Shrinking Celluloid Questions

[[J.K.]]

I posted this in the general discussion forum and realized it should actually be here. (Sorry for the cross-post!)

So my question is: what's the prognosis on shrinking celluloid and the related repairs on vintage guitars?
I was considering buying a guitar off a friend that's in otherwise perfect condition, but the shrinkage on about everything has me wondering what the financial scope of the repairs might be and what the inherent long-term issues may be related to it (especially the headstock).

• Binding - I know broken binding isn't always the worst thing in the world, but if chucks are breaking off, does that facilitate for the entire binding around the body being replaced?
• Pickguards - For shrinking pickguards under the laminate, I assume they have to be removed and re-glued to prevent uneven tightening on the soundboard, right? Is that typically an expensive procedure due to having to fix the laminate over the pickguard and around the area which the wood is exposed?
• Headstocks - I never knew I disliked those plastic headstock faces until I had a Les Paul one start to peel back on me. When they start to shrink and pull back, how much of a problem is that? I know that, over time, the holes will start to crack and it will get worse, but is there any way to reglue the face and prevent further shrinkage?

I'm curious to head peoples' experiences with these kinds of issues. I imagine that, given a long enough timeline, these sorts of things become inevitabilities for vintage guitars, and repairs aren't the biggest dealbreakers for me, but things like the headstock makes me nervous that there may be a terminal point of no return on some of these repairs.

Thanks everyone!

[ChrisN]

I was eyeing an '80s Ibanez semihollow and learned from research about "binding rot" endemic to multiple makes of that era. The outgassing in a closed case, or something else, causes the binding to shrink/crack and otherwise need replacement.

Because the binding replacement is a big job and it's under the finish, most luthier's seem to avoid it unless they can refinish the whole body after the binding replacement.

The scope of potential work for the guitar I was looking at caused me to pass on it, but there are plenty of folks who say just play and forget it - it may never get any worse. Interesting fact - just because one model, or even different examples from the same maker are susceptible, it doesn't mean all of that maker's models should be avoided. Something to do with the materials used for the binding, pickguard, etc. This can vary from run to run, too. I now looking at a guitar with the potential for binding rot as a game of musical chairs - I don't want to be the owner when the music stops.

In any event, in your place I'd research "binding rot" and the make/model of the guitar at issue.

[mirwa]

Originally Posted by [J.K.]

Binding[/B] - I know broken binding isn't always the worst thing in the world, but if chucks are breaking off, does that facilitate for the entire binding around the body being replaced?

All binding has to be removed when it breaks down, anything is a very temporary fix, expect to pay around 450 for a binding repair as a lot of finish work is involved

Originally Posted by [J.K.]

Pickguards[/B] - For shrinking pickguards under the laminate, I assume they have to be removed and re-glued to prevent uneven tightening on the soundboard, right? Is that typically an expensive procedure due to having to fix the laminate over the pickguard and around the area which the wood is exposed?

Sometimes you are lucky sometimes not, expect to pay 60-250 for repairing pickguard issues

Originally Posted by [J.K.]

Headstocks[/B] - I never knew I disliked those plastic headstock faces until I had a Les Paul one start to peel back on me. When they start to shrink and pull back, how much of a problem is that? I know that, over time, the holes will start to crack and it will get worse, but is there any way to reglue the face and prevent further shrinkage?

Nitro finished headstocks crack all the time, joys of nitro, having one refinished is about 150-250

[[J.K.]]

Originally Posted by mirwa

All binding has to be removed when it breaks down, anything is a very temporary fix, expect to pay around 450 for a binding repair as a lot of finish work is involved
Sometimes you are lucky sometimes not, expect to pay 60-250 for repairing pickguard issues
Nitro finished headstocks crack all the time, joys of nitro, having one refinished is about 150-250

Yikes. Good things a former bandmate is a tech. I had four cracks, two braces, and a neck reset recently for $280. My only fear, however, is that I don't really talk to him that much unless I need something. The guilt is piling up.

[D. Churchland]

Originally Posted by [J.K.]

Yikes. Good things a former bandmate is a tech. I had four cracks, two braces, and a neck reset recently for $280. My only fear, however, is that I don't really talk to him that much unless I need something. The guilt is piling up.

Is your bandmate retired? That kind of price gives me pause, not doubting you that's just not much money at all for that much work.

like mirwa said, binding eventually has to be redone. I recently turned down a job where the client wanted me to go through and patch up all the original (read that as rotten) degraded binding on his guitar. I told him it needs to be replaced, he wanted to keep it "original" but doing so was silly as it was just falling apart. The guitar will look better and you'll feel better if you pay for a pro rebinding job.

[John Arnold]

Likewise, the plastic heastock overlays must be replaced when the shrinkage is excessive.

[[J.K.]]

Originally Posted by Will Kirk

Is your bandmate retired? That kind of price gives me pause, not doubting you that's just not much money at all for that much work.

Nah, we're both in our early 30s. Still in the ballpark of an age range where favors exchanged can result in good hookups.

[Alan Carruth]

Shrinkage is inherent in nitrocellulose and, perhaps to a lesser extent, cellulose acetate. Both are chemically unstable, breaking down over time and releasing acids: nitric and acetic respectively. Both are considered 'toxic' by museum curators as a result. Manufacturers do not choose materials based on long-term durability.