This is beyond stupid

[GuitarDoc]

I was in the music store Sunday, that is where saw the reliced Martin. They had some reliced Strats that were beautiful. They would have been even if not reliced. However, 5K for any Strat is ridiculous. I can't get my head around not liking a guitar because it is reliced. It is just a finish, it would get akin to not liking enamel or poly. Or graphic designs. For me it is first about the feel of a guitar, then the sound, if it passes those tests I don't really care about the finish unless it is something extremely hideous.

So, let me get this right in case I misunderstood what you were saying.
If you walked into a store and saw two guitars that played and sounded exactly the same and were both priced at $2500, you could be happy with the one that was 10 years old, had lots of wear, was mistreated and abused, and never taken good care of (because that IS what relicing is imitating)...instead of the brand new one in pristine condition? And you wouldn't even think to tell the sales clerk you want a discount on the used one?

 

[GuitarDoc]

If you found a Strat that played great for a great price that was naturally worn over time would you buy it?

Now you're changing the rules. "At a great price" indicates a big reduction in the cost. But artificially reliced guitars are NOT reduced in price...sometimes they are even MORE costly than their new perfectly finished brother.

 

[Securb]

So, let me get this right in case I misunderstood what you were saying.
If you walked into a store and saw two guitars that played and sounded exactly the same and were both priced at $2500, you could be happy with the one that was 10 years old, had lots of wear, was mistreated and abused, ?

I would opt for the new guitar of course. However, if I saw a guitar that was played hard, that felt good, sounded good and was within my budget, yes I would buy it. If I saw a guitar that was artificially manipulated to look like it was played hard, that felt good, sounded good, and was within my budget, yes I would buy it. I do not search out reliced guitars, but a guitar being reliced would not prevent me from making a purchase.

And you wouldn't even think to tell the sales clerk you want a discount

Have you met me? ​

 

[Chistopher]

The biggest downside of relic'ed guitars is that at some point you will be approached by someone who wants to talk about the relic on your guitar as if that was the most important part of your performance.

 

[Ascension]

Why anyone pay more for a new guitar that looks like it was dragged behind a truck is beyond me. I kinda get a guitar that has been naturally worn for many years of playing. My 93 KOA Carvin DC 127 is an example. Picking it up and playing it kinda feels like shaking hands with an old friend, it just has that familiarity and is comfortable, like an old pair of well-worn jeans are. But that came from many years of real play and honest wear, and you just can't recreate it. I was in a shop today where there was a wall of relic Fenders listed at almost twice the $ as a pristine normal Strat orTele. That I absolutely don't get!

 

[weepingminotaur]

I would opt for the new guitar of course. However, if I saw a guitar that was played hard, that felt good, sounded good and was within my budget, yes I would buy it. If I saw a guitar that was artificially manipulated to look like it was played hard, that felt good, sounded good, and was within my budget, yes I would buy it. I do not search out reliced guitars, but a guitar being reliced would not prevent me from making a purchase.

With no disrespect intended, this feels like a purely theoretical situation, since as mentioned, reliced guitars are invariably either marked up based on their relic status, or the same price as a non-reliced guitar in their spec / quality range, all other things being equal.

Normal wear and tear on a guitar I own is come by honestly, and feels right. Artificial wear and tear, aka relicing, will rarely if ever look right to me, and since there is never a reduction in price, there is no point in considering reliced guitars for me.

 

[Mincer]

I look at it like any other color choice, really. There are guitars I would never buy just because it is in a color I hate, or a color associated with a famous player (like EVH). Some people dig it, and those are the customers. I wouldn't be, however.
I want a guitar to feel like a racecar, in a color that appeals to me. I am sure other people would hate it. It's ok, there is room for everyone out there.

 

[solspirit]

Aside from my other issues with relic'ing, I think about what You'd be offered for a reliced guitar from a music store on a trade-in trade or as a down payment on another guitar.
You would be lowballed for the 'damage'

 

[solspirit]

I look at it like any other color choice, really. There are guitars I would never buy just because it is in a color I hate, or a color associated with a famous player (like EVH). Some people dig it, and those are the customers. I wouldn't be, however.
I want a guitar to feel like a racecar, in a color that appeals to me. I am sure other people would hate it. It's ok, there is room for everyone out there.

Kind of like paying extra for a car that was in a demolition derby. It makes no sense to me.

 

[solspirit]

Artificial wear and tear, aka relicing, will rarely if ever look right to me, and since there is never a reduction in price, there is no point in considering reliced guitars for me.

From what I've seen, the majority of them have been way over-reliced.
I could see a relic job that looks like it was owned by one musician, but not a guitar that looks like it was owned by 5 different musicians with 5 different playing styles for 40 years of a lifetimes worth of wear on a 5 year old guitar.

at this point it's not wear & tear, it's simply damage.

 

[Securb]

I look at it like any other color choice, really.

The same here. An overpriced color choice but just a finish none the less. As I have said if I found a reliced guitar at a decent price I would have no problem playing it. In regards to giving the appearance that I have more experience with the instrument because it is worn in is a ridiculous consideration. The same could be said about purchasing any used guitar in any state of wear. I get the pushback and hate on relic guitars based on their price. I don't get the hate based on their appearance, it is the appearance of any other used guitar.

 

[solspirit]

This is NOT the appearance of any other used guitar.


https://www.sweetwater.com/store/de...gbsHdDwVHKyQmvKT7ss9TXXQ7CfM3JpUaAtkrEALw_wcB

 

[GuitarStv]

it is the appearance of any other used guitar.

Disagree.

At least the heavily reliced guitars don't look like anything like regular used guitars. I've seen plenty of working guitars that have been used for 20-30 years that have nowhere near the kind of damage done to them as a relic like the one in the OP of this thread.

 

[Securb]

Disagree.

At least the heavily reliced guitars don't look like anything like regular used guitars. I've seen plenty of working guitars that have been used for 20-30 years that have nowhere near the kind of damage done to them as a relic like the one in the OP of this thread.

Really?

 

[Mincer]

Kind of like paying extra for a car that was in a demolition derby. It makes no sense to me.

Not quite, as those cars aren't functional. Every relic I've played were great playing instruments, even if I didn't like the look.

At the heart of this, it is the fact that worn instruments insinuate that the owner put a lot of time into practicing and gigging, so the people watching them with this worn-looking guitar think they must be a great player.
But there are actual great players who buy relics and not so great players who buy shiny new instruments.

I don't care that much. The real design crime is the Dean headstock.

 

[Artie]

Really?

Love his music . . . but Pat Metheny does not photograph well. Especially when he plays live in white shorts.

 

[solspirit]

I don't care that much. The real design crime is the Dean headstock.

This one?

 

[jeremy]

that hamer looks sweeeet!

 

[GuitarDoc]

Really?

No playing style by anyone for any length of time will create the wear patterns on some of those.

But if you post 50 more pics, maybe you'll convince us.

 

[GuitarDoc]

Not quite, as those cars aren't functional. Every relic I've played were great playing instruments, even if I didn't like the look.

At the heart of this, it is the fact that worn instruments insinuate that the owner put a lot of time into practicing and gigging, so the people watching them with this worn-looking guitar think they must be a great player.
But there are actual great players who buy relics and not so great players who buy shiny new instruments.

I don't care that much. The real design crime is the Dean headstock.

You got that right, you SHO got that right!