What Do You Guys Think About 'Aged' or 'Relic'd' Guitars?

[Dick Seacup]

I'm a Golden Gopher-transplant.  Wait, Min'-uh-soht'-en, yah.  But, I've been here in the Winter Wonderland long enough I guess I'm a Michigander whether I want to admit it or not.

 

I like guitars that are pristine,

But then they stay in the case,

And are rarely seen.

So, now I buy guitars that will be heard

Even if they look like a

.

.

turd?

 

Well, not that bad.  But, I've found that well played guitars suit me just fine.  Even so, I wouldn't buy a "new" guitar that has been "reliced."  I want it au naturel (sorry, jacques, my French is plus mal).

[bluesaxe]

Always an interesting topic... and a controversial one...

 

IMHO (and I mean H , I think there is value in the reliced guitar for some people.  Having a guitar with a thin (or hardly any) finish and a well worn neck to the carve of a hand has value.  Unfortunately most of the relics I've played have been more about the "look" than the "feel" of a well used instrument.  I tend to by used guitars for all my guitars (does that count as reliced?) since I don't want to worry about putting that first ding in a $3k instrument.  I then work my own relic magic over the course of several years.

 

One thing I hate about relics...

 

It used to be that if you went out and saw a band and the guy was playing some beat up strat or tele, you knew the guy had most likely played the crap out of it (ala SRV, Rory Gallagher).  Or at least that someone before him did and it was probably a hell of guitar.  The guy that was playing it now thought that it was more important to have a guitar with serious mojo than a pretty one. Now days I tend to assume that the guy just bought it that way...

[Paul P]

I've never understood the idea of relic'ing guitars but it hasn't bother me.

 

For some reason the thought of relic'ing a Heritage bothers me quite a bit.

 

Paul P