I asked a relic question…

[Steven Westberg]

On the strat site and I got ganged up on! It was pretty funny the way the relic owners got butt hurt.
The gist of the thing was I like my guitars new looking and perfect, so if you didn’t actually wear the guitar then what does all the sanded paint and scratches mean?? Is it like a trick to fake everyone out?
If it’s a 2020 guitar that looks like 1957 guitar dragged behind a truck on a dirt road, well what is the statement? Or just plain, Why?
This will probably disturb the peace here too but don’t take it personal please.I just don’t understand the thinking I suppose.
Oh, and I understand it what the player “likes” but, Why do you like it? It seems unattractive to me from a show biz POV.

 

[BGood]

Then they wear this on stage.

​

 

[Steven Westberg]

A

Then they wear this on stage.

View attachment 14947​

Ahhhh, nice. I try to look well kempt onstage.

 

[Biddlin]

"You can only have an opinion on relic guitars after you've owned one for an extended period of time."
.
I've never owned a Yugo, but I have a definite opinion....

 

[vomer]

"Relics: Why?" is one of those no-win questions to be avoided, like, "how many people have you slept with before me?" Or, "how can you possibly like Steely Dan?"

 

[Otto99]

I don’t understand the appeal. If you bought a guitar with a hole or finish worn off that Willie Nelson caused, well that’s a relic. One with a finish half ass removed at new purchase is a poser guitar. Like CSNY said, “to sing the blues, you got to pay the dues, and carry on.”

 

[Supersonic]

"how can you possibly like Steely Dan?"

 

[Davis Sharp]

If I relic a Squier to make it look like it was made before 1982, may I put a Fender decal on it to complete the simulated authenticity?

 

[Steven Westberg]

"Relics: Why?" is one of those no-win questions to be avoided, like, "how many people have you slept with before me?" Or, "how can you possibly like Steely Dan?"

 

[Steven Westberg]

I learned my lesson.

 

[Raiyn]

To me the scratches, nicks, finish rashes, etc. tell the life story of the guitar. A reliced guitar is at best a work of fiction, at worst it's outright plagiarism.

 

[Steven Westberg]

To me the scratches, nicks, finish rashes, etc. tell the life story of the guitar. A reliced guitar is at best a work of fiction, at worst it's outright plagiarism.

My question to them was what is the very last ought preceding, “hand me the sander and the dremmel tool!”
Man were they pissed. And I didn’t mean it that way. But a lot of guys pointed out to them what you said. The earned/played relic is better than a forced/electric sander relic
Plus there was a story about Keith having Macabre cloned to keep the original at home. That’s a fair thing too.
Man did they ever pound on me! I will never do that again…maybe.

 

[Biddlin]

I have some dings and nicks that remind me of how I got 'em and the people involved. There's one on my old Les Paul Standard that a now departed band mate put there. I think about him and smile every time I notice it.

 

[BGood]

I have some dings and nicks that remind me of how I got 'em and the people involved. There's one on my old Les Paul Standard that a now departed band mate put there. I think about him and smile every time I notice it.

Much better than thinking about how that belt sander slipped.

 

[Bonzo21]

I get the poser angle, but I don't think that's what everyone* who buys a relic is going for. I mean, none of us, as far as I've seen, are against vintage tint lacquer on a maple neck or an aged Pelham blue or antique white (aged like when they make it a bit green or yellow, not when they relic it). Those simulate age as well, but we seem to be ok with it just because it's shiny.

My SG with thin satin nitro finish is naturally aging. The finish is wearing off the neck, and its down to bare wood where my body rubs up against it (back at upper bout, and arm). It's got nicks and dings all over and shit. I used to care for it, but honestly I play/treat it differently since the aging started taking off. I beat the shit out of that guitar when I play it now, and it's awesome. It feels different (worn in) and I play it differently (it's liberating). Now, back on topic. If I was given the choice between a shiny new true historic CS LP, and a Murphy Lab or Collector's choice relic, I'd have to really think about it. If I could get a guitar that feels worn in, and liberated me to "dance like nobody is watching," **** yeah I'd pay an extra couple hundred bucks. And I don't think there is anything poser about it. I'd treat that True Historic with white gloves... and it's hard to play with white gloves on. I've never seen a good relic in person, nor can I afford to buy one, so I don't know that it would "work," but if it did, I'd have a real decision on my hands.

 

[Steven Westberg]

Much better than thinking about how that belt sander slipped.

 

[Raiyn]

It feels different (worn in) and I play it differently (it's liberating).

It's worn in to you, someone else would wear it in a completely different pattern. Which comes back to the plagiarism idea.

The other issue I have with relics (particularly homebrew) is that they put "dings" in places one wouldn't naturally occur, and in the same vein they'll be lazy and use the same tool multiple places on the body - that doesn't happen in real life.

 

[Cozmik Cowboy]

When I was a roadie/soundman back in the '70s & '80s, there was already a problem with people faking '50s Les Pauls to get the outrageous prices of $3-4000 the real thing was bringing. That skill set is the basis of "relicing" (or, as I call it, paying extra for a damaged guitar).

The whole point is to fake wear to show your authenticity, but all it does is make it look like you don't take care of your instrument.

 

[Bonzo21]

The other issue I have with relics (particularly homebrew) is that they put "dings" in places one wouldn't naturally occur, and in the same vein they'll be lazy and use the same tool multiple places on the body - that doesn't happen in real life.

110%, that's why I don't know if I would like the feel of a "good" relic, I just assume if it DOES give me that feel, that it's worth it. I've seen some real shitty relics over the years. Especially when it's done on thick poly finishes. Those are not relics, they are just damaged guitars.

It's worn in to you, someone else would wear it in a completely different pattern. Which comes back to the plagiarism idea.

I got it used, and it already had some bucklerash so low that the guy obviously played it slash style. Doesn't bother me. It's part of the guitar's history. I suspect I'd feel the same way about a relic. My wear would still be my wear...

 

[Steven Westberg]

110%, that's why I don't know if I would like the feel of a "good" relic, I just assume if it DOES give me that feel, that it's worth it. I've seen some real shitty relics over the years. Especially when it's done on thick poly finishes. Those are not relics, they are just damaged guitars.



I got it used, and it already had some bucklerash so low that the guy obviously played it slash style. Doesn't bother me. It's part of the guitar's history. I suspect I'd feel the same way about a relic. My wear would still be my wear...

Natural wear is good. I’m getting finger marks on my neck in all the regular places. It’s very light but it looks cool I gues. Because it’s fingers not the dremmel tool.