I couldn’t care less honestly. I do like the improvements to comfort and playability that can come from relicing. As far as looks go I wouldnt go out of my way to buy one, but if i played one and liked it then id still buy it (money permitting of course). On a side note the plus side to a relic is dinging it wont hurt so much lol.
Every guitar in my 60+ years of playing was purchased new for the simple fact that I value the pristine condition of a new guitar and do my best to protect it from damage. Guitars I've kept for 20+ years are in "excellent" to "almost new" condition, but the longer you hold onto an instrument, it is virtually impossible to prevent some scratches or dings to appear. It distresses me to see any scratches or dings, but in a sense it's comforting to know that . . . I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO DID THAT! Personally, a reliced guitar would not appeal to me, regardless of the quality of the sound. BTW - I thought the A guitar (non-reliced) had a deeper more resident sound.
That was scary. I played both of those the same day. I was afraid I’d like the one I didn’t buy. 😂 I actually like the looks of the heavy aged one but the sound of the regular aged one. Both were great guitars. Just noticed the matching pickguards. One thing relic does is catch your eye. I’m going straight to the beat up guitar because I think it’s vintage. Once I’m there I’m going to play it vintage or not. If it sounds good, it doesn’t matter what it looks like. I’m actually in love with that black LG that is destroyed. It’s got too much relic for my taste but it doesn’t matter because it sounds amazing.
I have an Atkin D37 which I find stunning to look at. It has the lacquer cracking all over which would be a beautiful design element even if unrelated to anything "vintage"(i.e. pre war dreads.) Where I personally draw the line is actual "damage". For example, a custom shop Relic'd Fender Strat I dislike, but a dread with aged white binding and lacquer cracking like my Atkin I love.
I am not a fan of the reliced guitars, I had rather relic one through me playing it myself, however I noticed that B had a more opened up tone for lack of a better word. A little deeper sound to me. this was interesting to hear and surprising so say the least.
Amongst others I have a 94 Larrivee C-05 in pristine condition. I also play HEAVY! Scares me to death to damage it. The idea of not putting the first ding or scratch on a fabulous instrument is very appealing….
well was it the aging that made it different but deffenatly I difference I kinda went toward the relic thought it was bigger and punchy but its not like im playing it so that makes a difference also
If a guitar is anyway finished in a light nitro (definitely the best time-proven acoustic finish), then please please, for all its cool appeal, no ageing or relic'ing...! Simply because, if the guitar gets played a lot, it doesn't take *too* long for wear through the finish in certain places to get going. If I'm spending a lot on a top-notch Atkin, then I don't want it ageing prematurely ! I bought a red label Yamaha in 1972, which was my only acoustic until it became unplayable c. 1990. Beautifully aged and worn nitro finish - but I feel every note it played those years created that effect. A new guitar, even if only have it 5 years, I want that journey, then the next person can carry it on. What I definitely dont want, is needing to refinish at least parts of it after 5 years !
That black LG is destroyed but man is that thing a cannon! I don't mind "the relic" job but it definitely gets over done in many cases...great topic for discussions and just about everyone has a pretty strong opinion on this..
Just so everyone knows, they both have a lighter nitro finish that is checked. The only difference is the faux wear. They’re virtually the same guitar. The tonal properties of the finish would be the same.
I'm not really into relics. I really really want either an Atkin WR or a Santa Cruz TR. If there is an Atkin WR that is relicd spot on to Tony's ( I mean literally every mark the same) I would consider it. That would be a cool tribute, but all in all not my thing!
I think the Relic is cool!! At least you won't be crying for days over your first ding it will only add to the look!! I find that with a brand new one you spend too much effort being way to cautious and with the relic you don't have all the fear of getting it dinged!!
I preferred the sound of Guitar B......the heavily relic'd version. It had a fuller, warmer tone. But in my opinion, I think the difference in tone is due to the fact NO TWO pieces of wood are the same, even within the same species of wood. Sure, they sound similar and offer consistent characteristics within the same species ( assuming they are good examples of that particular wood ), but there's something that is so mysterious about acoustic guitars, on how one will sound better than another that is the same exact model using the same woods & finish. Personally, new guitars that are heavily relic'd, are not my cup of tea. I love the look of a fine, brand new guitar. But I also love the look of an authentic ancient guitar that has it's share of battle scars.......with the key reason being: those battle scars are authentic & happened during real-life situations.........they are NOT faked.
If you want a vintage guitar then buy a vintage guitar. I'm not into fake stuff. Another option is to just play your guitar a lot and create your own history.
This is really not a new concept... some violin builders back in the late 1600's and 1700's that baked tops and "reliced" new instruments because there were many orchestral players wanted to have an instrument that looked older. Status thing. Seems some things never change.
I don't mind old looking guitars. I don't like distressing them. I own a couple guitars for 50+ years, and none of them are as beat up as the vintaged Eastmans. Don't relic them for me.
Ok ,i repent of my lack of faith and doubt. I had my eye on the little atkin 47 in this video. I swore i would not pay out hard earned money for a heavy relic guitar. So i bought this same atkin 47 in this video,and the playability,perfect set up,quality of tone and structural integrity is fantastic beyond believe. For a small bodied maple guitar with a torrified top ,it sings like a bird. It holds tune and requires very little fine tuning if any is needed at all. It is comfortable to use while standing in concert for a four hour gig. I'm not even concerned with the appearance of this little guitar anymore. It never fails ,people always ask what happened to that guitar. Some one said it was beautiful,and i always get compliments on the clarity and full sound of this instrument at breaks at my gigs. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Quality of tone and music is in the ear of the listener.
Many guitar players are baby boomers and we are getting too old to put natural wear on a new guitar. I can see where some of these older players are willing to buy a guitar that looks old from the factory. The idea of relicing is growing on me for that very reason. Guitar B sounded the best to my ear.
I wouldn’t buy a new BMW with dings and scratches all over it. I wouldn’t buy new blue jeans that are ripped to the point they’re falling off. I wouldn’t buy a new guitar of any price that didn’t look brand new. Hey, that’s just me, a 73 yr old grump!
I like the torrifacation,but i am not going to pay thousands for a chiped up chewed up guitar,because it looks old and cool. It's all about the sound resonance, playability, and projection of the instrument. The ➕️ is ,every once in a while you get one that looks as good as it plays and sounds.
I couldn’t care less honestly. I do like the improvements to comfort and playability that can come from relicing. As far as looks go I wouldnt go out of my way to buy one, but if i played one and liked it then id still buy it (money permitting of course). On a side note the plus side to a relic is dinging it wont hurt so much lol.
Every guitar in my 60+ years of playing was purchased new for the simple fact that I value the pristine condition of a new guitar and do my best to protect it from damage. Guitars I've kept for 20+ years are in "excellent" to "almost new" condition, but the longer you hold onto an instrument, it is virtually impossible to prevent some scratches or dings to appear. It distresses me to see any scratches or dings, but in a sense it's comforting to know that . . . I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO DID THAT! Personally, a reliced guitar would not appeal to me, regardless of the quality of the sound. BTW - I thought the A guitar (non-reliced) had a deeper more resident sound.
My thoughts exactly, i visit a shop that sells atkin guitars, they just looks wrong to me
I am not a fan, however I played Mike Whites Atkins and it is one of the sweetest guitars I have ever played.
I played an Atkins White/Rice pre production and I loved it and I own a white rice custom built in Virginia and it’s my daily player.
It reminds me of the "Rat Rod" craze. Either you get it, and will embrace it, or you see it as a waste of craftsmanship. 🤔
Bit like the kids with pre made holes in their jeans😂
Good one - LOL!
I appreciate your honesty of both guitars still like the lights used one
That was scary. I played both of those the same day. I was afraid I’d like the one I didn’t buy. 😂 I actually like the looks of the heavy aged one but the sound of the regular aged one. Both were great guitars. Just noticed the matching pickguards. One thing relic does is catch your eye. I’m going straight to the beat up guitar because I think it’s vintage. Once I’m there I’m going to play it vintage or not. If it sounds good, it doesn’t matter what it looks like. I’m actually in love with that black LG that is destroyed. It’s got too much relic for my taste but it doesn’t matter because it sounds amazing.
I have an Atkin D37 which I find stunning to look at. It has the lacquer cracking all over which would be a beautiful design element even if unrelated to anything "vintage"(i.e. pre war dreads.) Where I personally draw the line is actual "damage". For example, a custom shop Relic'd Fender Strat I dislike, but a dread with aged white binding and lacquer cracking like my Atkin I love.
I am not a fan of the reliced guitars, I had rather relic one through me playing it myself, however I noticed that B had a more opened up tone for lack of a better word. A little deeper sound to me.
this was interesting to hear and surprising so say the least.
Amongst others I have a 94 Larrivee C-05 in pristine condition. I also play HEAVY! Scares me to death to damage it. The idea of not putting the first ding or scratch on a fabulous instrument is very appealing….
In the blind samples, I preferred the sound of B. That was interesting. I would order the heavily reliced guitar in a heartbeat.
well was it the aging that made it different but deffenatly I difference I kinda went toward the relic thought it was bigger and punchy but its not like im playing it so that makes a difference also
I like the new look myself John! From Pacific MO
An instrument played a lot over years has its harmonic properties aligned by the sound waves. Faux wear would note do the same thing.
If a guitar is anyway finished in a light nitro (definitely the best time-proven acoustic finish), then please please, for all its cool appeal, no ageing or relic'ing...! Simply because, if the guitar gets played a lot, it doesn't take *too* long for wear through the finish in certain places to get going. If I'm spending a lot on a top-notch Atkin, then I don't want it ageing prematurely !
I bought a red label Yamaha in 1972, which was my only acoustic until it became unplayable c. 1990.
Beautifully aged and worn nitro finish - but I feel every note it played those years created that effect. A new guitar, even if only have it 5 years, I want that journey, then the next person can carry it on.
What I definitely dont want, is needing to refinish at least parts of it after 5 years !
That black LG is destroyed but man is that thing a cannon! I don't mind "the relic" job but it definitely gets over done in many cases...great topic for discussions and just about everyone has a pretty strong opinion on this..
If it's an Eastman "reliced" then I am fine with it as it's only light relicing. Other than that, like this one at 1:43, I'm not a fan...
Just so everyone knows, they both have a lighter nitro finish that is checked. The only difference is the faux wear. They’re virtually the same guitar. The tonal properties of the finish would be the same.
I'm not really into relics. I really really want either an Atkin WR or a Santa Cruz TR. If there is an Atkin WR that is relicd spot on to Tony's ( I mean literally every mark the same) I would consider it. That would be a cool tribute, but all in all not my thing!
I think the Relic is cool!! At least you won't be crying for days over your first ding it will only add to the look!! I find that with a brand new one you spend too much effort being way to cautious and with the relic you don't have all the fear of getting it dinged!!
I preferred the sound of Guitar B......the heavily relic'd version. It had a fuller, warmer tone. But in my opinion, I think the difference in tone is due to the fact NO TWO pieces of wood are the same, even within the same species of wood. Sure, they sound similar and offer consistent characteristics within the same species ( assuming they are good examples of that particular wood ), but there's something that is so mysterious about acoustic guitars, on how one will sound better than another that is the same exact model using the same woods & finish. Personally, new guitars that are heavily relic'd, are not my cup of tea. I love the look of a fine, brand new guitar. But I also love the look of an authentic ancient guitar that has it's share of battle scars.......with the key reason being: those battle scars are authentic & happened during real-life situations.........they are NOT faked.
If you want a vintage guitar then buy a vintage guitar. I'm not into fake stuff. Another option is to just play your guitar a lot and create your own history.
Well said! My feelings exactly!!
Well at least I won’t have to worry about scratching it so it’s got that going for it
I do not care what they look like I care about what they sound like. It is all about the sound. And playability. Are they easier play.
I no longer feel bad about putting dings in my 2020 Martin. I've beat the shit out of it already.
It is very distressing... 😅
😮😂
I personally want my new guitar to look new.i don't mind a guitar with scars that are honestly wore
A had more of a bright punch b had a softer tone
They are nice guitars for sure, but making them fake old seems like a marketing ploy, possibly to set them apart? Fake is fake, but some want it.
If you play it enough , It will become your personal Relic through wear n tear ...IMO
I got an old relic knackered Yamaha, i would prefer a new one!❤😂
This is really not a new concept... some violin builders back in the late 1600's and 1700's that baked tops and "reliced" new instruments because there were many orchestral players wanted to have an instrument that looked older. Status thing. Seems some things never change.
7 or so minutes in guitar A is louder and brighter than B.
Not a fan of trashing a beautiful new instrument! But to each their own!
I don't mind old looking guitars. I don't like distressing them. I own a couple guitars for 50+ years, and none of them are as beat up as the vintaged Eastmans. Don't relic them for me.
B is the best sounding.
Guitar B sounded better to my ears but I'm not a fan of relicing.
B sounded better👍
If it looks vintage is better sound vintage.
Relicing a guitar is definitely not for me. Earn the scars.
Ok ,i repent of my lack of faith and doubt. I had my eye on the little atkin 47 in this video. I swore i would not pay out hard earned money for a heavy relic guitar. So i bought this same atkin 47 in this video,and the playability,perfect set up,quality of tone and structural integrity is fantastic beyond believe. For a small bodied maple guitar with a torrified top ,it sings like a bird. It holds tune and requires very little fine tuning if any is needed at all. It is comfortable to use while standing in concert for a four hour gig. I'm not even concerned with the appearance of this little guitar anymore. It never fails ,people always ask what happened to that guitar. Some one said it was beautiful,and i always get compliments on the clarity and full sound of this instrument at breaks at my gigs. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Quality of tone and music is in the ear of the listener.
Many guitar players are baby boomers and we are getting too old to put natural wear on a new guitar.
I can see where some of these older players are willing to buy a guitar that looks old from the factory.
The idea of relicing is growing on me for that very reason.
Guitar B sounded the best to my ear.
I wouldn’t buy a new BMW with dings and scratches all over it. I wouldn’t buy new blue jeans that are ripped to the point they’re falling off. I wouldn’t buy a new guitar of any price that didn’t look brand new. Hey, that’s just me, a 73 yr old grump!
Trrrtt
I think it is very stupid to "age" anything.
If a guitar could be a poser lol
I like the torrifacation,but i am not going to pay thousands for a chiped up chewed up guitar,because it looks old and cool. It's all about the sound resonance, playability, and projection of the instrument. The ➕️ is ,every once in a while you get one that looks as good as it plays and sounds.
False relic is Stolen Valor.