It is currently Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:55 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
Post subject: Re: Hi everyone, new user here, with a question: Revamp or n
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:37 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 2187
lomitus wrote:
DetroitBlues wrote:
I can't believe that guitar has that much vintage relic'ing for being only 17 years. People pay a lot of money to have their hardware and plastic look that aged. Personally, I wouldn't change a thing. I wish my Strat looked that aged.



Relics...I've said it before and I'll say it again - I just don't get it. To me it's like buying a brand new car...except that someone busted out a headlight, key'd the doors, painted one rim school bus yellow, smeared ketchup around the interior....why would you really want something like that, let alone actually pay -extra- for it? Just doesn't make sense at all. Same thing with what I said about vintage Rods...those guys go to -a lot- of trouble and expense to restore a car because no one really wants to look at that dented, half-primer'd body, rusted bumpers, etc...that just looks like crap every time.


Sigh.....

Jim


I guess there is a difference between cars and guitars... A guitar that is worn, slightly beat up, and has the look of years or decades shows a guitar that had to be played all the time. It means a guitar that has seen the stage time and time again. It means MOJO, serious Mojo. It has a broken in feel that is just comfortable in your hands. Its a players machine, sonic temple of bliss in your hands, its a tool whose function has surpassed its form. How to explain it is near impossible... Yes, I like shiny new things, but I also love the well worn things that show years of love from being used over and over again....

_________________
"Epitaph on a blues musician’s tombstone: “I didn’t wake up this morning”" Davy Knowles


facebook.com/313DBC


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject: Re: Hi everyone, new user here, with a question: Revamp or n
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:24 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 1598
DetroitBlues wrote:

I guess there is a difference between cars and guitars...


Not in my mind. To me, the concept of "vintage" applies equally to both. Consider the 50's for a moment...the tail fins of a '57 Chevy and Buddy Holly on that red Strat...very evocative imagery that easily goes hand in hand. Does Holly's Strat really look like some yutz took a belt sander to it? The 60's...the birth of surf music and muscle cars. Weren't The Beach Boys even with their "Woody" pretty much a walking Fender ad back then? I don't remember seeing any "relic" instruments there at all! LOL! How about cruizin' out to the beach in a '65 Mustang convertible listening to Dick Dale?

Dude...vintage cars and vintage guitars...goes hand in hand in my book!

Quote:
A guitar that is worn, slightly beat up, and has the look of years or decades shows a guitar that had to be played all the time. It means a guitar that has seen the stage time and time again.


I just have to disagree with this completely. First off, a guitar that has been "relic'd" probably hasn't see the stage that much...particularly in the case of a brand new "Road Worm" that hasn't seen the stage AT ALL. Seriously...talk about trying to deceive people, LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's more is that in the case of genuine authentic wear, particularly to THAT degree...well...it just tells me that someone just can't be bothered to take care of their toys. While I use it as reference a lot around here, my '96 MIM has seen the stage many times over the past 17 years (with countless hours down in the basement studio) and while no, she's not "pristine"...she's got a few nicks and dings here and there...she is pretty clean. Same goes for most of my guitars really with the possible exception of my old Memphis LP which does bear the scars of my rather ignorant youth. Nothing "deliberate" (other than some extra screw holes around the headstock where the tuners have been swapped out a few times) but yea...she's got quite a few bangs and dings. And even there...cheap guitar played by a reckless, rebellious youth and she's STILL in better shape than some of these mock monstrosities that some people inexplicably seem to find appealing.

Quote:
It means MOJO, serious Mojo.


Ok, while I will admit that I can acknowledge this to some -very- small degree, as I have used the term myself on occasion, aside from being a HIGHLY subjective reference to some ethereal somethingness that can't really be defined...again...it just doesn't apply to relic'd guitars! There's just no way to apply ANY degree of this un-quantitative something at the factory! It's not like Fender (or Gibson or anyone else) has a box labeled "mojo" sitting on the skid in the back of the warehouse somewhere along with all the bodies and necks (and if they do, I'll bet it's just full of "silly putty" or cans of Hormel Chili or something, LOL!). How does a guitar that's never been played (beyond the weekend wankers at GC), and never seen the stage have any mojo....at all? What's more is there are -PLENTY- of instruments out there that have tons of mojo, that simply don't look like someone deliberately trashed them! Consider Hendrix's white Strat at the Rock Hall as one single example...you're just not going to get too much more mojo than than...and she certainly don't look like some idiot took a belt sander to her! There are plenty of very fine instruments out there with tons of mojo that do NOT look like they've been abused or neglected.

If we're going apply this something called "mojo" to a guitar, then we have to acknowledge that it comes mostly from the hands that were playing it...it's simply not about the "look" of the instrument at all. What's more is that same mojo is NEVER going to be beaten into a guitar with hammer and screw driver, let alone a belt sander or by just letting the darn thing rust beyond being playable!

Quote:
It has a broken in feel that is just comfortable in your hands. Its a players machine, sonic temple of bliss in your hands, its a tool whose function has surpassed its form.


I'm sorry but this has -nothing- to do with the visual characteristics of a guitar!

Quote:
How to explain it is near impossible... Yes, I like shiny new things, but I also love the well worn things that show years of love from being used over and over again....


Years of love thru actual playing is one thing...and yes, again my fav's do have a few nicks and scratches of their own here and there to show for it. BUT again...that doesn't or shouldn't have to mean that it looks like someone intentionally abused it with a belt sander! With some -very- rare exceptions of some very special players...say Clapton and SRV (and remember, "Blackie" was a partscaster that came out of a box full of stuff EC picked up)...to me that always looks like someone just really couldn't be bothered to take care of their gear. Seriously...letting your guitar sit there and rust...how is that "LOVE" in any way?


Again...I really just don't get it. To me, even on a genuine instrument that always looks like someone really just couldn't be bothered to be careful their axe (while playing or letting it sit in the closet for 10 years). It just wasn't worth it to them to wipe down the instrument when they were done playing or polish up that chrome during a string change...I'm sorry but that's not "love" and it's not "mojo", it's just plain old -laziness-. I dunno....maybe it's because some folks just have the money to p_ss away but in my mind, if you're gonna spend upwards of $500 to $1000 or more on something like a musical instrument, it just makes sense to take care of it. A decent musical instrument is -expensive-...why not take good care of it?

Again these are just my own personal opinions and I'm honestly not trying to start anything here but after 30 years as a guitar player...again, I just don't get it at all.

Jim


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Hi everyone, new user here, with a question: Revamp or n
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:31 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:48 am
Posts: 26417
Location: Tombstone Territory
lomitus wrote:
and Buddy Holly on that red Strat...


To my knowledge, all of Buddy's Strats were sunburst.

OTOH Hank Marvin was known to have been quite fond of Fiesta Red......

8)

Arjay

_________________
"Here's why reliability is job one: A great sounding amp that breaks down goes from being a favorite piece of gear to a useless piece of crap in less time than it takes to read this sentence." -- BRUCE ZINKY


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Hi everyone, new user here, with a question: Revamp or n
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:04 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 1598
Retroverbial wrote:
lomitus wrote:
and Buddy Holly on that red Strat...


To my knowledge, all of Buddy's Strats were sunburst.

OTOH Hank Marvin was known to have been quite fond of Fiesta Red......

8)

Arjay




hhmmm.....dang...just did a search and I think you're right. Not sure where I came up with red from there. Something in the back of my head associated Buddy Holly with the Torino red for some reason. My mistake...doesn't happen often, but it does happen 8).

That said, looking at the pics I just did...still don't look like anyone took a belt sander to any of them :-)

Peace,
Jim


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: