Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fred's Barcalounge' started by englishman, May 30, 2017.
Wheres my hammer!....
You naysayers can go on and on ad infinitum about how you hate relics. Frankly, it's a very tired, worn out subject on just about every guitar forum, including this one. The dead horse has been well beaten by now, and the subject has become boring. If you don't like relics, stay away from them and stop posting over and over. Get over it. Move on.
But, the one thing maybe some of you haven't realized is, guitars that are lightly relic'd at the factory often feel nicely worn in, comfortable and well played, versus some brand new, shiny thing, and a LOT of players like that, whether you think it's right or not. Look at the success Fender has had with their relic'd guitars. They've sold tons of them, so people out there are buying.
And also, some of us who do like relics don't have thirty years to beat a guitar up naturally.
Haha, white over flamed sunburst ! Ultimate snob choice !
In real life, Real punks choose (or steal) studio models for doing their crappy customisations B-)
Same as when someone buys a pair of Jeans already worn and ripped at the knee....
Looks like someone been there and done that.
Gibson has a history of not knowing what their customer base really wants and a lot of the success they had was accidents. The Les Paul is a perfect example. The original gold tops had the wrong neck angle even after Les told them that. Those first gold tops all needed neck resets. Then they discontinued the sunburst models after three years and they because their holy grail guitars. Gibson has been trying to get it right ever since. The automatic tuners were another big mistake and the list goes on
I think it's the colors painted over standard finishes then relic'd that is the issue here. To me this is Gibson grasping at straws. There are a few hundred Les Paul models in production now and it's not necessary at all
I agree with you on that note. Fender is the king of relic finishes-they invented the concept-but all I read was, "Ewww, I hate relics." This topic comes up all over the the 'Net, and it's the king of over-discussed topics.
See how that works?
I wonder if they use old strings on those.....?
Man........could NOT agree more.
I personally like relic guitars for live work because they ARE comfortable and because they really take the "pressure" off of worrying about scratching, scraping, bumping, knocking over etc. Two of my biggest workhorses are AMAZING relics.
I always knew there was a reason why I liked you, Tony. You're smarter than the average bear.
Relic? That's like marrying a pregnant woman.
At least any wear and tear is (presumably) of your own making.
I wonder how good the whote top REALLY is if you scrapped the crappy white paint? Surely they wouldn't be using their AAA+ flamey maple for these....?
...are we still talking guitars......?
Of course we are!
I hate relics.
For 6K it had better be!
For the record, I never intended this to be a 'relics suck'...'relics rule' typical internet fight, just questioning Gibson's wisdom in this particular marketing strategy. For 6K you could get Stephen Stern to knock you up a Corvette.
Tell me where the fight is and I'll start selling tickets. People buy all kinds of stupid things, like new or old looking guitars, so what?
I took your intent as "will it work for Gibson", I enjoyed the post, hadn't seen they did these.