Page 1 of 2
#1
Hello There.
So I'm wondering, what are your opinions on those relic, road-worn, damaged guitars? To me it depends on the wood, color, and severity. I own a 77 Les Paul, and it's got a couple of nicks and dings. Personally, I really ****ing dig it. It's a nice Tobacco Burst, and it wears them good. On the other side, I also have a 90's FSR Strat. It looks almost brand new to be honest. Not a single knick. It's in Inca Silver (Think Robert Cray), and I don't think it can pull off a scratch. Generally, I like the fact that something has been broken in, played, loved (in a twisted way), and has been around. Now there are limits to me. If you have a guitar that has cracks, 90% of the finish has been scratched off, and your hardware is just rust, then I think it's time to put her down. What about you?
#3
I don't care for guitars that are intentionally reliced, but any guitar tht has come by its battle scars honestly is OK by me.
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!

Log off and play yer guitar!

Strap on, tune up, rock out!
#4
If it's intentionally beat up (like reliced Strats sold by Fender), they almost always look terrible.

They look pretty good with some wear and tear on them. For like 2 months, I had a Martin GT-75 (me and my dad bought cheap to sell) and it had some really nice wear on that looked like it really has been loved by the previous owners for a 48 year old guitar.
Skip the username, call me Billy
#6
Awwww....




Don't listen to him, baby! Daddy still loves you!
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!

Log off and play yer guitar!

Strap on, tune up, rock out!
Last edited by dannyalcatraz at Jun 18, 2013,
#7
It's cool as long as it wasn't put there intentionally.
Spin 'round carousel when your horse isn't screwed in.

My band:
Fractured Instinct
(For fans of Death/Groove/Prog Metal)

Ibanez RGA42E
Ibanez S420
LTD H-301
Ibanez RG520
Peavey Predator USA
Douglas Grendel 725
Line 6 Pod HD500X
#8
Quote by dannyalcatraz
I don't care for guitars that are intentionally reliced, but any guitar tht has come by its battle scars honestly is OK by me.


This. I hate those "road worn" or "relic'd" guitars, but I like beat to hell vintage guitars that got their battle scars through years of heavy use.
banned
#9
I suppose if your guitar gets worn and scarred as a result of heavy gigging over the years, then that might make it a bit more interesting to you personally. But these "relic" guitars that are beat to hell artificially to make them look a hundred years old strike me as ridiculous. I rather doubt that anyone believes that your "relic" guitar is a valuable antique, and these "signature relics" that seek to duplicate every nick and scratch of some famous so-and-so's guitar are truly a waste of money - and probably a waste of an otherwise good guitar.
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell?" - Aldous Huxley
#10
Well, my guitar is beat to ship.

I've hit it with a hammer a couple times on different occasions but not for the purpose of relicing it, just pissed me off. So I have no choice to love how a beat up guitar looks.
My Soundcloud dudes
Recording gear:
Yahama Hs8
Saffire Pro 40
Shure Sm57
Shure Sm7b

Guitar gear :
Ebmm BFR7
Axe fx XL+
Walrus audio Janus
Ibanez Ergodyne
Black Market Custom cab
#11
I like my guitars to look good. As such, I hate imperfections and "battle scars." I would never buy a guitar with intentional damage and do my best to avoid damage to my guitars. It bothers me when I chip the paint or something.
#12
I have one guitar that I guess you could say I relicd , It was a cheap strat I always left in my highschool music room and it go really beat up but in a bad way , I fixed it up but wasnt happy with how it looked(deep scratches etc). So i decided i would strip the guitar and possibly refinish it etc. I was very new to working on a guitar so i was using basically a blowtorch to remove the paint and ended up burning the guitar in spots along with removing the finish and at that point it just looked cool. I then just coated it with some linseed oil and left it all burnt and beat and it looked really good. I think relics (even man made ones) have their place but its all preference , I think john mayer's black one looks so cool beat up but some people would prefer something more clean cut.
#14
It only looks good in extremes. Either extremely pristine or extremely roadworn. A 95% fine Lester with a few dings and scratches would bother me. A Strat that looks like it's been dragged behind a truck is sexy.
#15
Pre-relic'd guitars have and always will be a dumb idea.

And if you feel the need to beat up your Strat for it to have any distinct personality at all, then clearly it's a guitar devoid of personality. Which therefore makes it a dull guitar to begin with.
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Omae wa mou
Shindeiru



Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Jun 18, 2013,
#16
i really like the look, that being said im never paying more for a guitar thats been abused.
#17
Quote by gregs1020
a strat's not a strat unless it's beat up.

/opinion.



Beautifully put.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#18
i'd hate to see a guitar with a nice flamed maple or quilt top have chips or dents but i agree that strats have a cool vibe to them when they show wear
#20
I've got a silvertone archtop acoustic made in 1960, plays beautifully and has plenty of wear on it. But it's from being 53 years old. I Absolutly hate the relic or road worn guitars. Just ugly.
#21
A. Does it sound good?

B. Can I justify it for the price?

If the answer to both of these is yes, then I don't care whether it's an awful, blatantly crappy relic job and it looks stupid. I'm good with it.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 75-87
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 3-3
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 52-39
#22
Not a fan at all of damaged guitars, natural or artificial. I've always found it weird, guitars and Jeans are the only things (off the top of my head) people like to have beaten up - You wouldn't buy a car or furniture with a ton of dents and scratches
#23
Relic guitars aren't my cup of tea to be honest, I do like a old worn vintage look on a guitar but more of wear from playing rather than miss treatment.
I try to look after my guitars but if they get a knock here and there, there's nothing you can about it. I do have a couple of guitars that are in as new condition even though they've been gigged and travelled to many rehearsals.
Last edited by Delboyuk_01 at Jun 19, 2013,
#24
Quote by dannyalcatraz
I don't care for guitars that are intentionally reliced, but any guitar tht has come by its battle scars honestly is OK by me.

+3.1415

This acoustic, for example, is beautiful.

Squier "VMC" Stratocaster
PRS SE Singlecut
tc electronic polytune
CMAT MODS Signa Drive
Blakemore Effects Deus Ex Machina
DIY gaussmarkov Dr. Boogey
EHX Small Clone
Mooer ShimVerb
DIY Beavis Devolt
T-REX Fuel Tank Chameleon
Ampeg GVT52-112
Last edited by Linkerman at Jun 19, 2013,
#25
I hate the ones that are a signature model, that has been artificially relic'd to the same look as that particular guitar looks today... the guitarist didn't buy it that way...

I also don't care for guitars with a really nice finish that have been abused with dents dings and scratches. I like my ladies to stay beautiful.

That said, I do like guitars that have a custom unique finish if it is made to look rough all over... and they are not trying to fake 30 years of abuse. I have an AXL with a "distressed" finish, but they don't try to make it look like a 30 year old axe that once had a beautiful finish. The AXL distressed look is obvious that it started out that way. To me, that's just a unique finish.
PRS SE Santana - Santana III Bass/Treble
ESP LTD EC400vf - Gibson Zebra 496R/500T
AXL Badwater SRO - GFS OW Liverpool, SD Duckbucker, SD JB
Mitchell Acoustic MD100SCE
Peavey Vypyr 100
#26
People are way too anal about guitars. It has paint, it wears and it gets dings. Cars are not the same.

If you're intentionally relicing your guitar you better do a good job or it'll look shit. If it's done well I have no problem with it. I've tried it with a shitty Squier and it was quite a difficult process and it came out poorly.

You either play it or you mother it. I'm a man, I don't mother stuff.

Here's my 56 RI. I look after it but I'm not going to watch every single step I take, which is why it has a few dings here and there,









Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


#27
What Phil said.

Shit happens.

Also, after handling the stupidly pricy Gibson CS relic stuff, I actually loved it. They felt and played like old guitars. The Kossof and Gary Moore CC models being my point of reference.

Fenders relic stuff though, really not a fan. Looks and feels too artificial.

My gear gets beat up fast, not because I don't care for it, but because I play it every day.

1977 Burny FLG70
2004 EBMM JP6
2016 SE Holcolmb
Last edited by Tom 1.0 at Jun 19, 2013,
#28
I play everyday too, and mine look like they could've come out of the factory this morning ;-)
There is a difference between mothering a guitar and being careful with one.

To each their own though, there's no "right" here
#29
Yea, well it's pretty easy to keep a poly guitar looking perfect. Although it's still silly to fret so much over a guitar that you need to plot your path to the stand.

I take it you don't own a nitro guitar? That little knock you fret about that leaves no mark on a poly guitar leaves the dings I have on my Strat.

Do you gig?

I've had people crash into my guitars leaving marks on them. In fact most of the marks on my guitars are from drunk twats.
Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


#30
My main guitars are poly so don't suffer from playing wear, my number one is an Explorer and though i'm a bit of a madman on stage she's so far managed to avoid chipping her pointy bits (despite taking a blow or two)

I'm careful to a degree but my point is more that i don't think chips and scuffs improve a guitar - i accept they they will eventually happen

EDIT: My idea of being careful is not wearing a belt or a watch onstage so i don't get buckle rash
Last edited by Bassface7 at Jun 19, 2013,
#31
I need to wear a belt though, I'm not picking overly tight trousers for fear of a bit of wear on the back of my guitar. It's just way too anal and superficial.

I'm not happy with exposing myself either.
Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


#32
I buy guitars that I'm not afraid to play without wearing down.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#33
I'm not afraid of damaging my own guitars. It happens naturally over time. Spending extra money on an artificially aged guitar is quite silly, though. What are you trying to achieve by making a guitar look older than it actually is?
#34
It's a look. It's preference, you could say that about anything.

Why do you want anything retro? Preference, fashion. Why buy matured whiskey?

The Roadworn Strats are pretty cool guitars.
Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


#35
Retro things mimic the design of things from the past, rather than making something look old and worn. Technically, all Strats and Les Pauls are retro, as their design hasn't changed much since the 60's. The only other example besides relic'd guitars that I can think of are pre-ripped jeans (which are also very expensive). Why not just buy some second-hand jeans?

Also, I don't drink whisky, but doesn't the taste of alcohol change over time? Isn't that why matured whisky is so desirable?

I feel like it's trying to create a sense of authenticity that isn't there. To me, the appeal of an aged guitar lies in the knowledge that it has been played for many years, and the owner still keeps it around today because of the connection he's formed with it.

Fender's Road Worn series are good guitars, but the relic job on them looks artificial. Besides, they'd still be just as good without the wear and tear (although they'd have to change the name).

Eh, I just don't get it. It does look kinda cool if it's done right, but I wouldn't pay for it.
#36
Quote by sashki
Why not just buy some second-hand jeans?

every find a pair of second hand jeans that fit perfectly?
#37
Quote by gregs1020
every find a pair of second hand jeans that fit perfectly?

I haven't even found new years that fit perfectly. Are ripped jeans somehow more comfortable?
Last edited by sashki at Jun 19, 2013,
#38
Quote by sashki
I haven't even found new years that fit perfectly

know what you mean.

they don't even label the length or waist on used jeans at the goodwill store by me.

man i wish they'd do that. i get some killer shirts there.

yes, worn, mojo'd, relic'd etc.

Quote by sashki
Are ripped jeans somehow more comfortable?

worn jeans are softer generally, yes.
Last edited by gregs1020 at Jun 19, 2013,
#39
Everythign you said is based on preference. Which is what it is, so we'll never get anywhere.

Although, Les Pauls and Strats are in no way retro. 'Retro' is when something goes out of fashion for ages and then comes back into fashion. Normally once it's been gone from popular culture for 20 years or so.

Those guitars have been significant at every single musical period and have never been out of favour in popular culture. They have been the most successful brands over the ages except for small pockets here and there where other guitars became popular, but they were still always up there.

Maybe certain aspects of the guitar could be considered a retro design, like the colour, the pickups etc but the guitars themselves do not qualify.
Quote by Shredwizard445
Go ahead and spend your money, I don't care. It won't make you sound better.


Quote by Shredwizard445
Sure upgrading your gear will make you sound better.


Last edited by Mephaphil at Jun 19, 2013,
#40
Quote by Mephaphil
Everythign you said is based on preference. Which is what it is, so we'll never get anywhere.

That's why I said I don't understand the appeal. This thread is all about opinions.
Page 1 of 2