To the left is a shot of my 1959 Les Paul Replica. If you click on the picture you can see the finish checking and the little ding above the pickup selector toggle that was applied by the builder. It’s light, so for me, it’s cool. But truth be told, I don’t really get the relic thing. Give me a nice, bright, shiny guitar, and I’ll be happy. In fact, though many of my guitars have dings on them or their metal is a little tarnished, I’m cool with that because I did the aging through gigging and recording. And I will also add that while I don’t actively try to prevent aging, I do take very good of my guitars and make sure I wipe them down after each gig or session, so even though some of my guitars have dings, they still look fairly new – even the older ones.
On the other hand, my very close friend Jeff Aragaki loves guitars that have been artificially aged. In fact, he once got a gloss ’59 historic, and buffed it down to age it slightly himself. My reaction was, “WTF did you do that for?” He just said that he prefers the well-used look. Of course, I’m totally cool with someone liking that, and will never dis anyone who likes artificially aged gear, but it’s not for me. I’d rather do the aging myself.
Do you get the “relic” thing? 🙂
Guitar Gear 
But when the come pre-reliced I don’t feel so bad about putting that ding there!
True. I think I just have a problem with a brand-new guitar being artificially aged. If it was truly aged, like my Squier Strat or early-80’s Ibanez Strat, then it definitely has some character. But done by a machine? Not really for me… 🙂
I pretty much don’t get it either.. I work to hard to keep them from getting that way, I think they should use the word “abused” instead of relic’d. Relic implies carefully preserved in modern culture, but in latin it meant the “remains” of something. I’d have to say most of them are going for the remains meaning, the cheap strats that are relic’d look crappy but I’d have to say a very light job like yours does add character…
I don’t like relicking a new guitar. I have played the Fender strats and teles that they sell already relicked and they feel and sound great, but I don’t want to pay 800 bucks for that. Plus they all have the same relicking pattern. So nah, I’d rather age it just by playing it for 10 or 20 years. At my age, that’s about all the relicking time I got left!
No S$%t, Ed! Totally hear you!
I earned my grey hairs and my guitars earn their dings, dents and wear. I believe its called character. You can’t fake character and you can buy it either. I would rather pay for a well used guitar or amp with character than pay for an expensive imitation. Oh the stories those rigs could tell.
Each to his own,
but what what pleasure to find a beautiful old girl/guitar who has been lovingly maintained and then to play such an instrument and to feel pain every time you leave a minor mark on her,god forbid a major ding.
ie :would you marry an ugly woman?
you would only not notice as time took over.
keep loving those guitars
EXACTLY my point… And I love the ugly woman reference… 🙂 You wouldn’t marry one intentionally. You’d marry a beauty, then grow old with her – though sometimes divorce is inevitable. But the comforting thing is that there are lots more pretty ones out there! HA!
I never understood those relic guitars as well. Guitars should age with playing and the I think wear is almost a badge of honour for the guitar. (+1 on john lewis wear -> character)
All my guitars have been bought new, and over the last decade I have dinked them, worn bits etc but each guitar now has its own little story that only I know. I take good care of them so the guitars are in great nick, just slightly worn.
Relics for me is all about “image”, its like plastic surgery on celebrities, its just really really fake.
This too shall pass. Manufacturers are always looking for a gimmick to sell you the “next big thing”. I’m like most of you. I take good care of my girls. I can tell you where every ding, scratch and blemish came from. Wouldn’t have it any other way. Let other folks spend their money on cosmetics. I don’t play scratches or dents any more than I play abalone or fancy inlays. If it plays, it stays.
That’s what I used to say, but part of the charm of guitars like the Gibson Historics is that they’re aged to simulate an old guitar. Granted, Gibson doesn’t go as far as Fender who seems to beat the livin’ shit out of their roadworn and relic models.
My ’59 replica is the only aged guitar that I’ve ever liked, because it was done so lightly. Any more than that, and I just couldn’t like it at all.
Point well taken. I agree with your Les Paul idea. There’s a significant difference in the relics Gibson puts out and those of Fender. The Gibson relics are much more “realistic” (if that’s the best word) than most of the Fenders. If you’re looking for something with a nod toward history, then it’s your thing and that’s cool. If I had to choose between some “road worn” Fender that looks like it fell out of the van and got dragged along the road for a while or a “Murphy-aged” Gibson, it’s a no-brainer. The Gibson wins.
Totally hear ya, brutha!
I wouldn’t go out of my way to have a relic guitar, but after seeing Jimmy Vaughn’s white Strat, I sure liked how beat it was. I’ve seen some real artists with the process which makes all the difference. It depends on how realistic it is, to me. It’s all about mood. It’s pretty much aside from music, though.