This is beyond stupid

So if a new player bought this guitar used at a pawn shop and the story and history are not his own is he being a fraud and a poser somehow?

XlWp8aC.jpg

I haven't used the words "fraud" and "poser," so I can't speak to that. But you keep trying to make this an abstract discussion, when in reality that pawn shop purchase would always be contingent on price. If it's being sold at a cut rate, then it's worth purchasing if you enjoy refurbishing and repairing guitars. Personally, I don't, so I wouldn't go near that guitar no matter who played it or how much history it had or even how cheap it was. But at least someone who buys a damaged guitar that belonged to a celebrity is honest about why they're buying it: for the associations, the "aura," etc. They're not trying to pretend that the story behind the wear and tear on Nile Rodgers's Hitmaker is somehow theirs, or that it makes the guitar play better.

And none of this has anything to do with the original point of discussion, which was guitars that are artificially reliced and priced the same or higher than non-reliced guitars.
 
How hard is it to understand that relic'ed guitars cost more because their is more work involved (if nothing more than giving it another pass through the cnc machine) and that if relic'ed guitars weren't selling they wouldn't make them.

Outside of these principles, all you're doing is that someone is using their own money to make their own decisions in a diverse market.
 
So if a new player bought this guitar used at a pawn shop and the story and history are not his own is he being a fraud and a poser somehow?

If you buy a broken ass guitar because it's all you can afford and you got it a great deal . . . then no problems. Givver hell.

If you pay extra to get someone to break your guitar because you're afraid to write your own story . . . then yeah, you're a fraud and a poser.
 
Come on, Securb. You can show all of these specific cases of worn guitars that may or may not have some extra value because of who owned them. But you're sheepishly avoiding the original issue here...namely paying the same price or more then a brand new pristine guitar because it was ARTIFICIALLY reliced.
 
If you buy a broken ass guitar because it's all you can afford and you got it a great deal . . . then no problems. Givver hell.

If you pay extra to get someone to break your guitar because you're afraid to write your own story . . . then yeah, you're a fraud and a poser.

I think we are hitting the middle ground. If someone is buying a relic for the sole purpose of writing their story. I can see where someone might have an issue with that. Especially if they are paying extra money to tell that story. If someone buys a reliced guitar because it gives off a vintage or pawnshop vibe and plays like a beast, I see no problem with it. I can't see walking away from a great guitar or deal because someone at Fender rubbed some sandpaper on the guitar.
 
instrument worn in by artists are specific to that artist
the artist hand has adapted to that neck as much as the neck has worn to match the hand

the only benefit to a relic'd guitar is to that artist
who finds them selves out on the road and the instrument is unavailable
they can pop into a local music shop and get an exact copy of said instrument

Chrissie Hind? the girl from the Pretenders told a story of getting her signature guitar at a local shop for a gig

I love the feel of a worn in neck
doesnt matter to be if I wore it in or not
the edges are rounded the back is smooth
just tucks into the hand so nicely and feels wonderful

I can mimic that on most any neck
we all have with our new guitar neck routines of sanding the back of the neck and rolling the fretboard edges

I read Securb's post on his ritual dozens of times
and that sense of satisfaction he gets when completed

I might get a relic to hang on the wall and look at
but I love a good player
 
Back
Top