Relic jobs on Basses / Guitars

[daz]

I'll throw my hat straight into the ring with this. [b]What on earth are people playing at [/b]when they plump for buying a bass (or guitar for that matter) that has been given a relic finish.

Those sanded away areas are such a give away. Its not as if anyone who knows anything about them will be fooled for a minute. But even if it was given one of those proffessional time consuming relic job, where all the other little bumps scratches, dings, rust, belt buckle marks, and minute scratches, etc is labouriously put in. What is the point.?

Even with so called custom tribute jobs where a bass is taken and copied to the Nth degree right down to the wear and scratches. Whay bother? The owner of the original bass never bought it like that, and if someone had told him/her that X years down the line someone would copy it to that degree. Im sure they'd have found it highly amusing, if not ridiculous.

I mean really. What is the point.

Opinions please....

[simon1964]

I quite like really well done relic jobs. People presumeably buy reissues because they want to buy into the vintage vibe without the cost of the real thing. So if you're buying a re-issue, I can understand why you might want it to look like its had 40 years of gigging, and hence the relic thing. I guess its just fashion at the end of the day.

The problem is that the vast majority of relic'd basses look totally false. The Fender road worn stuff is pretty unconvincing close up, especially the sanded down areas of wear on the top of the body (although they feel and sound great). The Custom shop stuff is better, but still not entirely convincing.

The best relics I've come across are the Sandbergs, which look fantastic (IMO!).

[skankdelvar]

TBH, I don't know that there [i]has[/i] to be a point. It's a customer option like anything else - colour, fretboard material, 'hot' pickups, bridge type.

But if it is to be done, better that it be done well. The old 'belt sander over the elbow cutaway' ruse is both ugly and the mark of the hobbyist. The Roadworns are indeed a bit over-templated

As for specific guitars - e.g. Clapton's 'Blackie', Jaco's 'Bass Of Doom', Billy Gibbons' 'Pearly Gates' - why not? And if the artist is still alive, they presumably get to trouser a few bob. If they're dead, they've got bigger things on their mind - like half a ton of marble.

[Noisyjon]

I'm [i]kind[/i] of with you on this one.

Where I falter is that I can see the POV that, for instance, I could never afford an early to mid 60's Fender but could stretch to a Fender Relic/Closet Classic/New Old Stock instrument from the Custom Shop to look, sound & feel like a genuine older instrument.

That said I have a bass that's just over 10 years old, that I've had from new, and it has been naturally relic'd which I much prefer the look of as I know I done all that wear and tear/damage!

Cheers,
Jon

[paul h]

I came up with an analogy the last time this subject came. Shortly after OTPJ gave me a complete roasting only to go out and by a RW!

[b]Jeans.[/b]

Do you wear faded, pre-distressed jeans? Are all your jeans dark, flawless and pressed with a nice crease? IMHO it's the same thing. It looks cool and it's fashionable. Nothing more to it.

It's not immoral, dishonest, ridiculous, stupid or any other term that is going to be used in this thread. It's a matter of taste, totally subjective and fairly trivial.

And FYI, I'm all for it. A good relic job looks cool, removes the first dink nerves, feels good to play and gives the vibe of a vintage instrument without the cost.

[thisnameistaken]

I think old basses look nice with a few knocks and scrapes on them, but I think new basses that have been painted and then sanded down as if they've been played every night for 30 years by a man with cheese graters on his forearms look bloody stupid.

[Alfie]

It is just personal taste, not really that hard to understand. Personally I think that basses made from exotic wood look vile, but I can appreciate that others might like them.

Lots of people like the look of relic basses but would rather have the wear done naturally, so I don't understand why so many makers offer relic options but not the option of a new, unblemished nitrocellulose finished that could naturally get the worn look. If Fender just finished their classic series basses with nitrocellulose lacquer then they would sell quite a bit more (basically and road worn without the relicing).

The one particular finish option about relic instruments that you just can't get anywhere else is the different layers of colour, such as a fiesta red over sunburst finish, which I think looks incredible.

[Lozz196]

[quote name='Johnston' post='1008830' date='Nov 1 2010, 06:25 PM']I seen one Far Eastern brand that had a range of Relic'd guitars and they looked like someone had been at them with an orbital sander.

Played one Fender RW P. The look wasn't really my thing but that thing was as comfy as hell to play. Best way to describe it is like the old pair of trainers you don't want to bin. Look like they are falling apart but they are so comfy you don't want another pair. Where as my MIM still feels new, can't wait till it has the feel of the RW

A Few other of the forumites have played the same one and said much the same.[/quote]
The above is exactly how I found the RW Precision to be, just about the most comfortable P I`d ever played.

I`m not too keen on the fake relic jobs, prob the only thing I can find in their favour in the looks department is at least you don`t have to be concerned abt giving it a ding.

[Cat Burrito]

Each to their own I say. Ultimately it's your bass. Two of my basses have no finish as I completely stripped the original finish completely off - a Relic EXTREME! Used to be popular in the 70s, I like the look & feel. None of this messing about with a small section of paint being removed

We all look at the relics and say "You can tell". Well I was fooled the other day when I went to see my guitarists covers band. His guitarist was playing a cool little tele. I asked after what year it was and it was a roadworn! In the shop we might be able to tell but clearly they work on stage

[bubinga5]

some people like a bass to look worn, without the price tag that usually comes with such a bass...simples!

i would put a wager on the the thought.. you couldnt tell the difference between a real worn Fender and a Nash...Nash does it vey well...strangley Fender's Jaco Relic looks not so good...

Edited November 1, 2010 by bubinga5

[pietruszka]

I can see the point of them, when done well they do look good. But thats all it is, a look.

Paul H is bang on the money. People buy faded jeans for a look, just as people buy relic/custom worn basses for a look. Its nothing more than a fashion.

I personally would prefer to get a bass I love to play and love the sound of and play it to death, have it relic'd with time. I have done that with my Stingray. But the finish on them is pretty good and I look after it a bit too much to get it 'worn'!

Its not for me, but I can appreciate the time gone into weathering them.


Dan

[daz]

For my money a nice new bass with shiny paint job to match looks great. There is nothing wrong with it looking new, its almost as if some are embaressed of owning a new bass. I understand the[i] pays your money and makes your choice [/i]argument. Its the choice of ruining a good finish i dont comprehend.

(As [b]Simon1964[/b] mentions)The Sandbergs are the only ones i have seen that look believable. Thats only from pics though. I cant recal seeing one close up.

Edited November 1, 2010 by daz

[4 Strings]

I must admit, I find it all a bit odd. I can understand reissues to mimic neck profile, sound or whatever from a model in the past but to pretend its been well used cannot be a very satisfying thing. In my experience they are quickly identified (the sanding never seems to touch the neck) and have been played by people who clearly have not played the guitar enough to put that amount of wear on it.

While I mourn every dig I put into a guitar I happily accept they show history and tell the guitar's (and owner's) story. What does a sanded, pretend wear mark tell you about the user?

I don't buy pre-worn out jeans either so you can make your own mind up about my taste (or lack of it)

[Vibrating G String]

[quote name='daz' post='1008816' date='Nov 1 2010, 11:15 AM']I mean really. What is the point.[/quote]
What's the point in wearing Spiderman underwear? You get to pretend you're someone you're not. Not my thing but it doesn't really bother me. I put them in the same pigeon hole I put breast implants in. Fun to look at but I don't really want to get my hands on them. I don't fault any maker for trying to cash in on the trend.

What really makes my head hurt is when people claim it makes a huge difference to the tone. Stay in school kids!

I have noticed a correlation between relics and insecurity over your instrument choice. When forums have to make special rules that certain things can only be discussed in a positive light it's gone too far IMO.

Since it is a fashion thing it will probably one day go the way of fluorescent spandex and skinny white ties.

[ThomBassmonkey]

I'd quite like a RW jazz (or I would if I used 4 strings) but I wouldn't buy a bass specifically because it looks worn.

[Fat Rich]

It seems to be a fashion thing, my 20+ year old Jap Fenders have chrome knobs, EMG pickups and the pickguards missing as that seemed to be the fashionable thing to do in the 80s (Jaco style).

Now I'm looking at putting them back to standard '62 spec I'll end up with worn scruffy basses with dull corroded hardware but shiny new pickguard, knobs and pickup covers, it'll all look a bit wrong.

So I'll probably take the shine off the new bits and try and source used stuff wherever possible so they look the same age as the rest of the bass, so kind of a relic job.

But most of the wear and tear will be due to 20+ years of gigging.

BTW there's some pretty convincing relics here: [url="http://www.bravewoodguitars.co.uk/"]http://www.bravewoodguitars.co.uk/[/url]

(If anyone has a tort Jazz bass pickguard and Jazz knobs they want to flog let me know!)

Edited November 2, 2010 by Fat Rich

[orangepeelneil]

Hi there,

Yes good topic,my viewpoints have been covered here by others but another point I'd like to make is in my experience instruments don't generally get that tatty quickly..?

I had a 94 MIJ Jazz for over 12 years and was my only gigging/rehearsing bass.
I played pretty regularly and gigged lots with it , but when I sold it two years ago it was still pretty great condition-hardly a relic... just reasonably used condition.

I do look after my instruments and don't carry them round in bin liners (like I have seen!! ) but I don't know how you get that kind of wear on an instrument. You must have to literally gig daily (and who can confess to that) with sandpaper for shirts and aspestos for fingers ...dunno maybe I'm just light with bass ( but don't think so) - even my highway one with the light nitro covering isn't showing much wear after 4 years and I use that weekly...?

Cheers Neil

[Bigwan]

I think some of you are missing something quite vital - obviously the look isn't to everyone's taste, but surely the worn-in feel can be something everyone can appreciate? If a relic is done well it should feel like a vintage instrument as well as look like one - from playing a few vintage basses (never played any relic) there's something about a 45 year old bass that's been played a lot that makes it feel so much better than a modern version (thinking a 66 P bass vs. a current US P bass, obvious production differences aside).

[neepheid]

Each to their own, but if you come near my basses with that cheese grater I'll knock you into the middle of next week

[Fat Rich]

[quote name='Bigwan' post='1009290' date='Nov 2 2010, 08:57 AM']I think some of you are missing something quite vital - obviously the look isn't to everyone's taste, but surely the worn-in feel can be something everyone can appreciate? If a relic is done well it should feel like a vintage instrument as well as look like one - from playing a few vintage basses (never played any relic) there's something about a 45 year old bass that's been played a lot that makes it feel so much better than a modern version (thinking a 66 P bass vs. a current US P bass, obvious production differences aside).[/quote]

Absolutely although I think that depends on your playing style also. I never hook my thumb over the top of the fingerboard so I'm not going to notice if the edges are worn nice and smooth from years of playing.

But I dig in quite hard with my other thumb resting on the pickup so I like the worn smooth feel of my trusty 20+ year old pickups.

[quote name='orangepeelneil' post='1009279' date='Nov 2 2010, 08:29 AM']Hi there,

Yes good topic,my viewpoints have been covered here by others but another point I'd like to make is in my experience instruments don't generally get that tatty quickly..?

I had a 94 MIJ Jazz for over 12 years and was my only gigging/rehearsing bass.
I played pretty regularly and gigged lots with it , but when I sold it two years ago it was still pretty great condition-hardly a relic... just reasonably used condition.

I do look after my instruments and don't carry them round in bin liners (like I have seen!! ) but I don't know how you get that kind of wear on an instrument. You must have to literally gig daily (and who can confess to that) with sandpaper for shirts and aspestos for fingers ...dunno maybe I'm just light with bass ( but don't think so) - even my highway one with the light nitro covering isn't showing much wear after 4 years and I use that weekly...?

Cheers Neil[/quote]

It takes far longer to wear through modern poly finishes than the old nitro finish on vintage instruments so the Roadworn and Highway 1 Fenders should show signs of wear quicker than the poly finished ones, be interesting to see how long it takes.

Edited November 2, 2010 by Fat Rich

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Fat Rich' post='1009348' date='Nov 2 2010, 09:43 AM']It takes far longer to wear through modern poly finishes than the old nitro finish on vintage instruments so the Roadworn and Highway 1 Fenders should show signs of wear quicker than the poly finished ones, be interesting to see how long it takes.[/quote]
If my two Overwaters from the mid 80s are any indication then it's going to take a very, very long time. Both have been well used but are only showing minimal signs of wear to the finish. The fretted Overwater was my main bass for 10 years and during that time clocked on average around 2 hours a day serious playing time (rehearsal/gigging level - not noodling in front of the TV) and it doesn't show any significant wear to the finish. The fretless which was owned by session bassist Michael Féat before I bought it a couple of years ago has had an even harder life and been shipped all over the world, but is only slightly more worn on the finish.

Personally I think there's a fine line between worn-in on worn-out. I would also suggest that if you need to wear in a bass then it might not really be the correct instrument for you. I can live with a certain amount of damage to the finish - it's inevitable with an instrument that gets any kind of serious use but once it become noticeable from the audience, IMO it's time to get it refinished. I've already had this done with one of the basses I use regularly, and I can see that in the next 10 years a couple of others that I own will probably be sent back to the people who made them to be restored to the condition they were in when they were new.

For me how an instrument looks is just as important as how is plays or sounds. If it had worn frets or other playing damage that impedes it's ability as an instrument then it needs to be fixed and IMO wear to the finish detracts from its visual impact and therefore also needs to be sorted out.

[Alfie]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1009404' date='Nov 2 2010, 10:46 AM']For me how an instrument looks is just as important as how is plays or sounds.[/quote]

Exactly, and that is why some people love relic basses, because it suits the style of music they play and the image they are trying to project. It is exactly the same principal as you wanting to make your bass look factory fresh, just the other end of the taste spectrum.

Looking at the (albeit extreme) example of Rory Gallagher, some people want their instrument to look as though it has a few stories to tell, but a modern instrument will never get to that stage because the finishes are so thick that rather than rub away, they either chip off and look a bit wrong or don't wear at all. The thing about Rory Gallagher is that his strat got to that state by the time he was 20, I would have to be at least a nonagenarian and still gigging regularly to get an instrument in that state.

It's all about Taste

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='Alfie' post='1009440' date='Nov 2 2010, 11:31 AM']Rory Gallagher ...Taste [/quote]
See what he did there?

The thing about Rory Gallagher is that he always attributed the remarkable amount of wear on his guitars to the very 'acidic' nature of his sweat. He eventually died of a liver dysfunction. Any connection?

Edited November 2, 2010 by skankdelvar

[Low End Bee]

I have no desire to own a relic but I do see the point.

Good ones are like a nice pair of beaten up, worn in 501's.

Bad ones are like a pair of stone washed Wranglers with creases ironed in.

[Al Heeley]

I'm interested in why relic'ing is such an emotive subject, it does polarise and excite opinions. I don't get it myself but it doesn't really bother me. It's a bit like someone's dad trying to be hip at a school disco and ending up a bit embarassing and self-conscious. It's worked well for Fender who have managed to reinvent another 75 different models of the same guitars by rubbbing off different bits of paint from the instruments. All kudos to their creative marketing departments, who needs technology advancements and performance benefits?