|
Author
|
Topic: Clean-Up, Paint-Up, Fix-Up!
|
Rick Collins
Member From: Claremont , CA USA
|
posted 24 May 2003 08:12 AM
profile send email edit
I have never understood why authenticity of vintage instruments is so important to value appreciation. For me personally, re-chroming, new paint, case re-conditioning, etc, are desireable things.Changing the design of the instrument or doing things that greatly destroy the sound are of course, undesireable and should lower the value. If I had Willie Nelson's guitar, the first thing I would do is to see if it could be restored. But, maybe Willie could use some restoration himself.  New paint on a home or some automobiles can greatly increase the value, even if the automobiles are collectibles;___why not vintage instruments? Rick [This message was edited by Rick Collins on 24 May 2003 at 01:48 PM.] |
D Schubert
Member From: Columbia, MO, USA
|
posted 24 May 2003 09:11 AM
profile send email edit
I'm sorry, but I have seen so many botched refinishes on good instruments -- that look like brushed-on boat-grade polyurethane -- that I get queasy when someone even brings this up. I spend more time in the acoustic world, where it is generally accepted that refinishing destroys acquired tone in a big way. And, by consensus, it destroys value -- just look it up. I am less concerned about changing the color of a non-collectible Telecaster or other "solid" instrument. Same with rechroming and polishing metal parts.In order to "fix" Willies' guitar by your criteria, you'd have to replace the top, some of the sides, etc. That'd be a lot like putting a new handle -- plus a new head -- on George Washington's axe. |
Dave Boothroyd
Member From: The Malvern Hills
|
posted 24 May 2003 09:45 AM
profile send email edit
It's odd though, isn't it? that if you bought a genuine Stradivarius violin, it would not knock anything off the price because it was fitted with a curved bridge, a cambered fingerboard, and the fret cords had been removed.
It would just mean that it had been made possible to play it in the modern style..
So what's the difference between that and putting a Midi pickup on Elvis's Gibson?
Why are some updates sacrilege and others are good?
Cheers
Dave |
Jesse Pearson
Member From: San Diego , CA
|
posted 24 May 2003 01:20 PM
profile send email edit
wouldn't touch willies guitar or any vintage fender strat or tele. I heard the old paint jobs allowed the wood to still dry out and improve the tone, the new fender finishes will last for a long, long time and not let the wood dry out like the old paint jobs did? As for willies guitar, touching that thing up would be like re-dying my old faded baseball cap "No baby, are you crazy trying to throw out my favorite cap, can't you see it's broke in just right"???[This message was edited by Jesse Pearson on 24 May 2003 at 01:23 PM.] |
Doug Beaumier
Member From: Northampton, MA
|
posted 24 May 2003 02:10 PM
profile send email edit
An original finish... even with scratches and dings.. is always worth more than new paint. Refinishing a vintage guitar cuts the value in half.
The same is true with antique furniture. Have you ever seen PBS' Antiques Roadshow? Many times an appraiser will tell an owner... this piece of furniture if it still had it's original finish would be worth $XX,XXX.00 but because it has been refinished it's value is about $X,XXX.00 When I open a pre-war lap steel case, I want the hinges to squeak a little, I want the case to smell like a pre-war case, I expect to see a little bit of player wear on the instrument. That's all part of the vintage look and feel. That's not to say that a beat up guitar is a good thing, but I'll take a slightly worn original guitar over a shiny newly painted one any day. ------------------
My Site - Instruction | Doug's Free Tab | Steels and Accessories[This message was edited by Doug Beaumier on 24 May 2003 at 02:14 PM.] |
Jon Light
Member From: Brooklyn, NY
|
posted 24 May 2003 02:19 PM
profile send email edit
Which would you pay more for---a 57 Chevy rusting and moldering in a swampy yard or one that has been lovingly restored? Just playing devil's advocate because I love the look and feel of age that is honestly come by, but I find the fetishism of authentic, period mold to be over the top. And remember that whether we are talking furniture or instruments, the subject here is 'collecting'. The value of that Louis the whatever chair has nothing to do with how comfortable it is to sit in.
---also, consider that there's a big difference between the beautiful patina of oxidation and years of handling and just being run down and worn out.[This message was edited by Jon Light on 24 May 2003 at 02:22 PM.]
|
Jesse Pearson
Member From: San Diego , CA
|
posted 24 May 2003 03:20 PM
profile send email edit
What about the tone of a vintage, would it change at all if you worked it? Stevie Ray's #1 guitar was pretty cool looking and gave the impression that it had been played a lot by someone who loved it. Vintage cars aren't worried about tone.[This message was edited by Jesse Pearson on 26 May 2003 at 10:13 AM.] |
Andy Alford
Member From: Alabama
|
posted 24 May 2003 04:51 PM
profile send email edit
I am all for keeping it like you find it but we all know that sometimes a guitar may need some basic work if your going to use it.I do hate to see a nice guitar painted up and made to look like new.I must say that many are paying full price for a restored steel.Many people are just glad to get a Fender or Rick and will shell out the cash painted or not.I have met people who could care less about a new paint job,they are wanting it to play.In the pedal steel world guitars are marketed by what has been done to make the guitar ready to play..Restored is not a bad word in the pedal steel world.I have seen Emmons and buds that looked like the land fill was calling them restored and sold for fair market value without the seller loosing a dime.Non pedal buyers seem more concerned about keeping it like you find it.I want original and in playing order,not looking all new.In the future players will care less and less about restorations because it is geting harder to find them. |
Mark van Allen
Member From: loganville, Ga. USA
|
posted 26 May 2003 10:02 AM
profile send email edit
Interesting thread. In the antique auto world, the idea of restoration seems to be obtaining the illusion of a car in showroom condition using N.O.S parts or painstaking recreations. With furniture and instruments, it seems the idea is that refinishing, restoring parts, etc. (Even if it makes instruments more playable) Is altering the original structure of the beast. Perhaps the idea is that the original design/finish/appointments are the instrument and any change, good or bad is not the same instrument. Some changes may be more acceptable, (replacement tuner buttons are essential to playability and don't seem to affect vintage value the way other mods do). Very few people would want to drive around in a rusty vintage car, missing parts and trim... but yet you have a large series of reissue Fender Relic guitars that already come all beat up! Fascinating!------------------
C'mon by and visit!- www.markvanallen.com
My Bands: Sugarland Kate and the Retreads Kecia Garland Band Shane Bridges Band Dell Conner Blues Band
|
Rick Collins
Member From: Claremont , CA USA
|
posted 26 May 2003 10:30 AM
profile send email edit
In Las Vegas, at the Imperial Palace, there is an automobile collection of over 200 cars worth tens of millions and all have been restored to showroom quality. They would not have near the value that they do, without the restoration.I recently bought an early Fender instrument, case and all, original, and in very good condition. If I had had a choice of another, of the same instrument, that had been expertly restored to near perfect, I would have bought the restored one in a nanosecond, even if they were the same price. Rick |
David L. Donald
Member From: Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
posted 26 May 2003 10:34 AM
profile send email edit
Some of the best sounding upright basses look like they could double as dumpsters.
And the owners and the repair techs wouldn't do a thing to them.The patina of age is just part of an old instruments being old.
It is better left that way for any number of reasons.
If you want a new looking instrument get a new one.
If you want an old one accept it as itself. All mine are old and I like the sound. The old stradavarious get as little work done to them as possible. A modern bridge on one is something that can be easily replaced with the original. Not so a reconstruction or refinishing. A few dings... so what it's old.
I got a few dings too, but I still sound OK.
[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 26 May 2003 at 10:36 AM.] |
Doug Beaumier
Member From: Northampton, MA
|
posted 26 May 2003 11:25 PM
profile send email edit
I think we're talking apples and oranges here. A restored and repainted car is worth a lot of money. A restored and repainted guitar is not. In the world of collectibles (antique furniture, toys, antique musical instruments, etc) refinishing is altering, and it takes away from the value by up to 50%. If you want to repaint or rechrome your pre-war Rick, 50's stringmaster, Weissenborn, fry pan, old Gibson, etc... go ahead... it's a free country. Just be aware that it's value will be severely diminished. ------------------
My Site - Instruction | Doug's Free Tab | Steels and Accessories[This message was edited by Doug Beaumier on 26 May 2003 at 11:47 PM.] |
Jussi Huhtakangas
Member From: Helsinki, Finland
|
posted 27 May 2003 03:58 AM
profile send email edit
I think restoring and refinishing are two totally different things and restoring and old instrument increases its' value ( assuming there was something that had to be fixed ). Think about an old D'Angelico archtop with a crack on the top seam and a detoriating binding. Very common damages, that occure simply because of age and climate changes and something that a skilled luthier can fix to perfect. Leaving those flaws unrepaired would eventually lead to worse damages decreasing the guitar's value. Refinishing, like already said here, is a different matter, and shouldn't be considered unless the original finish is already severly damaged. And I would always recommend cleaning-up, dirt and dust seldom do any good to musical instruments. |
Andy Alford
Member From: Alabama
|
posted 27 May 2003 04:25 AM
profile send email edit
What action will it take to bring the guitar up to where you want it?Every day there are fewer of these gems on the market and they come in all conditions.Where the less expensive student mods.like a BR-9 go for over $200.00,we will see more gems with paint jobs, repairs, and replaced parts.There are some guitars that must be fixed if they are going to be played.A missing or dead pickup will kill the tone of the guitar.Do you want a Stringmaster plant stand,wall hanger or a working guitar?[This message was edited by Andy Alford on 27 May 2003 at 04:28 AM.] [This message was edited by Andy Alford on 27 May 2003 at 04:30 AM.] |
John Kavanagh
Member From: Kentville, Nova Scotia, Canada
|
posted 27 May 2003 08:12 AM
profile send email edit
A Strad in original condition, without 19th- century refittings, is worth a LOT more. And even in the 16th century, tied frets (standard on viols) were strictly for beginners on violins, so it's unlikely any Strad - valued even when new - ever had them.Not that you asked.[This message was edited by John Kavanagh on 06 June 2003 at 08:07 AM.] |
Rick Collins
Member From: Claremont , CA USA
|
posted 27 May 2003 09:10 AM
profile send email edit
I have a violin which was made in Genoa, Italy in 1907. Obviously, in 2007 it will be 100 years old. My father aquired it from a retiree, of the Los Angeles Philharmonic. I would not even consider refinishing this instrument.I have a Fender Dual-8 Professional that has been refinished. And I have installed Stringmaster leg sockets to make the legs spread out more at the floor. This has much improved the appearance of the instrument and I enjoy playing it much more than before. To me it is simply much better than new. But, I would never sell it, because it is my favorite of all the steel guitars ever made. Sometimes "market value" has no meaning. I would bet that there are a few more like me, when it comes to steel guitars. Rick |
Gary Slabaugh
Member From: Scottsdale, AZ
|
posted 03 June 2003 08:48 AM
profile send email edit
After reading this post a few times I decided to chime in. I have restored, and hot rodded some cars. One thing that I always keep in mind is that it is MINE. I hopefully would have enough sense not to screw up something of significance, like filling in all the bullet holes in Bonnie & Clydes sedan.In my ebay quest for steels I have ended up with 2 "previously modified" steel guitars. A 1953 National Double 8 that went from a dour brown to a very pretty 2 tone blue, after I got it I put in a modern 1/4 plug to replace the screw on. In this example no perceivable financial damage has been done. The other one was a 1948 Rick ACE and someone had put in some nice Grover Tuners in. This may have effected the price a little, but since it is not a highly sought after version, no big deal. I don't think I would paint a Rick Panda pink, or weld skid plates on a fry pan. But if it is mine, why not? |
Andy Volk
Member From: Boston, MA
|
posted 06 June 2003 03:19 AM
profile send email edit
http://www.rsguitarworks.net/Refin_.htm I just don't get this approach. Like Fender's "Relic" series, these guys will "refinish" your guitar to "age" it to simulate years of use or abuse. I either want my vintage instruments to hae earned their lumps honestly or have my refinished instruments look like they just left the factory. |
Rick Collins
Member From: Claremont , CA USA
|
posted 06 June 2003 08:42 AM
profile send email edit
I don't get it either, Andy. All of my stuff I like new, if I can get it new. Otherwise, I like it to be in the best condition possible.What is of value to me, of course, may not be of value to another. If an instrument is worth three or four thousand dollars to someone else, it might be of more value to me if it is restored correctly. I don't need $3,000 or $4,000 dollars; I need $500 million. If I came into the possession of the original Mona Lisa, the first thing I would do would be to take a paint brush and wipe that silly grin off her face once and for all. Rick |
The Steel Guitar Forum
