Un-relic-ing a strat!

  • Thread starter Thread starter cephus
  • Start date Start date
cephus

cephus

Slow Children Playing
Back when i was young, we didn't take perfectly nice guitars and screw them up with shoepolish and belt sanders. We took guitars that looked like they'd been gone over with shoe polish and belt sanders and make them look new again.

I bought my late 80s blue '62 re-issue stratocaster new on payments so I wouldn't quit my electrician's job. I quit anyway, but I still have the guitar. It's been to pretty much every gig with me (at least as a backup) for going on 20 years - and it shows.

I have just begun to scrape the crud from it. Under the strings between the pickups there is this especially tenacious crud, which I realize now is mostly my skin and sweat and fingernails mixed with green tortex. The body has this smear of yech on the upper bout like the traces of the ancient canals of Mars most certainly contain more than a trace of my DNA.

Interesting discovery. I got the bridge that's on it from a friend of mine. I put it on because the sockets that the ball ends butt up against in the block are very shallow and the balls don't get stuck in like almost every other trem. Some time in the 90s I replaced the saddles with graphite ones (and for some reason later restored the high E and B ones to the steel fender ones), and when I removed them to put them back to stock, I see that the bridge and tremolo are one piece, not screwed together like a normal strat trem. The block is chrome plated, as it's part of the bridge. Casted all in one piece. It also has a number stamped on the bottom of the block. It had fender saddles on it when he gave it to me. Does anyone know what this may have come off of? Is it some aftermarket one? Just curious. The thing is pitted really badly all over, so i may not get to use it again.

As kind of a gold watch gesture, I am planning or reaplacing all the screws with the gold plated ones. If I replace the bridge, I may go gold with that and throw in for the tuners and jack socket. I think it shows that at some point, the thing has been gone over for the 100,000 mile maintenance.
 
cephus said:
Back when i was young, we didn't take perfectly nice guitars and screw them up with shoepolish and belt sanders. We took guitars that looked like they'd been gone over with shoe polish and belt sanders and make them look new again.

I bought my late 80s blue '62 re-issue stratocaster new on payments so I wouldn't quit my electrician's job. I quit anyway, but I still have the guitar. It's been to pretty much every gig with me (at least as a backup) for going on 20 years - and it shows.

I have just begun to scrape the crud from it. Under the strings between the pickups there is this especially tenacious crud, which I realize now is mostly my skin and sweat and fingernails mixed with green tortex. The body has this smear of yech on the upper bout like the traces of the ancient canals of Mars most certainly contain more than a trace of my DNA.

Interesting discovery. I got the bridge that's on it from a friend of mine. I put it on because the sockets that the ball ends butt up against in the block are very shallow and the balls don't get stuck in like almost every other trem. Some time in the 90s I replaced the saddles with graphite ones (and for some reason later restored the high E and B ones to the steel fender ones), and when I removed them to put them back to stock, I see that the bridge and tremolo are one piece, not screwed together like a normal strat trem. The block is chrome plated, as it's part of the bridge. Casted all in one piece. It also has a number stamped on the bottom of the block. It had fender saddles on it when he gave it to me. Does anyone know what this may have come off of? Is it some aftermarket one? Just curious. The thing is pitted really badly all over, so i may not get to use it again.

As kind of a gold watch gesture, I am planning or reaplacing all the screws with the gold plated ones. If I replace the bridge, I may go gold with that and throw in for the tuners and jack socket. I think it shows that at some point, the thing has been gone over for the 100,000 mile maintenance.
Click to expand...

I know a local guitar tech that actually does relicing for Gibson, and I just can't believe there is a market for abusing guitars like that. WTF are those customers thinking anyway-its just insane to me!
He uses a dremel or has methods to simulate rusty bridges or gooey fretboards~~~ :rolleyes:
 
I think this trem assembly is kinda cool. It's all one piece and all chromed. It uses the standard stamped saddles. Anyway, as far as I can tell it's a mid 70s one. The guy who gave it to me had just installed a kahler and black and white checkered shelf paper. I think the pickups were maroon seymour duncans with no pole pieces showing. Maybe stacked humbuckers.
 
I prefer natural finishes and enjoy removing paint from guitars and trying to make them shine?
 
we've discussed relics and all that trying to understand the crowd who buys them.

Best light I can shine on it is, some story of Keith Richards not wanting a "geeky" looking new one; he wanted a beat up one. Cosmetics, like a theatrical suit to instill a certain look.
thats my understanding of the first famous person they can bilk for selling these :p

To each their own, fhk... and it makes for a great running joke over beers, we often refer to relic'ing stuff. or offereing to.

I was thinking Guitar Center could start charging people "Hanging Relic Time" in their store. The customer could bring in his new guitar, hang it on their walls for awhile...come back in a few weeks and BINGO!! The guitar would be all beat up and scratched and have skin crud on it hopefully.

Maybe $30 a week for guitar hanger space?
Nah..nobody would do that.
 
It's not just guitars, it's wooden products in general. I worked in furnature refinishing for 11 years, a couple of years for a store that sold unfinished (bare wood) products, then for an additional cost we would apply the finish the customer wanted. In addition to the sanding and finishing, we had our "distressing tools." We beat up brand new items! Used chains, hammers, pieces of pipe, a dull hatchet, whatever we had laying around in an attempt to make the pieces look "old and abused." I never really understood the appeal, but from the seller's point of view... If a customer wants something that looks like crap, make it look like crap and sell it to them, don't question it, just do it. I've got a couple of guitars with a lot of wear showing, but they got their's honestly. I take care of my guitars but 30 years of daily use will certainly show, all those little bumps and scratches and sweat and spilled beer take their toll on a guitar's finish. I guess those "made to look used" guitars are for the people who don't have the time or patience to get that look the old fashioned way.
 
I think I'll throw my shiny STratocaster down the stairs...you know to get "that tone".
 
What I don't understand is this...
What does someone get out of owning a relic guitar?
Why would someone buy a new guitar that looks used?
Why would someone paint ...for example...a nice lake placid blue nitro laquar paint job, only to spray yellow tinted clear over it that makes it green.

It's NOT an old guitar.
It's NOT naturally aged.
The paint is not naturally yellowed and , in fact, not a correct color.
The hardware is NOT naturally rusted and oxidized.
The guitar is NOT worth what a naturally worn vintage guitar is worth.
People will NOT say "wow, look at that old strat!". they will try to find wear that doesn't look natural in order to say "wow, what a chezzy relic job...I just don't get the relic thing!"

Buy brand spankin' new guitars that look brand spankin' new, or buy used guitars that are already worn out...in order to play or refurbish.

But DON'T defaced a perfectly good paint job.....
Don't screw the chrome up on perfectly good hardware....
and don't soak your plastic parts in coffee....

It makes you AND the guitar look chezzy.

Remember this....
The PRESTINE examples of vintage guitars are worth FAR more than the severely worn examples.
If you could choose between a "worn to hell and back" 54 strat and a 54 strat that looked brand new in every way...which would you choose?

Then WHY would you want to relic a 54 reissue?
I just dopn't get it.

my 2 cents.
 
COOLCAT said:
I think I'll throw my shiny STratocaster down the stairs...you know to get "that tone".
Click to expand...
Just don't do it until I can get to the bottom of the stairs to catch it! :D
 
jimistone said:
If you could choose between a "worn to hell and back" 54 strat and a 54 strat that looked brand new in every way...which would you choose?

Then WHY would you want to relic a 54 reissue?
I just dopn't get it.

my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
I don't get it, either.

To me, the real aging of any finely made product over a period of time by its owner is a beautiful thing. Whether it is a guitar, a leather portfolio, a nice fountain pen, or a piece of well-made furniture - the aging process is a history of the person or people who have come into contact with it. It's more about the people who have used the product than about the product.

Artificial aging levies a nonexistent history on an item. Looking at a "relic-ed" guitar is like looking at an imposter.

I don't understand the appeal.
 
jimistone said:
What I don't understand is this...
What does someone get out of owning a relic guitar?
Why would someone buy a new guitar that looks used?
Why would someone paint ...for example...a nice lake placid blue nitro laquar paint job, only to spray yellow tinted clear over it that makes it green.

It's NOT an old guitar.
It's NOT naturally aged.
The paint is not naturally yellowed and , in fact, not a correct color.
The hardware is NOT naturally rusted and oxidized.
The guitar is NOT worth what a naturally worn vintage guitar is worth.
People will NOT say "wow, look at that old strat!". they will try to find wear that doesn't look natural in order to say "wow, what a chezzy relic job...I just don't get the relic thing!"

Buy brand spankin' new guitars that look brand spankin' new, or buy used guitars that are already worn out...in order to play or refurbish.

But DON'T defaced a perfectly good paint job.....
Don't screw the chrome up on perfectly good hardware....
and don't soak your plastic parts in coffee....

It makes you AND the guitar look chezzy.

Remember this....
The PRISTINE examples of vintage guitars are worth FAR more than the severely worn examples.
If you could choose between a "worn to hell and back" 54 strat and a 54 strat that looked brand new in every way...which would you choose?

Then WHY would you want to relic a 54 reissue?
I just don't get it.

my 2 cents.
Click to expand...

Here is an issue where Jimi and I see eye to eye. A reliced guitar is a clip-on tie, silicone boobs, a fiberglass MGA body on a VW Beetle chassis, a cubic zirconium, a dime bag of oregano, "mag" hubcaps, a bundled pair of socks down the front of the shorts, a Bolex watch, a junkie's promise... IMO, of course.

I have been relicing my 1960 Strat for more than 30 years now. In another 20 or so it should be about right. ;^)
 
ggunn said:
Here is an issue where Jimi and I see eye to eye. A reliced guitar is a clip-on tie, silicone boobs, a fiberglass MGA body on a VW Beetle chassis, a cubic zirconium, a dime bag of oregano, "mag" hubcaps, a bundled pair of socks down the front of the shorts, a Bolex watch, a junkie's promise... IMO, of course.

I have been relicing my 1960 Strat for more than 30 years now. In another 20 or so it should be about right. ;^)
Click to expand...
Amen, and I agree with both of you completely.
 
ya know.... yeah... they may look old. but nothing beats the original. amen to ggunn and jimi.
 
The whole concept of the "distressed" look, (as it is referred to down under for furniture etc), is distresses me too.
But the world has changed & people can't wait for things, (I've moved up to ADSL for example), so it's just a distressing mark of our time.
Question: would a bundled pair of sock STAY down the front of your shorts? I'd have though a pair of Y fronts or briefs would have held the enhancement in place rather better.
 
I decided to go with the Wilinson trem from guitar fetish. It was $44. The other one was $25 or so and that seemed excessively cheap.

I just decided that my cool cast mid-70's bridge isn't all that cool. I have another guitar I can drop it into as a hand me down. If the tone suffers from the new wilki bridge, I can always switch back.

This one is pitted pretty well under the saddles and anything I am doing to clean it up is just making what little protection is left flake off. One of these days I am going to get some motorcycle parts replated and I may see if I can replate this at the same time.
 
Just for the sake of scorekeeping, I ordered all new screws from stew mac. They were a tidge cheaper than guitar fetish and had everything I needed. I got the vintage-style split post tuners and wilkinson trem from guitar fetish. I bought some stuff before from them and they seem like good eggs. I also bought some kind of cleaning stuff from gerlich or someone like that. It was an impulse buy. I tried cleaning up some of the goop on the finished part of the body with water trying to be gentle and it just made a hazy mess. Hopefully this botique snake oil crap will get it at least sanitary again.

Oh. And I did go with all gold hardware. It's kind of a motorcycle thing, I guess. If you go and tear something all the way down and restore it, sometimes it's cool to change the color of the hardware and gasket sealant so you make it obvious that it had the 100,000 mile service performed.

I also have a mother of toilet seat pickguard that I used to have on it, but I think that is a little too gay. With the gold hardware, it would totally be liberace territory.
 
Cephus, you have a lot of nerve, un-jacking this thread.

It's all about you, isn't it? :p
 
Someday the shitty gold plating is gonna come off in flakes and I'll wonder how long it took. I can search the forum and see when I did it.

So, yeah. I guess it is about me.
 
Completed project: Born again Strat's cherry popped.

I played the guitar this weekend. Actually, I played 3 of them: the new epiphone ES-295, the jambolin and the rehabbed strat.

I went ahead and did the bling thing with the gold hardware. It was hardly noticeable to anyone but me.

I bought a Wilkinson trem and vintage tuners from guitar fetish. At first I thought the bridge was a mistake. The barrel end of the strings rest directly below the bridge plate. I don't know if they seat in the block at all. Since the trem I took off was a mid-70s cast one where the ennds of the strings are barely recessed in the back, I was afraid the tone would suffer with the new bridge. it didn't. The wilki vintage-style trem is a nice peice. One problem is that the arm is thicker than normal and only comes with a black knob. I spent a good half hour whoring out a stock white one to jam on there.

When I brought the guitar in to be set up, I brought my jambolin and had the guy check out how I like the action and he did a great job. The trem stays in tune very well and there is no buzz anywhere on the neck now. It buzzed everywhere before.

I was kind of thinking that after I had it all back to being nice that I'd hide it away under a bridge and save it, but i just like it too much. I will keep gigging with it. For the gig, we played 4 sets. I played each guitar for one set and then the winner of the bake off won the fourth set. I picked the renewed strat. Best sounding/playing guitar I own. I had no idea it could be this sweet again.
 
Good job, Cephus! You deserve to feel proud of yourself. :)

Now give yourself a gold star, and a pat on the back! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top