buffing satin finish Taylor 322

[dr.underhill]

i was wondering if it is possible to polish/buff the satin finish on my 322e Taylor? i just prefer a gloss/semi-gloss finish. i polished the satin sides/back of a Larrivee parlor and also a 414ce Taylor back 5yrs ago and both turned out great. just not familiar with their current finishing and if it can buffed as the above mentioned guitars.

[mirwa]

When you polish a satin finish, you can only achieve a certain amount of shine, its more surface shine than depth of lacquer shine as well.

The original satin mix has a different solids concentration to a gloss mix, so impossible to make it lustrous.

Steve

[nikpearson]

I’ve buffed a couple of satin instruments to a semi-gloss using T-cut. If you’ve done it before you’ll already have an idea as to how to do this. Taylor have used the same UV cured finish for 20+ years. The satin finishes are thinner than gloss so you need to go slow and steady. I did mine by hand, wiping back and checking regularly.

My preference is for matt/satin finishes but both Taylor and Martin satin finishes are slightly rough to the touch and cause noticeable handling noise. Buffing out with polishing compound allows you to add a level of sheen up to semi-gloss and in the process gets rid of the surface roughness.

Hope that helps.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by nikpearson

I did mine by hand, wiping back and checking regularly.

What are you checking for?

It's fine until you've abraded through the finish. Once you have, you have.

[mirwa]

Originally Posted by nikpearson

The satin finishes are thinner than gloss so you need to go slow and steady. I did mine by hand, wiping back and checking regularly.

How did you come about, that satin finishes are thinner than gloss finishes?

Steve

[nikpearson]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

What are you checking for?

It's fine until you've abraded through the finish. Once you have, you have.

Getting an even sheen whilst ensuring you don’t polish through the finish. I’m not quite sure how easy this is to do with T-cut but better safe than sorry.

[nikpearson]

Originally Posted by mirwa

How did you come about, that satin finishes are thinner than gloss finishes?

Steve

Taylor’s standard gloss finish is 6 mil (thousandths of an inch) thick, their recent thinner gloss finish used on 600 and 800 series is 3.5 mil. Both finishes have a base coat of UV cured polyester followed by UV cured polyurethane. The satin finish used on 300 series back and sides (along with the neck on most other USA made models) is 5 mil. Baby, GS mini and 100 series guitars use a different matt varnish again which gives a more open-pored feel and if memory serves me correctly is 2 mil in thickness.

The hardest areas to buff out are around the bridge, the top either side of the fingerboard, and if the instrument has a scratchplate it’s tricky to polish right up to the edge.

[mirwa]

Originally Posted by nikpearson

Taylor’s standard gloss finish is 6 mil (thousandths of an inch) thick, their recent thinner gloss finish used on 600 and 800 series is 3.5 mil. Both finishes have a base coat of UV cured polyester followed by UV cured polyurethane. The satin finish used on 300 series back and sides (along with the neck on most other USA made models) is 5 mil. Baby, GS mini and 100 series guitars use a different matt varnish again which gives a more open-pored feel and if memory serves me correctly is 2 mil in thickness.

I think you may have inadvertently drawn a conclusion vee comparing years of manufacture and different models of guitars.

Models painted with UV are done the same way be it a gloss or satin finish, if any conclusion could be drawn and this is me making an assumption, the gloss would be a thinner finish as it’s “possibly” buffed longer to get a better finish, again this is just me making an assumption, but I think it’s a wrong assumption, because to the best of my knowledge the guitars are robot buffed.

I paint / repair / touch up Taylor guitars weekly using UV finish, but that does not make me an expert on them, just allows me to draw certain conclusions from doing the work.

The varnish models have nothing to do with UV finishing, they are a varnish.

That is why I was curious about the gloss to satin comparison, it was a new one for me.

Steve

[nikpearson]

Originally Posted by mirwa

I think you may have inadvertently drawn a conclusion vee comparing years of manufacture and different models of guitars.

Models painted with UV are done the same way be it a gloss or satin finish, if any conclusion could be drawn and this is me making an assumption, the gloss would be a thinner finish as it’s “possibly” buffed longer to get a better finish, again this is just me making an assumption, but I think it’s a wrong assumption, because to the best of my knowledge the guitars are robot buffed.

I paint / repair / touch up Taylor guitars weekly using UV finish, but that does not make me an expert on them, just allows me to draw certain conclusions from doing the work.

The varnish models have nothing to do with UV finishing, they are a varnish.

That is why I was curious about the gloss to satin comparison, it was a new one for me.

Steve

You clearly have a good deal of experience with repairing Taylor finishes but the information I highlighted came directly from Taylor’s Wood, and Steel magazine and their website. The thicknesses given are all for current guitar models in the Taylor lineup.

Standard gloss being 6 mi thick, standard satin 5 mil. Given that the gloss finish has to be buffed I can only assume that it is applied more thickly than the satin version. The recent 3.5 mil gloss finish on 800 & 600 series models was the result of trying to get as thin a gloss finish as possible whilst maintaining the (desirable to many) gloss look. Taylor acknowledge it’s harder to achieve and results in more burn-through when buffing; I’m guessing that’s why this thinner gloss finish hasn’t been adopted throughout the range.

The Mexico-made instruments have a very different matt varnish finish which as you say isn’t uv-cured; it also looks and feels thinner again, as well as being open-pored.

I like the look of the standard satin finish when buffed with polishing compound and it gets rid of the somewhat annoying and dare I say, cheap feeling, roughness on Taylor’s 300 and 400 models. And just to add one more option, Taylor recently introduced a ‘silent satin’ finish on their Builder’s Edition V-class braced instrument to address this very issue.

For my money the best factory finish I’ve seen is Lowden’s nitrocellulose hand-rubbed satin. Classy, understated and very tactile without any handling noise.

As a student builder with only basic workshop facilities my direct experience is limited to shellac and oil finishes to date. Less protection than typical factory finishes but with a more organic, natural look to my mind.

So many choices...

[paulorr8179]

I just scored a 2004 Taylor 414CE Limited Edition. Rosewood sides and back. I bought a 6" electric polisher for $20 in Wal Mart's auto department:

https://www.walmart.com/ip/WEN-6-Wax...isher/22053050

and Meguiar's polish compound from Harbor Freight:

https://www.harborfreight.com/32-oz-...ish-62562.html

20 minutes and my 414ce looks like a gloss finish. Keep the polisher flat on the surface no sides of the polisher.

Looks great I love it.

[mirwa]

Yes, because of the clarity of the finish on the UV clears, super fine buffing makes a noticeable difference

I have two dedicated guitar buffing machines with 8 mops installed so 4 grades of buffing compound, only on taylors do I use the last mop set which is extra fine, on every other guitar from guilds to gibsons and everything in between, no noticeable difference is achieved between fine and extra fine buffing process, except for the taylors.

So buffing it with something like the harbour freight hand polisher is a good choice

Steve

[paulorr8179]

I polished a few by hand first to see if it would be a problem. Moved on to the polisher next. The polish is so super fine it is like hand cream. And it really did a fantastic job polishing that matte finish.

When I bought the guitar (last week) there was high gloss from shirt wear on the top of the guitar and I matched the polishing up to that.

Polishing the top which was already gloss made that even better. Shine baby shine!

Paul

[Kree]

I spent over 35 years as a custom cabinet finisher. I am not an expert on Taylors finishes, but I can tell you that the debate over mil thickness could have a simple explanation. Lacquers, and conversion polys and varnishes are built with solids as part of their chemical make up. Sometimes it doesn’t matter how thickly you try to apply a finish, it’s the solids content of the finish (high build, or low build) that determines the cured mill thickness of the finish. (And number of coats obviously) Satin, or flat finishes use flatting pastes in their mix in order to achieve the dull look, this flatting paste is what gives the finish a different feel. I currently own a Taylor 324 CE that has a shiny spot left from the original owner. Doing a spot repair that is invisible is near impossible, though the technique I would recommend would to be to use 0000 steel wool and a soap (like dish washing liquid or something as a lubricant, though unlikely, it may work out well enough. I will most likely break out my Kremlin Sprqy rig and just refinish the whole top, I’m too anal to accept an OK repair.

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by nikpearson

You clearly have a good deal of experience with repairing Taylor finishes but the information I highlighted came directly from Taylor’s Wood, and Steel magazine and their website. The thicknesses given are all for current guitar models in the Taylor lineup.

Standard gloss being 6 mi thick, standard satin 5 mil. Given that the gloss finish has to be buffed I can only assume that it is applied more thickly than the satin version. The recent 3.5 mil gloss finish on 800 & 600 series models was the result of trying to get as thin a gloss finish as possible whilst maintaining the (desirable to many) gloss look. Taylor acknowledge it’s harder to achieve and results in more burn-through when buffing; I’m guessing that’s why this thinner gloss finish hasn’t been adopted throughout the range.

The Mexico-made instruments have a very different matt varnish finish which as you say isn’t uv-cured; it also looks and feels thinner again, as well as being open-pored.

I like the look of the standard satin finish when buffed with polishing compound and it gets rid of the somewhat annoying and dare I say, cheap feeling, roughness on Taylor’s 300 and 400 models. And just to add one more option, Taylor recently introduced a ‘silent satin’ finish on their Builder’s Edition V-class braced instrument to address this very issue.

For my money the best factory finish I’ve seen is Lowden’s nitrocellulose hand-rubbed satin. Classy, understated and very tactile without any handling noise.

As a student builder with only basic workshop facilities my direct experience is limited to shellac and oil finishes to date. Less protection than typical factory finishes but with a more organic, natural look to my mind.

So many choices...

Another "Wood & Steel" reader here.

In the "Ask Bob" section I do remember him answering a reader question about finish thickness and it's effect on tone. He stated that one of the reasons that Taylor was electing to use the satin finishes was because the formulation allowed them to provide the same level of protection with a thinner finish thickness that could be reliably buffed with automated buffers. The resulting thin finish contributed to more volume and better tone from instruments with the new satin formulation.