Question for people who hate relics.

Status
Not open for further replies.

GiorgioV

Member
Messages
1,651
The leading argument against relics is that it's for posers, it's for people who want to play a guitar that looks like they played it and earned their chops on it for 30 plus years.

So to those same people I'd like to ask: if you had a real vintage guitar that looks like this



and the wear was not put on it by you, you'd never play it right?

Otherwise you'd be just as much a "poser" as the guy who owns a relic, you'd be the guy who flaunts a guitar that looks like they played it and earned their chops on it for 30 plus years but it's fake.
 

Dickey

Member
Messages
1,847
It isn't relics per se that I hate; I hate what they represent: Fake mojo that is indicative of this phony, instant gratification society that we have become.
I owned a relic a few years ago; a Custom Shop '62 Strat. I didn't buy it because it was a relic; I bought it because it was an awesome guitar & the price was right! but, I woulda preferred it be brand new & shiny; the fake mojo was the one thing that bothered me about it. I eventually sold it, because I was almost embarrassed to play it onstage, because of what it represented. Even worse are people who buy a new guitar, then relic it. Phony poseurs, & I have actually told that to them to their face. I pull no punches. relics are for phony people.
As far as the guitar in the pic...it would be virtually impossible & very cost prohibitive to find a guitar of that vintage in mint condition, so I have zero problem with owning that. With 1 exception, all my guitars are vintage original, and look like that. And they looked like that when I bought them, way before relics were a "thing". I have zero problem with a guitar with real, vintage wear. I have a problem with FAKE wear.
 
Messages
925
The leading argument against relics is that it's for posers, it's for people who want to play a guitar that looks like they played it and earned their chops on it for 30 plus years...
Maybe, but speaking as a relic "hater", I don't like relics because I can't disassociate it from damage. I fix things, I don't intentionally damage them.

If you like relics, I believe the phrase is "it's a finish option", all good.


...So to those same people I'd like to ask: if you had a real vintage guitar that looks like this... ...and the wear was not put on it by you, you'd never play it right?...
I'll never afford a guitar like that, but in general, if it's an old worn out guitar, I'll clean it up and fix it. I'm not going to preserve patina or dysfunction, I remove dirt and rust, the switches, pots, jacks, bridges, machine heads all have to work properly. New parts must fit existing holes without modification, I'm not removing wood or drilling holes, and I keep all the original parts if any are replaced.

I regret posting.
 

pup tentacle

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
1,871
if you had a real vintage guitar that looks like this...
and the wear was not put on it by you, you'd never play it right?

Otherwise you'd be just as much a "poser" as the guy who owns a relic, you'd be the guy who flaunts a guitar that looks like they played it and earned their chops on it for 30 plus years but it's fake.
I think the thing that would determine whether or not you're a poser in that situation would be whether or not you bought the guitar for the way it sounded/played, or rather, how it looked. Do you love the guitar for the right reasons, or are you just trying to be Mr Mojorisin' from the aesthetically pleasing cool factor of the wear? I think when people opt for the relicing of a brand new guitar, that is exactly what they're doing. It's ridiculous. It's as bad as buying a vintage guitar in excellent shape, and purposely scuffing it up because it spent too many years in the case and doesn't look its age.
 

GiorgioV

Member
Messages
1,651
Can’t we all just get along?
I wish we could but I am so worn out by people coming with their two cents in every thread with disparaging comments about a finish or about people who like that finish.

I'm not even a huge relic fan myself, I got one relic'd guitar that I bought used and that I simply liked the specs, and another that I bought new that had no option for a pristine finish.

Neither is a guitar that looks aged unless you watch closely, I would not like to play a guitar that looks like it came from the dumpster myself.

I have a couple of guitars that are in the territory of "real relics", a Les Paul that has the neck worn down and had to be refretted. All done by me in 10+ years of practice and gigs...it frankly does not make me special.

I just find the attitude of people feeling entitled to criticize how other people spend their money unsufferable.

I personally would never buy a CS strat that is "olimpic white over sunburst" or other absurd things like that but if someone else does and he likes it I have no right to criticize.
 

Skullkrusher

Member
Messages
84
I don't care at all if people buy reliced guitars, although I find over-the-top relic jobs to be funny/amusing. I'd have no problem playing a guitar with a lot of natural wear, but I wouldn't buy a reliced guitar myself. I don't understand how that makes me a poser.
 

jvin248

Member
Messages
5,257
.

I used to hate relics for the usual reasons -- until I owned one. Then I found out it's about the feel of the guitar. The freedom to dig in when playing and the freedom from worrying about scratches.

A relic needs to be repaired so its fretwork plays like a custom shop model. So it plays better than when it left the factory (often not hard to do when a good guitar tech goes over the guitar giving it more than the three minutes the factory workers have to complete the task).

The sharp edged, paint-chipped, splintery, and nasty relic jobs out there are no fun to play.

Soften the corners of metal parts, roll the fretboard edges, make the neck satin as well as the body. The goal is transforming a pair of brand new stiff as lumber dark blue jeans into soft jeans fresh from the drier or a pair of blister-inducing new boots into comfortable broken-in footwear. Or a baseball player who oils a fresh new glove and wraps a ball inside to make the glove supple for play, broken-in. Achieve that with your relic and you'll learn to love them for what they are too.

.
 

bibir

Member
Messages
754
I bought relics wishing it feels like a vintage guitar. Fender relics mostly do. Gibson relic another matter though, some feels like a very new guitar with relic look.
 

Chicago Slim

Member
Messages
4,055
When I started playing (and for the next 20 years), I was able to buy vintage Gibson and Fender guitars for less than the least expensive new guitars. There was no reliced, but simply old worn and used. If they were priced accordingly, I would still be buying them.

You could also get good luthier work, at a reasonable price. Today, I can buy a new Fender neck, for less than it would cost for a re-fret. I know that young people don't like to hear about the "good old day's", but that was where my values were established.
 
Messages
70
relicing is cool, fake mojo is fake. i only like the wear i put on myself, but some of my guitars came to me reliced. real wear is honest wear but i want that new guitar to look old. i play reliced instruments but have the nerve to call out another musician if they artificially fake wear on their instrument.

play what you want. don’t let anybody bully you.
 

geek-mo

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
9,652
My dislike for relics has little to do with "posing," and everything to do with how crappy the relic jobs are. If it's done well and I like the guitar, I would certainly consider playing it.

I would also gladly buy a guitar that is well-used. I like things that show signs of being taken out every day, year after year, because they delivered what was needed.

Here is a relic that's done well. The dings and checks on the finish look like they come from plausible use.



As opposed to this one. What the ****??!!

 
Status
Not open for further replies.




Trending Topics

Top