliberately relic'd guitar because of the bashes on it, it's a black mark against the guitar for me. The Roadworns were different, though, the guitar itself outweighed the black marks. They were "cheap" and they really lucked-out making them - and when they first came out, there were more "magical" guitars than "OK" guitars in the batches that I played. I have since seen some real dogs (in my opinion!) in the Roadworn range - and I understand they've even toned down the "aging" since I bought mine (some bloke in a shop told me - but he didn't realise he was talking to a guy who owns two already!)

I am still looking for an equivalent Roadworn 50s tele. Most I've tried were "OK", but not good enough to get over the appearance for me. I did try one a few months back that was "OMIGOD!!" and would have been enough for me to retire my Baja (which I find HORRIBLY shiny - that thing's never ever gonna feel lived in - otherwise it's a glorious guitar ), but I didn't realise I had the funds to buy it. I went back the next week after my missus had told me "why didn't you get it?" ... but it was gone.

No, the only thing that winds me up about these "relic" threads (here and elsewhere) is the language that folks who don't like relics always seem use (vast generalisation, I know). "I don't like them" is a perfectly reasonable position to be in, same as my position of "I don't really care but they're not really for me" is reasonable, same as someone else's "oh wow, I love them" is.

The thing is, the "I don't like relics" folks often seem to end up telling us that "a guitar should age gracefully with its owner" and that each ding is some sort of badge of honour, but without adding a "personally, for me..." to it. So it often reads like the writer believes that this is the "way" and that everyone else is wrong... And this is so obviously not the case... it always makes me feel uncomfortable.

I guess what it is is that I don't like it when one set of folks tries to force another set of folks to agree on something that is only a matter of opinion (yeah, yeah... what am I doing looking at the internet, then?! ).

A few years ago, elsewhere in cyber-world, in a similar thread - which got VERY heated, btw - a bunch of guys pointed out that "relic" is a finish option, nothing else, get over it... and that kind of cooled things down for a bit. I already had my roadworns by then, but it helped me to finally stop wishing that they'd made a version of the roadworns without the dings.

Anyhoo - peace guys
I don't want anyone who dislikes relics to start liking them. And I don't want anyone who likes them to see the error of their ways!