What's with this 'Relic' shit?

[Seshmeister]

I was in a guitar shop today and they had one of these up at the 'special offer' price of $4000 or something.

What is this shit all about?

Why would anyone want to pay for a guitar to be beaten up? Is this like the people in cities like London who buy fake mud to spray on the wheels of their SUV's?

[ashstralia]

i've 'relic'ed my '84 roadstar II. took 28 years and hundreds of gigs.

[Nitro Express]

I was in a guitar shop today and they had one of these up at the 'special offer' price of $4000 or something.

What is this shit all about?

Why would anyone want to pay for a guitar to be beaten up? Is this like the people in cities like London who buy fake mud to spray on the wheels of their SUV's?

Because there is a demand for it. Apparently there is an art to beating the instruments up so they look like they are really aged. I'm with you though. I think it's crazy. When I buy something new I like pristine shiny paint and no corroded metal parts on it.

[DONNIEP]

Sesh - how much do you think the relic-ing adds to the price of that guitar? I'm just wondering how much somebody's willing to spend above the usual price to have a guitar that looks like they've been playing for 25 years. I could see spending the cash on a Frankie replica - if you have the cash. But just for it to be antiqued? I don't see it.

[Nitro Express]

i've 'relic'ed my '84 roadstar II. took 28 years and hundreds of gigs.

I used to have one of those. Mine had one pickup and a flamed maple top and a maple neck with a skunk stripe. I was tuning with a pitch pipe (remember those?) and it dropped out of my mouth and hit the top of the guitar body and cracked the finish. It looked like a pane of glass does when a BB hits it. It must have had a lot of clear coast on it. I guess that is how I relic'ed mine. Oh and the neck had a pretty big ding on the back. I traded it in with some other stuff to get a Marshall amp.

[jhale667]

i've 'relic'ed my '84 roadstar II. took 28 years and hundreds of gigs.

Same with my 1st Charvel mutt. Relics are quite popular, and people actually do pay $500-1000 extra for the treatment. Agree there's an art to it (Tom Murphy does amazing stuff at Gibson, and the Fender Custom Shop pieces look way more realistic than the production ones, where the "worn" patches appear to by done by applying vinyl patches in the desired shape prior to finishing...looks really uniform and obvious IMO), but also tend to agree unless you're doing a replica (or a piece inspired by an aged guitar), I can't really justify the extra expense personally...YMMV.

The only thing I've done close to a "relic" is I had Jeff @ RCA go easy on the clear coat on the Bomber to better match my 2nd actually for really-real vintage Charvel neck that was going on it...

[vandeleur]

The only guitar I've made money on is my srv tokai. Everything else should be shop worn,
Or fucking humped to death. In mho.

[Seshmeister]

Sesh - how much do you think the relic-ing adds to the price of that guitar? I'm just wondering how much somebody's willing to spend above the usual price to have a guitar that looks like they've been playing for 25 years. I could see spending the cash on a Frankie replica - if you have the cash. But just for it to be antiqued? I don't see it.

I really should know more about guitars than I do to be blunt. I tend to view them a little the way I view cars as tools.

Because of that my cars and guitars usually end up getting 'reliced to fuck'. That word reliced doesn't look right but you know what I mean...

I'm sure that there are a lot of people here who fuss over their guitars(and or cars) like super delicate babies like Nigel Tuffnell in Spinal Tap. There are a lot of guys like that in fact it may even be the majority but I'm not like that at all, I take pride in not taking pride.

I was looking at that $4000 relic strat and to be fair there is a lot of attention to detail on these things but to me it is pathetic fakey shit.

Back in the day doing the semi professional thing we used to say that the cost of the equipment a band had was in inverse proportion to their talent. That was obviously an overstatement but there was a little but of truth in it. The people that had sensible jobs in banks and had money to throw at it didn't have the time to practice.

Most of us here now will have experienced the service you get in a guitar shop if you walk in at our age, fuck if you have a suit on they virtually suck you off because the the guy who used to play the guitar a lot but is now old and busy and wants to somehow replace time with an expensive guitar is what keeps those places in business. So now people are paying money to make their guitars look as though they have played them to fuck and gigged them for years? Get a life people.

I have always been of the view that it was cool to use fairly cheap beaten up guitars onstage because

a) At least a third of your audience are usually guitarists or at least have dabbled - don't make them jealous. Their natural inclination is to stand there with their arms folded pretending or being correct in thinking they are better than you.

b) It's kind of punky and street cool.

But mine were cheap and naturally beaten up. I picture these bankers for want of a better word paying $4k for their pretend damaged guitar having a fucking heart attack when someone accidentally brushes against it.

Part of the reason I'm ranting on about this is that now that I am back in the saddle so to speak I've found I've been let down a couple of times with my 'bargains' and am finally seriously considering buying a properly expensive guitar.

Even half decent guitars over here(and I think in Japan) seem to be at least about 30% more expensive than in the US for reasons I don't understand and I usually buy second hand. The most I have ever spent is about $700(although I then usually spend a bit more tarting them up with better pickups and so on).

I'm probably going to buy a rare second hand Ibanez I've found in the same shop as the relic strat for $1600 tomorrow and it's worrying me deeply and seeing that people spend crazy money on just making guitars look shit has just confused me even more.

Sorry thinking out loud here...

[DONNIEP]

Well, 500 bucks or a grand doesn't seem too outrageous for a custom finish to me. I can definitely see the "art" that would go into doing one up right. But if I was in the market I'd probably have to draw the line there. Cool info. Thanks guys!

[Seshmeister]

Send it to me. I'll stick it in a room with my kids for 20 minutes and only charge you $50...

[ashstralia]

what's the ibanez??

[Seshmeister]

http://ibanez.wikia.com/wiki/RGT3170

Should I? It's lovely.

It's either that or a S970CW-NT which I think is very pretty but I would end up getting new pickups and I can't find one local so would have to buy online without trying which worries me but it is 30% cheaper.





I have been trying to make up my mind on this for 12 hours now...


Apologies for being an Ibanez RG person but it's just happened over the last couple of years - you are what you are...



I am having a hell of a trouble making up my mind here...

[ashstralia]

no worries mate, i've owned jems before... i like 'em too. the flame one is a beauty.

[Seshmeister]

I'm starting to think the RGT3170.

I've haggled them down to $1500 AUD.

I'm thinking that worst case scenario it's going to keep it's value.

What do you think?

[Seshmeister]

Where's that fucking guitar nerd jhale when you need him... ?