The Guitar Thread • Page 59

Eh I think it's kind of implied, they just don't actually put it in the tab. No one is a robot who can warp their hand in 0.00 seconds to the next chord haha, there's always gonna be that little split second of time it takes to switch chords if the chords aren't super close together. If you listen closely on any album, fast-strummed parts always have that little open string transition between chords. It's just the natural way to do it, trying to hop immediately from chord to chord and keep it clean is impossible and would sound forced and robotic if you tried to be that rigid.

I don't think it sounds unclean to "shift gears" between fast chords so to speak, as long as you're rhythmic about it it just sounds like an intentional scratch-strum. The distortion & drums typically cover that up and it never sounds "off" in the studio. I'm very particular about every note being played with the right intensity and volume, and it never bothers me.

 

What is everyone’s opinion on buying new guitars with relicing

I’ve seen some heated conversations on Instagram posts from builders and distributors posting pics of their guitars/basses with light to heavy relicing

 

I don't agree with it personally but I don't see why anyone would get HEATED about it haha

I just feel like you can either have a company sell you the image of being a seasoned musician with worn gear... or you can just go do it haha. I don't see why you'd want that "image" if you're not actually a regular touring musician and you're more of a hobbyist. Why would it matter then if people perceive wear and tear on your rig?

I'd figure a hobbyist wants a SWANKY guitar not one that's intentionally worn out & aged, especially since relic guitars also cost more than they should.

 

Yeah there are people downright outraged by it. I’m just kind eh about it. Some builders pull it off really well when they put some light aging (thinking of Fano guitars), and I can see some aesthetic appeal in them, but there’s this whole “if you want you guitar to look like it’s been played then play it!” crowd.

It is crazy how it’s seemingly becoming more and more common now and that it’s something that builders are charging wild premiums to do. But, I guess it wouldn’t be offered if there weren’t a pretty good market for it.

 

pretty much agree 100%. the relic look is pretty cool imo but if i wanted to pay money for that id just go buy an old used/vintage guitar. otherwise im just gonna keep playing what i got and however they age over time is what it is ha. nothing wrong w a new looking guitar either.

 

Yeah, it's just a trend I don't get. I could maybe see the appeal if it was to deliberately improve the sound of the guitar rather than simply cosmetic.

However, people can buy whatever kind of guitars they want lol who cares. If a person wants to get ripped off for purposely scuffed wood that they could easily have scuffed themselves if they wanted to fabricate that image, thats their prerogative lol.

 

I don’t particularly like the look of a new relic guitar, but I also really want a Nash Telecaster, and I think they all have relic finishes.

 

i think some of the appeal might be getting the aesthetic but w/o the potential maintenance needs that could pop up w an old guitar thats seen a lot of wear and tear. i mean i get it but for me personally its not worth paying for.

 

some of the best guitar brands out there (Novo, nash, fender CS) do relic jobs on their best guitars. couldn't imagine wanting a worse guitar just bc it looks mint.

 

You’re not limited to buying the relic version of whatever guitar it is though.

 

never owned any but being outraged over reliced stuff is extremely dumb

 

it’s like when you see those forum posts that ask “how do I sound like my favorite band” and then you open it up and everyone’s like “why would you want to sound like anybody but yourself derppp”

maybe because they want to play a song on their guitar?? Lol guitar culture attracts way too many weird idiots - maybe it’s a gen x or boomer thing yet again

 

I’d buy a reliced tele body for a partscaster if I could ever find cool and cheap one

 

1000%

 

I'm not a fan of relics, just because it seems a bit disingenuous as an aesthetic to me. That being said though, there are plenty of other cosmetic options on guitars I don't like and I don't care if people buy those either. If you want to pretend your guitar is old, spend your money on that. Makes no odds to me.

 

^ever bought a piece of distressed furniture, or ripped jeans, or a used vehicle, etc?

 

On distressed furniture or ripped jeans, no. Buying something used which is genuinely worn isn't the same. I'm not adverse to owning things which have aged. It's not like I sell my guitars just because they're starting to look worn in.

 

sometimes you can’t tell when something is genuinely worn or not ha

 

why are we still talking about this lol

 

Apparently it is a big deal after all.

 

to you lol

you said the words ‘disingenuous’ and ‘pretend‘ in a conversation about guitars

 

i get it. and for folks with a poly finished guitar natural aging isn't likely to happen over a reasonable amount of time.

personally, i'd rather put in mods that i'll never use and then tear it down in a few months to try something else rather than mess with the finish/appearance

 

I mean, I also pretty clearly said it doesn't bother me if other people want to choose that route, so whatever man. Not sure why you're getting chippy over it.

 

Got my hands on an old beat up Tom Delonge squier body and decided to bring it back to my life, but with my own touch. Finished up the paint job and just letting it cure for a bit before clear coating/sanding/polishing. I'll be putting on a custom TD style white with black beveled edge pickguard and going with a vintage style 8 screw hole placement for it. I'll be throwing on some chrome hardware and a zebra invader for fun. I was shocked how well this came out! I have an old CBS strat neck sitting around I'll throw on it too.