Why the relic fad should just die.
January 10, 2009 by Chris
Filed under Featured, Thoughts From Backstage
I am completely over this fascination with relic or road worn guitars. I don't mind them as a tribute to an iconic guitar owned by a famous guitarist (for example the Rory Gallagher Strat), but as a marketing gimmick? Fender at NAMM is launching the new entry level Relic series titled Road Worn. Here is what they have to say:
Some things just get cooler with age. It’s especially true of electric guitars and basses—they develop an unmistakable mojo that makes them look cooler, sound better and feel even more comfortable than when they were brand new. Hence the winter 2009 arrival of Fender’s new Road Worn series—Stratocaster, Telecaster, Precision Bass and Jazz Bass guitars that, while new, are designed to look like they’ve borne the wear, tear, blood, sweat and beers of thousands of miles on the road.
Now here is what I have to say:
This is the most meaningless way to make yourself feel important and "legitimate" as a guitarist as you can go. There is no character in these guitars, they all look the same. Part of the joy of having a beat up guitar is getting it to look that way. If you buy it like that from the factory, you don't live and grow with the guitar you just bought over time. It's like adopting a 10 year old with scars. You don't get the funny story about the kid falling out of the tree or scraping their knee learning how to skateboard, you just get a banged up kid.
My two main guitars are full of stories. They have been on the road. They have lived. One has a giant crack on the neck's finish from me throwing it into my amp and the end of the gig. That was the same gig I had a fat chick pour a beer on my head because I turned down her "invitation" to "party". My other main guitar has a matte finish on it that has been rubbed off by my right arm from too many hot night in hot bars in country New South Wales, Australia. Not to mention the countless dings and scratches that have happened from onstage (and offstage) mishaps.
What happened to these guitars was natural, an evolutionary process of myself as a guitarist and a performer, and the bonding between a man and his musical instrument. The guitar wears in to your playing, your body, your touch. This cannot be done from a factory. This can not be achieved without putting in the effort, the energy, the time, blood sweat and tears, the passion, everything it takes to be a real musician.
These guitars have no soul.
Seriously, if you are going out to buy a brand new PRS for example, and you get to the shop and they try to sell you at full price one with dints and rubbed off paint at full price, what would you think? Would you buy it?
I know I wouldn't. So why should trashing the guitar deliberately be any different? In my mind it isn't.
Image: Stephen Poff
No related posts.
The “Relic” fad is wankery of the lowest order. And to further erode my faith in the essential non-idiocy of my fellow man, it’s obviously making money for Fender, because they’ve brought it downmarket with the “Road Worn” trademark.
On another level, I suppose it’s a credit to Leo Fender’s vision that the Strat and the Tele have been around for 40-odd years and have generated so many famously well-worn instruments to emulate. It’s just sad that people can’t be bothered to take the time to wear out their own axes.
There is one real benefit to the rest of us, though: It’s a great way to flag the posers and marks. I may be a mediocre guitarist with a fan base of exactly ZERO, but I can count myself an evolutionary step ahead of anyone who buys a “relic” guitar.
“It’s like adopting a 10 year old with scars. You don’t get the funny story about the kid falling out of the tree or scraping their knee learning how to skateboard, you just get a banged up kid.”
Haha that’s the best way I’ve heard it put yet.
Seriously, I’m becoming slightly disappointed in Fender. They’re putting all this time and money into making and advertising beat up Strats that sell for 2-3x the price that the same Strat in mint condition would. That time and money could be better spent making a new and improved Strat, Tele, Jag, Stang, Jazzmaster…
…though I’ve said this on another forum; it’s the consumers who pay outrageous amounts of money for someone to beat the shit out of their guitar that make that business profitable, so I guess we’ve only got ourselves to blame. Well, not me personally, but you know what I mean…
P.S., I see you’re also using Revolutions Church theme, like I am on my site… I’ve spent quite a bit of time getting familiar with it so that I don’t have to pay for tech support… it looks like you have also, so if you have any questions about the admin type stuff, feel free to send em my way. I may do the same to you one of these days
You’re right. As long as people keep buying them, Fender, and other manufacturer’s, will keep making them.
On the theme… I’ve got it nailed and I love it. I’ve got a slew of sights that need to be built that would all benefit from using it, but then I’ll end up with a bunch of sites that all look the same. I could get away with one of them as it will be a sister site to GTB, but the other is pushing it. Know of any other really good magazine style themes?
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Besides, why would you want to miss out on the early days of having a shining new guitar?
And I can’t even imagine how awful these “pre-aged” guitars will look once they have some real wear & tear.
I like relics, but then again, not having any history as to why your guitar is “aged” is kind of lame. I bought a 1998 Les Paul Standard for only $200 because it was all beat up looking which was awesome because I wasn’t worried about scratching or denting a $1,300 guitar. And just think, people pay extra for guitars being beat all up whereas I got a HUGE discount because it was beat…
Who knows…
Great post by the way.
Yeah, but if the relic thing goes away, what am I gonna blog about?
))
At least that guitar has a story. It may not be your own, but it is a story none the less.
And thanks for the compliment!
I’m sure we are both old and grumpy enough to find something!!!
Great storis, folks. Actually, I was about to be guilty of buying a relic ‘69. When they first came out, I laughed my butt off at them, and wondered who would be looney enough to buy one, but after I went through too many guitars in an embarrassingly short period of time, I realized finally what I wanted and didn’t want. I don’t gig out anymore, and missed that feeling of an old, beat up axe (like my first one, a Kramer V). Man, thank you folks, because I will get the 69 NOS I saw used instead.
To relic-cravers: Honestly, even if it looks cool, the sound might be lousy; you’ll haqve to go through as many of them as you would a normal axe, so give it some thought.
Well I respect your opinion if that’s what works for you…that’s a totally legitimate point of view.I,however love these guitars.I’ve owned and played Strats in all the price ranges.What I love most about these is that they come closest to the feel of original 50s and 60s Strats that I have played.More than most custom shop relics too,which I mostly find stiffer feeling.The main feature they possess that I love is the thinskin 100% nitro lacquer applied straight to the wood.That is unlike most Strats made today that are sprayed in polyester.Even the (supposed) U.S. reissues use a poly undercoat with nitro spayed on top.I’m not saying poly sounds bad but to my taste,a thin nitro finish gives the woodiest tone…just like how the original ones were made and sounded.For some strange reason,I really believe the relic job changes the tone.I’ve compared many N.O.S. vs. Relic custom shop models(which are both the same model except for the added wear)and I’ve always prefered the sound and vibe of the relic.Many people have told me the same…the could hear a difference.The difference with these compared to all my other strats is really obvious…acoustically and amplified.I’ve been giggig with them steadily for about 2 months and they are quickly starting to acquire my own relicing and vibe.This is due to the fragile nitro which wears fast.The factory relic job to me is only the ‘opening up’ of the guitar’s relicing.As it is played,it is quickly developing its own story.Within a year,you won’t be able to tell it was already reliced by the factory or not.Of course,a beat up guitar may not be for everyone but I personnaly love that feel and vibe.With my added sweat and playing wear,they are quickly becoming the best Strats I have ever owned.
Great response Sonny. I love it when someone comes on with experiences and shares it. Thanks for the input. I agree some relics are beautiful and do indeed serve the purpose of giving you a “worn in” feel from a new guitar. I just really hate how now almost every company is doing it for purely aesthetic reasons and that people are picking them up to make themselves feel “cool”.
If you find a guitar that sounds right for you, feels right for you, then who cares if it is a relic or not? If I found one that felt right for me I would pick it up instantly.
Amen, these guitars are such a cash grab. I can’t believe people are actually buying these things
I totally understand. When that douche bag bought Hendrix’s Flying V and painted over all of Hendrix’s hand painted art work (which was beautiful) I was crushed. That’s something that you’ll never get back, and if you told me that this is a guitar owned by Paul Mccartney during the mid 60’s, then yes I would be interested because of the history and the guitar as a capsule for it.
However, other than those rare occurrences, a guitar is an instrument – so it should be played more than talked about. In fact had I gotten a hold of that Hendrix V I would have not painted over it, but played it every day to keep the memory alive, and get those vibrations rolling through that poor guitar again. Just my thoughts anyways.
i feel kinda out of the pecking order here only being 19… but id rather use my 38odd year old Shaftesbury Les Paul than a premade ‘relic’. although ive only had it 4 years, i feel connected to it… natural wear, lots of chips, the white bordering and lining has faded yellow, the pickups are scratched and worn, worn away machine heads etc… even got burn marks
haha. And over time i have added my stories and marks to it and it feels like a part of me.
the new Road Worn series may look the part.. but theyre missing all the history
Umm, just to point out, aren’t you basically becoming the same kind of person by being a snob and thumbing your nose up / insulting those that legitimately enjoy these guitars (pot and kettle)? I’ve been playing for 20 years and I love these things!! Aside from having to wait 20+ years for your own to age, or spending a fortune on an original, this is a great way to get that vibe and look at an affordable price. Also speaking of the originals, are you saying that an actual guitar from that era that wasn’t played by a famous person, nor has a famous history, is just as crappy because someone picked one up used and didn’t put the scratches on themselves?
You’re right in that these guitars have no soul, that’s because the soul comes from the PLAYER!!! Are you telling me that if SRV or Clapton played one of these that it would sound terrible and suck and be soulless?? A poser is a poser, period. It doesn’t matter if they’ve naturally worn a guitar in themsevles for 20 years, or if they bought one that way because the guitar and gear have nothing to do with it.
A guitar has to first and foremost sound and play great for the player. Whether or not it comes pre-aged is just an aesthetic choice like picking the color. Pre-aging doesn’t mean the guitar is bad or sounds terrible, that’s a close-minded assumption. You guys give truth to the old joke, “How many guitarists does it take to change a light builb? All of them!! One to actually do it, and the rest to point and say ‘I could do it better’!!”
My issue with these are several. I am man enough to admit that people may disagree with me, and that’s great! But it’s the way the whole relic thing is being used that bugs me. Gibson are a great example. The premium they charge to have your guitar relic’ed is criminal. They are preying on peoples desire to have a guitar that looks old, and promoting these relic’ed guitars as if they are the real deal. It’s who these guitars are being marketed to, and how.
Look at the new Jimmy Page No. 2. While I like the idea of a replica for such a significant guitar, and extra $4000 to take that beautiful guitar and damage it?
The other end of the spectrum is the cheap entry level “trashed” guitars. These are marketed purely on “trashed guitars are cool cause they’ve been around” cool.
I guess my issue that most of these relic’s are marketed as relic first, quality of guitar second. And that is wrong. If you dig the guitars then great, and obviously a lot of people do otherwise they wouldn’t exist. I’ve never said a pre-aged guitar is bad, just the reasons some people are choosing them for is.
But thanks for the reply. I’m loving the opinions this topic is generating.
Here is a situation that warrants relic’ing:
I recently bought a 1958 Gibson Les Paul Junior that the original owner painted a nasty-looking orange color. Its horrible. He even painted the P90 pickup cover and pick guard blue! I intend to have it repainted in the original color but I don’t want it to look brand new… I want it to be relic’ed – maybe look somewhat original! Seems like a legit use of relic’ing to me!
I just cried a little at that story. If I was in your boots I would do the same. Nothing wrong with having a guitar show it’s age.
Hey man you if don’t like it don’t buy one. The fact is since the late 70’s Fenders have been coated in POLYURETHANE…perhaps you’ve heard of it. They make bowling balls out of it, it will NOT age in the traditional sense. Unlike original nitro, or polyester the most you’ll get is a slight yellowing. Few people want to spend good money to buy a guitar then abuse their guitars like a 2 year old throwing a tantrum and launching it into a stack at the end of a show to make it look “worn.”(Very Original by the way)Now whether they planned it this way long ago or it was just a stroke of marketing luck, the roadworn series essentially makes guitars available that are comparable to what used Fenders from the 80’s and 90’s would look like by now had they not been encased in a bulletproof shell. If their not for you that’s cool, having a professional “posed” photo of me doing jumping splits WITHOUT MY GUITAR EVEN BEING PLUGGED INTO ANYTHING isn’t for me.
Amen to all that.
Anyone who can’t see the “relic” look for the gimmick it is, DESERVES to be parted with his money. If I’m plunking down some serious cash, I want the benefit of the shiny and new. You are right about the character that goes into aging an instrument over time. LET ME DO IT! Paying extra just to have somebody in the factory beat it up makes no sense.
I’m so dis-enchanted with the zillion plus versions out there. This just proves that fender has run out of ideas. And speaking of all the versions out there, it just makes sense anymore to find a decent MIM, slap a loaded pickguard into it and enjoy your SRV special and use the money you save to buy more toys.
As far as the relic craze dying, don’t hold your breath – pre-faded jeans haven’t gone away yet.
Fastelder
Yes, the relic craze is simply an extension of the worn jeans concept. I wonder who buys these instruments, as I’ve never seen any real musicians using them? Must be the same folks that made Harley Davidson a fashion item. Weekend warriors, posers, folks with more money then brains. I’m most amused by the proliferation of discussion regarding the qualities that make relics so popular, though I’m not at all convinced they are really as popular as Fender makes them out to be. This is an obvious attempt by Fender marketing to leverage on the increasingly high price of real vintage instruments. I can almost understand why some folks might like the worn look, but I can’t buy any of arguments that suggest these instrument are in any way superior to a non-relic. So what are you paying for?
1. Labor to create the illusion of age. However, relic instruments do not look authentic when closely inspected. The really expensive ones are more convincing, but anyone knowledgeable will not be fooled.
2. Better sound and feel. People willing to spend the ridiculous bucks Fender is asking will always say these instruments play better or feel better. Why? Because they have to rationalize their idiotic purchase.
3. Then, there is the rap on thin nitro lacquer. The finish on a solid body electric guitar has very little effect on the tone, period. It is mostly the wood, pickups, bridge, etc.. that make the difference.
4. The guitar was assembled by a master. Masterbuilt by some fucker you have never heard of. I suppose the master does some amazing special mojo when he/she screws the neck on or installs the tuners. Something different and very expensive… Maybe majic dust!
5. Something special! Who are you kidding? Do you think Fender uses a special CNC machine for the custom shop necks and bodies? If so, you are in idiot.
What you are paying for is simply a standard instrument with a fucked up finish, and the master builder doesn’t have to worry a bit about scratches or dings while assembling. Enjoy sucker!
Well… Tim’s arguments might be right, or wrong, but sure he’s got a point.
Anyways, I’m really starting to see the whole road worn thing as very subjective… just like the CBS headstocks, or maybe the Stratocaster guitar itself. Some loven ‘em, some can’t stand ‘em.
While some people sees the aged finish as tacky, and sure, a closer inspection will reveal the “fakeness”, some others agree that is impossible to inflict that kind of wear to a Poly finish, which is also true. There are some others, like me, who stay away of the standard production models because of the uncomfortable “modern” neck profiles, and for years had a hard time finding the right profiles, until the “classic” versions of fender came around, and then, the nice feel that preworn fenders give.
I have a couple of weeks with my road worn, and all I can say is that its neck is one of the most comfortable Stratocaster necks I’ve ever played. Its profile combines several elements that work well together with my not weak but smallish hands, like a narrow nut width, a “c” shape and a curvy 7.25 radius, which gives you a nice oval feel and improves your grip for bendings, unlike the worst profile in my opinion, the one in my 98 American Standard, which is wide nut, shallow C, (is it D?) and flatter 9.5 radius. I love the tone of the Am Std, but I really have a hard time gigging with this guitar, which slows me a lot because of the extra effort made to bend the strings, and the lack of proper support. I guess it just doesn’t fit in small hands.
Other thing bout the road worn I don’t care too much but some other guys really do, is the absence of heavy finish on the back of the neck, which in hot, humid conditions, or if you have sweaty hands, makes a hard time on your playing. Last, there’s some nice tall frets in the guitar, which helps a little with bendings.
Tonewise, the axe resonates a lot better than the Am Std, so I guess the stripped finish actually helps with this, but I haven’t had the chance to test thoroughly if this makes a difference plugged in, because my amp is in my rehearsal space.
Overall, this guitar is actually more expensive than the 60’s classic, but not THAT much, so I guess the whole rant about ultra expensiveness doesn’t apply in this guitar. So go for it if you dig the worn look, but more important, the different feel you don’t get so often in regular guitars.
Still, I think all Fenders should lower their prices, because almost a grand for a guitar (I don’t give a damn if they are built in Mexico, my country by the way, as long as they are well made, which they are) is a little bit too mucho.