Relic guitars, faded jeans cool, or tan pants ghey?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Findthetone1
  • Start date Start date
F

Findthetone1

Well-known member
I have generally not really cared for relic guitars but for some reason, seem to be warming up to the idea. Am I late to the party or just getting dumber with old age?
 
vegas-vacation.jpeg
 
I don't think they look objectively bad aesthetically, though it can look stupid with certain models and finishes. Especially when it's a guitar that obviously hasn't existed for 20 years looking like it's 100 years old.

But I do think it looks objectively bad when someone who can barely play pulls what's obviously supposed to be a "road worn" guitar, or one that looks like it's been toured. It makes the person who owns them look cringe in certain situations. If you can rip? It doesn't seem like a huge issue, because it "tracks" with the guitar being well used.

It's kind of the same thing as really expensive guitars, but on a higher level because it feels like "stolen valor" on a certain level. Then when someone who obviously isn't super experienced at the instrument starts plunking away at this expensive guitar that's supposed to look like you toured with it (with "turn the page" playing in the background") it just becomes an entirely different level of cringe.

That being said? It's your money, and if you like it you like it brother. I don't have a huge problem with relic guitars, I just naturally relic mine through actual use, so I never needed to. I do think certain guitars (the charvel henrik danhage comes to mind) with relics look pretty sick.
 
I wouldn't qualify it either way. It's more like going into a high end clothier and getting fitted for a new Armani suit, then telling them to make it look like the hobo down the street wore it for the past two years straight.
 
I really like them because I can take high end guitars out to gigs, teach with them, bump, ding and scratch them...and it doesn't hurt the guitar's resale value. I have guitars that I've put a lot of miles on myself over decades of playing, and I have older guitars that I bought used that had play wear. I didn't buy my relic guitars beacuse they had relic jobs, they were just cool guitars that happened to be relic'd. The added bonus of that though is that they're the guitars that get the most use because I can enjoy them without having to really worry about them.
 
Tbt I normally say "transient", but thought it would confuse too many people.

That's true, they would think you were talking about someone who moves around for work like a traveling nurse

That's always an issue when you try to sanitize language and make it "diplomatic" - meanings for everything are lost
 
I've had a couple and liked them mainly because they felt broken-in and adding a new ding didn't stand out vs a pristine new guitar...at gigs it was freeing to just lean it up against anything and not give a shit.
 
I almost bought a reliced Suhr once until I saw the relic up close and it looked like a new guitar that someone had tried to deface. Not my cup of tea.

Fun story: last guitar I reliced was a Knaggs Tuckahoe. I had put it into its case on top of a whole bunch of other cases and then thought, hey, let me check out the case below.

Unfortunately, I had forgotten to close the locks on the Knaggs and it almost tumbled straight to the floor. Luckily I grabbed it out of thin air, but the back took a bit of a scratch on the binding.

No real harm done though, it actually looks fine for a guitar I intend to keep playing.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top