Jump to content

So wait my tele wont look like this in 20 years...


Fersnachi

Recommended Posts

  • Members

it will if you play the crap out of it. Poly wears just at a rate much slower then nitro. My nitro finished tele is starting to wear after a few months.

 

The problem is most people own like 30 guitars. Back in the day not only were guitars nitro but people only played 1.

 

Its a myth that nitro guitars take 20 years to age, there are pics of people like Don Rich playing a well worn Tele that is only a few years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd say any guitar that's used near to the point of being abused with all the stuff that can happen while gigging (dropping, falling, smoke, buckle rash, sweat that wears down the finish where your arm rubs on the body, etc.) is gonna look worn. My Strat is 20 years old now. But because I don't gig it looks pretty much brand new still. The maple board has shown a bit of yellowing but that's pretty much it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The problem with relic'd guitars is that usually, unless it's a very, very thorough job, the bridge, hardware & neck look brand new. Essentially only the body & maybe the headstock was touched..

 

Got me thinking though..... could I put together a relic'd Tele someday?

 

Hmmmmmmmmmmm..... Iiiiinteresting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Welcome to 1968, when Fender stopped using a pure lacquer (either nitrocellulose or acrylic) finish. In 1968, ALL Fenders had a polyester undercoat underneath the lacquer. In 1983 they went to polyurethane as the top coat and stopped using polyester on necks.

 

Given that the guitar in your top pic has a mint three-ply pickguard, what looks like a late '50s blonde finish, a '60s bridge pickup with raised D&G poles, and '60s style saddles, all with a one-piece maple neck... I don't think anybody thought those two-to-four guitars that example is assembled from were going to look like that in 20 years.

 

Yours is a Mexican Standard with a polyurethane neck finish and polyester body finish... So, no, it won't look like well-worn nitro or acrylic lacquer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The problem with relic'd guitars is that usually, unless it's a very, very thorough job, the bridge, hardware & neck look brand new. Essentially only the body & maybe the headstock was touched..


Got me thinking though..... could I put together a relic'd Tele someday?


Hmmmmmmmmmmm..... Iiiiinteresting...

 

 

the plating on the hardware though chips and falls off pretty fast, even the stuff on my US52RI.

 

The neck is the hardest part. Nitro necks wear fast, poly not at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Welcome to 1968, when Fender stopped using a pure lacquer (either nitrocellulose or acrylic) finish. In 1968, ALL Fenders had a polyester undercoat underneath the lacquer. In 1983 they went to polyurethane as the top coat and stopped using polyester on necks.


Given that the guitar in your top pic has a mint three-ply pickguard, what looks like a late '50s blonde finish, a '60s bridge pickup with raised D&G poles, and '60s style saddles, all with a one-piece maple neck... I don't think anybody thought those two-to-four guitars that example is assembled from were going to look like that in 20 years.


Yours is a Mexican Standard with a polyurethane neck finish and polyester body finish... So, no, it won't look like well-worn nitro or acrylic lacquer.

 

 

 

 

Thats is very observant!!

 

How did you tell all that from two pics both of which dont show the Headstock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

heres the problem

 

far right is my 52RI, you can see fretboard wear on 2nd and 3rd frets (the dark areas)

teles.jpg

heres the body you can see where the nitro chipped away and underneath is the poly (the white areas) these areas will never darken because the poly is underneath.

twins1g.jpg

 

So the neck because it is all nitro is wearing fast, but the body will always look like it does, chips with white areas underneath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thats is very observant!!


How did you tell all that from two pics both of which dont show the Headstock?

 

You stare at enough guitars for a long time and you can star to tell them apart. :)

 

The top one has a transparent look to the finish but almost seems solid white at that angle. If you got a straight on view, you'd see more grain. The saddles are the threaded type that were used in the '60s. The pickguard has a greenish tone from the particular plastic they used in the early '60s before they went with vinyl. The bridge pickup has the raised D&G poles that they used in the '60s. And for the neck, there's no visible seam for a separate fretboard, which they would've started using in the late '60s when they reintroduced maple boards.

 

As far as the MIM Standards, the bridge and the color of the neck are the dead giveaways, but the body edge radius is also subtly different. I can spot a non US Fender body a mile away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Hmm...I'm about to start a building project and I have to finish the body myself. I think I'll try to go with a finish more like the older style cuz I'd kinda like to have a guitar that'll age like Clapton's Blackie or SRV's guitar. I don't want to relic it because, for me personally, I feel like I have to earn the look of that wear and tear by playing it instead of creating it artificially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Angry Tele is correct, you had one guitar that you gigged with till the frets wore out. Then you sold it and bought a new one. If we had only had the prescience of mind to realize that someday people would pay big $$$$ for beat to hell gear...........We might not have been so eager to sell.:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Can somebody tell me why it's so important that guitars get beat up and relic'd looking over time?


And why poly durability is so disappointing?



:confused:

 

I don't get it either. If you look at from the point of view that a finish should be durable and protective, nitro is actually a pretty terrible choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Can somebody tell me why it's so important that guitars get beat up and relic'd looking over time?


And why poly durability is so disappointing?



:confused:

 

I think it depends on the guitar. I like some guitars to look new and others to look old. I've had my Jackson for 20 years and, though it's aged very well, there are a few tiny dings in it that I wish weren't there but the finish has held up very well and I'm very thankful for that. I hope my JP6 holds up that well but it's only 3 years old so I don't know yet.

 

On the other hand, there are guitars that look great with some wear and tear. Clapton and SRV had strats. Paisley and Summers have their teles. You could just tell they spent a lot of time with those guitars and they'd probably have some great stories if they could talk. There's just something cool about an instrument that looks worn in by it's owner.

 

It's the ultimate form of instrument bonding and customization and no money can buy it. If you pay enough, it can be imitated but not duplicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...