These dicks never stop the insanity.....

[roodyrocker]

Gibson is not the only one charging big money btw. Have you checked what high end PRSi cost these days? Ever checked their Private Reserve guitars? I'm not complaining about them, if I don't like them I just don't buy them. But someone else is and if it makes them happy who am I to tell PRS they're overpriced and not worth it. And I certainly wouldn't say the buyer's choice doesn't make sense. Gibson keeps making and selling these signature Les Pauls because there is a huge demand for them. So it actually makes sense for them to continue to do so. What doesn't make sense for Gibson, the way I see it, is to make such things as the Firebird X and claim its going to be so revolutionary and change the way we look at guitars. Their fans are diehard traditionalists. Thats why they buy a Les paul looking like it came out of 1959 in several versions. Things like the Firebird X aren't going to fly with these guys. Also, the quality on these high end Les Pauls is very good. So its not like they're selling a junk guitar for $10-12K. At the other end of the spectrum Gibson has Les Pauls that are only a small fraction of the cost of their expensive signature models. They're called Studios and they're US made. So you can choose from those or anything in between and still have a Les Paul.

[Nightbat]

On relics: ya know, when it comes right down to it "relic-ing" is merely a finish option. To simply call these guitars "beat up" is not doing them justice.

Ok, let's settle for "Professionally Thrashed"

I've got a '67 Mustang in impeccable state for $80K

...but if you give me an extra $60k I'll make it an exact replica of "Gone in 60 seconds", don't worry, you'll get your money's worth after I profesionally dented, scratched and scraped it

Love them or hate them, to make an accurate replica down to every scratch and nick takes a lot of talent and time. That's a big part of the reason these guitars are so expensive.

No, it's because people are stupid enough to pay for something new looking worn
I'm having a hard time thinking of anything else people are willing to pay more for being new but looking like it's (over)used

[leftykingv2]

Ok, let's settle for "Professionally Thrashed"

I've got a '67 Mustang in impeccable state for $80K

...but if you give me an extra $60k I'll make it an exact replica of "Gone in 60 seconds", don't worry, you'll get your money's worth after I profesionally dented, scratched and scraped it




No, it's because people are stupid enough to pay for something new looking worn
I'm having a hard time thinking of anything else people are willing to pay more for being new but looking like it's (over)used

My sentiments exactly bro.

[AdRock]

^I hear ya, but I just don't get the logic.

For iconic guitars, like the George Lynch example, perhaps the battle scars on that guitar and their origin can be traced to show their "authentic-ness".

But what about your average used guitar with battle scars? How do you know if those were acquired over many years or intentionally put on by the prior owner...or a combo of both? There is no way to know. So there is no way to prove if they are "honest" or not. So how is that any different than buying a relic?

The average used guitar with battle scars isn't normally being sold for thousands of dollars. I've seen a USA Strat, same color, that looked just like that Yngwie as far as wear goes, in a local pawn shop. Was the price 9k? NO, it was $550. And it's pretty easy to tell if the average used guitar was relic'd on purpose. That's how its different.

[Chad]

The average used guitar with battle scars isn't normally being sold for thousands of dollars. I've seen a USA Strat, same color, that looked just like that Yngwie as far as wear goes, in a local pawn shop. Was the price 9k? NO, it was $550. And it's pretty easy to tell if the average used guitar was relic'd on purpose. That's how its different.

The average relic isn't being sold for thousands of dollars either. These replicas are a small niche within the relic market.

So you can look at a used guitar and immediately know how, when, and where every ding/flaw originated from? That's pretty cool. I wish my sixth sense was so keen.

[Chad]

A guitar is what it is. Most of the time every ding, wear pattern, etc. can't be authenticated with 100% certainty. And what exactly is "authentic" and "honest" playing wear after all?

Take three examples:

1. At a gig, a player bumps into a cymbal and puts a gash/ding into their guitar.
2. A player intentionally bumps their guitar into a cymbal, which puts a gash/ding into the guitar. Their exact location at the time of the ding is unknown. Does it matter?
3. As part of their job, a player in a factory intentionally bumps a guitar into a cymbal, which puts a ding/gash into the guitar.

The outcome of all 3 is a guitar with a ding/gash from a cymbal. I reckon number 3 is the least honest, but does it really matter? Could anybody even tell the difference? Or even care?

[BLOOD SPLATTER]

Once again ALOT of folks who "don't get" relics are focusing solely on how they "look" - "damaged" "dropped" etc - & completely missing that relics don't just "look" old & worn they "FEEL" old & worn....THAT is why relic lovers love relics....jeebus these relic threads get old fast!!

[Matt_B]

Once again ALOT of folks who "don't get" relics are focusing solely on how they "look" - "damaged" "dropped" etc - & completely missing that relics don't just "look" old & worn they "FEEL" old & worn....THAT is why relic lovers love relics....jeebus these relic threads get old fast!!

+1 million. Relics were first made to recreate the feel of vintage guitars that had been played and played for years, if not decades, and were considered to valuable to keep taking on the road.

[Nightbat]

The average relic isn't being sold for thousands of dollars either. These replicas are a small niche within the relic market.

So you can look at a used guitar and immediately know how, when, and where every ding/flaw originated from? That's pretty cool. I wish my sixth sense was so keen.

as if a relic'd guitar shows 5000 armrubs (beltsander+waterproof), pick marks (blunt scalpel), dulled paint (bad coating), handdirt fretboard (used oil), burnmarks (soldering iron), cracked p'up ring (vice)

Once again ALOT of folks who "don't get" relics are focusing solely on how they "look" - "damaged" "dropped" etc - & completely missing that relics don't just "look" old & worn they "FEEL" old & worn....THAT is why relic lovers love relics....jeebus these relic threads get old fast!!

Corksniffing tightasses
they can't replicate 30+ years of resonance, bumps, temperature changes, stringchanges, retunes, or even find wood of that age (some exceptions maybe)
even they are deluding themselves

[bucketbrian45]

People just seem to hate things they don't understand...

[Brandenburg]

i think relic'd anything is pretty stupid but if people have that much disposable income and throw it away..better them than me. Relic's guitars is a bad investment IMO.. you arnt having a piece of history in your hands by buying one.. its an imitation..There is no magical mojo in these guitars.. no history..no story to tell..

[Nightbat]

you arnt having a piece of history in your hands by buying one.. its an imitation..There is no magical mojo in these guitars.. no history..no story to tell..

I think there's more 'value' in an autographed picture if you look at it that way

[Brandenburg]

I think there's more 'value' in an autographed picture if you look at it that way

atleast it has some history.. IF it was actually signed by the artist personally and not just copied

years ago I was at a guitar clinic and had the dude sign one of his albums I had... I still remember that moment after 24 years.. hence it has a story to tell and a bit of history

[roodyrocker]

As I said before, I prefer a nice new looking guitar personally. But some of you are just not willing to admit that some relic'd guitars are indeed a good investment. This is besides the fact that their owners enjoy them that way. Anyone who bought a Jimmy Page aged & signed Les Paul has seen them go up in value every year. They have gone up several thousand dollars. They were expensive when new but if you bought one you would stand to make a lot of money today if you were to sell. As for the run of the mill mass produced relic guitars, they're not for me and perhaps not for you but apparently there are enough people who like them that way that manufacturers responded to the demand and sell them that way. Let their owners enjoy them, no need to pick on them.

[PowerTube]

I haven't read this entire thread, but I despise "relic" and "signature" model guitars. They're nothing but pure scam. I think the worst offender I've ever seen was the Fender Stevie Ray Vaughn Strat. Stevie Ray was dirt poor and sleeping on a pool table in Austin before he made it big. His Strat was a body from one year and a neck from another, because that's all he could afford.

So then we had Fender producing a "signature" model, all scuffed up and beaten half to death, so that a beginner could be "just like Stevie Ray" and have his "vibe." Please.

And don't even get me started on the various Brian May "models" out there.