So, I've got a Start that is not all original parts and I want to get the neck looking more like a Fender neck with the slightly yellowish lacquer look. As I searched Google for information I came across LOADS of videos and sites for relic-ing a guitar. Not to mention the number of places to buy reliced guitars.
So that got me thinking, when did it become popular to own a beat up axe? The other obvious question is why does everyone like them so much?
I came of age in the '80's and everyone wanted a guitar that looked new and shined with hot colors cool graphics. I wonder if those days will ever return...?
Its crazy isnt it. You dont want a relic'd muscle car. Or piano. Or jewellery. Or suitcases. Or even a house.
Why is it only guitars that have "mojo" if they are all beaten up? Even if the wear and tear is fake? Imagine buying a brand new relic'd 2013 Camaro... complete with fake rust, dents, and scratches...
rhoads56 wrote:Its crazy isnt it. You dont want a relic'd muscle car. Or piano. Or jewellery. Or suitcases. Or even a house.
Why is it only guitars that have "mojo" if they are all beaten up? Even if the wear and tear is fake? Imagine buying a brand new relic'd 2013 Camaro... complete with fake rust, dents, and scratches...
Now imagine being charged more for a beat up Camaro!!
randy will never die wrote:Personally I blame EVH. have you seen his Kramer 5150 and Frankenstein guitars. They look beat to hell
But Ed's guitars were beat up because he used them for years. He doesn't use cases when not on the road, so he beats them up every time he tosses them in his trunk to go somewhere.
The replica EVH guitars are beat up because people want exact replicas of what Ed is playing. Then again, he used spray paint to paint them, so they were probably beat up on day one!
Personally I wouldn't want a replica of Randy's polka-dot V in the condition it's in now... and no one wants a Jackson RR1 that's beat up.
I think some guitars look better beat up and some look bad. Personally theres something about old guitars that have yellowed and been worn that really appeals to me and something about clean and shiny ones that makes me dislike them, im not sure why that is, its kinda like why i like the taste of foods but not others. However, like i said, i think some guitars dont look well aged such as randy's polka dot V.
There's a tiger-striped ESP Strat at the Pawn Shop down the street that looks worn and faded. In some respects I like it because it's an older guitar, but I bet it looked GREAT when it was new. For $325 I'm thinking about picking it up.
BowTie29 wrote:I think some guitars look better beat up and some look bad. Personally theres something about old guitars that have yellowed and been worn that really appeals to me and something about clean and shiny ones that makes me dislike them, im not sure why that is, its kinda like why i like the taste of foods but not others. However, like i said, i think some guitars dont look well aged such as randy's polka dot V.
Your right some guitars look prefect aged and relied
I think people think old guitars that have been around the block a few times are gonna sound god like because their old. The reality is that the guitar new or old is only gonna sound as good as the person plays it
If you are a beginner guitarist and you have a vintage 1959 gibson and your playing sounds like crap the guitar is gonna sound like crap.
I love relic guitars. Not soo much the relic paint job but rather the relic hardware
One guitar that does come to mind for being a 'fossil' of a relic guitar is Rory Gallagher's strat. What a pure work horse of a guitar with plenty miles on the clock. Very much like Randy's signature PDV that Rory guitar was one of the first relic guitars that i heard about being reproduced to look aged distressed and not exactly tret with TLC. I cannot see the fascination of wanting to own a repro guitar that has been replicated to look aged etc..The guts of the guitar would cost the same your paying for the work that involves the distressing which takes how long ??. But the market is out there and like any fan if its a must have item and the money is in the bank.
Interesting topic about signature guitars here http://axvault.com/2012/07/04/the-great ... on-part-2/
GUITARIDOL5682 wrote:...the market is out there and like any fan if its a must have item and the money is in the bank.
Interesting topic about signature guitars here http://axvault.com/2012/07/04/the-great ... on-part-2/
Excellent link, thanks for that.
Kurt Cobain- Although he is not the best guitarist, he should be credited for bringing back the Jaguar and the Mustang. He has had multiple signature models with Fender, including the Jagstang, that have all been very successful. - See more at: http://axvault.com/2012/07/04/the-great ... WWpGL.dpuf
Freaking Cobain is the reason I can't afford another Mustang like the first guitar I owned!!! Even the reproduction ones are $900 I bought a '66 Mustang AND a '66 Fender amp for $210 in 1980... I hate the vintage guitar market and the bloated prices.
randy will never die wrote:
I think people think old guitars that have been around the block a few times are gonna sound god like because their old.
I can agree on this
One thing to consider though, is that these guitars were NEW when they "became famous"
and thus, they haven't been exploited to the wear and tear yet
This shows some good detail of the RR Gibson LP relic. The attention to wear on the paint the cracking and crasing. The hardware looks worn on the tuning heads, the weathered brass looks tarnished. A stupid price to pay for this guitar but it would be cool to see how they distress the guitars and put the age to them. How is this guitar a limited edition of 100 but this one is numbered 101 ? Check out the link and scroll through the pics.
Just to answer myself the Rhoads family received the #1 so they needed to put the 100 guitar at 101... I get it. For the sake of an extra guitar to sell. That must of been the guitar on display in the winery a few months ago. I wonder how much alike the 2 guitars (Randy's original) are sitting next to each other and how the attention to detail is replicated on each guitar. with more wear on one then the other, the buckle rash being the same shape of knocks etc.
Not sure why relics are popular. I think most of it is with the idea that it looks like it is old and came out of the 60's. The main issue with old guitars is that they do cost alot to get a hold of a real 50's era fender or gibson. The Relic gives people a way to get those guitars at a lot less money. Some people even swear they sound as good. So that makes me wonder what all the hype of vintage gear is. I have played some relics from fender and I really liked them. I think the thing about the relics is that has appeal at least for me is that they do play more "broken" in. They feel older. I am not really all that taken in from them. I have never owned one. I am more interested in NOS or VOS type stuff. Ill wear it out on my own.
I bought a '66 Mustang AND a '66 Fender amp for $210 in 1980... I hate the vintage guitar market and the bloated prices.
