whats the attraction with beat up guitars?

[hat]

I have some new-ish guitars that are in great condition. Few scratches, glossy finish, no worn spots, and they are great to play. I also have an old 50's J45 that reeks of smoke when I play it. It's beat, scratched, and ugly. I love it. And I have an old Harmony that's about the same, also well loved. The thread that runs through all of them? They all have a great tone, all sound unique in their own way.

[dwasifar]

I understand continuing to play an instrument that has become beat up through natural causes, whether you or someone else did the beating up. You bond with it despite its flaws.

Artificially damaging a guitar to make it a "relic" is an affront to my sensibilities. Like, say, a Stevie Ray Vaughan relic model. Buying a pre-beat-to-crap replica of that beat-to-crap guitar doesn't make you SRV, and it doesn't make you cool like SRV either. It makes you the opposite of those things; just a cargo-cult copycat confusing style with substance.

Maybe for a professional SRV tribute act, I can see it, but in that case it's stage dressing, part of the show. Otherwise no.

[menhir]

A well loved, often played guitar is cool.

A roughed up guitar, either purchased that way or intentionally "aged" just to seem cool, ain't cool.

Keep it real.

[Gordon Currie]

In general, I think it's a fantasy that a beat-up guitar indicates any sort of magic. Willie Nelson's Trigger never sounded like anything special to me, but I love Willie's idiosyncratic playing approach and his innovative use of nylon string guitar in country. If it works for him, great - but I perceive no magic in the actual instrument.

A lot of 'beat up' guitars I see have damage that is in no way explained by PLAYING, but instead easily explained by simply not taking care of the guitar (not using a case, not wearing the huge belt buckle, ignoring humidity, etc.).

I remember buying a 1976 Fender Precision bass in 1978. It looked like it had been through the wringer for decades. Turns out it was owned by an aspiring punk musician, and probably made contact with many floors, mike stands, band members during that short time. In spite of that, it played well and was dirt cheap. I needed a bass and had no money, otherwise I would have avoided it altogether.

To me a guitar is a tool, and I take care of them. Other people have different outlooks. Some folks seem to fetishize them.

[Goat Mick]

I have over 400 gigs under my belt in the last 3 years. I am very careful with my guitars and can't remember actually banging one of them into anything or letting one fall. But dang they all show road wear. Nothing major, but you can tell they've worked really hard over the last few years. Personally I don't have any problem with new guitars that look a bit old and used as long as they have the tone to go with the look.

[jrb715]

Originally Posted by CoffeeFan

But he is a real musician, so he's not really "posing". You just didn't care for the sound of the guitar...

Maybe I phrased it the wrong way. The guitar was a part of his costume, and it was a way of showing how "authentic"--how I suppose uncommercial or not manufactured-- he is . It would have felt a lot more "authentic" if the guitar sounded good, but it just looked to me like a prop. And I'm fine with that if the guitar sounded good. I like Zac Brown's music. That's why I was at the concert.

[stephenT]

Lot's of judgmental opinions in this thread.

Originally Posted by jrb715

Maybe I phrased it the wrong way. The guitar was a part of his costume, and it was a way of showing how "authentic"--how I suppose uncommercial or not manufactured-- he is . It would have felt a lot more "authentic" if the guitar sounded good, but it just looked to me like a prop. And I'm fine with that if the guitar sounded good. I like Zac Brown's music. That's why I was at the concert.

Originally Posted by menhir

A well loved, often played guitar is cool.

A roughed up guitar, either purchased that way or intentionally "aged" just to seem cool, ain't cool.

Keep it real.

Originally Posted by DukeX

Perceived mojo.

[Mr. Jelly]

Come on? Lyrics deal with imagery. Iconic imagery. Mom, apple pie, old dogs, pick-up trucks etc. and you don't get the show business imagery of a well worn guitar?

[dwasifar]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jelly

Come on? Lyrics deal with imagery. Iconic imagery. Mom, apple pie, old dogs, pick-up trucks etc. and you don't get the show business imagery of a well worn guitar?

Did he have his mom, a pie, a dog, and a pickup truck onstage with him too?

[JERZEY]

Lets be real though.. 90% of the time "played in" means the owner is a dirty slob who doesnt take care of the instrument. Willie never cleaned that guitar himself. He is in all aspects a pretty dirty slob of a guy all around. He smells like Mikey Rourke and Mikey is probably the dirtiest human being walking the earth

[1Charlie]

I am a sucker for cosmetically-challenged Gibsons from the '30's and '40's. The more beat up, the better. Why?

1. I can afford examples of pre-war guitars that no not many people want to mess with (usually because of cracks, loose braces, poor neck angle, worn frets, fretboard divots, bellies, extensive pick rash, and multiple dents/dings/scratches).

2. After a little love from my luthier, they sound great!

3. I can take them anywhere and not worry about another ding joining the hundreds that are already there.

What's not to like about all that?

[619TF]

Originally Posted by JERZEY

Lets be real though.. 90% of the time "played in" means the owner is a dirty slob who doesnt take care of the instrument. Willie never cleaned that guitar himself. He is in all aspects a pretty dirty slob of a guy all around. He smells like Mikey Rourke and Mikey is probably the dirtiest human being walking the earth

Let's really be real. It's "Mickey" (like the mouse) and how many times were you ever near enough to either of them to have taken a whiff?

[DesertTwang]

It would be interesting to do a poll sometime about how many of us on this forum go to great lengths to preserve the instruments and spend their time buying, selling, trading and discussing details, as opposed to how many spend their time practicing on the same instruments they got when they were 14, which eventually allowed them to make a living with those beat-up guitars... To me, that is where the cool factor lies...

[CoffeeFan]

Originally Posted by jrb715

Maybe I phrased it the wrong way. The guitar was a part of his costume, and it was a way of showing how "authentic"--how I suppose uncommercial or not manufactured-- he is . It would have felt a lot more "authentic" if the guitar sounded good, but it just looked to me like a prop. And I'm fine with that if the guitar sounded good. I like Zac Brown's music. That's why I was at the concert.

But the bottom line is that you just didn't like the sound of the guitar, because if it sounded good the appearance would've been fine with you.

I'd be willing to bet that Zac Brown his guitar tech and his sound man know a good sounding guitar when they hear one.

Maybe the guy's guitar just gets beaten up by the road...

[alien]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

Seems to me that

playing a guitar that looks kinda beat up because you've had it since you were 14 years old, and

playing a guitar that looks kinda beat up because you selected that degree of relicing from the manufacturer's "roadworn" (or whatever) line

are two 100% different things.

+1 on this

None of my guitars are mint. They have a few dents, scratches and repaired cracks. A couple of them show a good bit of checking on the top. But none of them are "beat up". I don't really get why someone would buy an aged/reliced guitar. But that's just me. I understand that guitars from the 30s , 40s or 50s may not be pristine, but I do have my limits as to what is acceptable.

Willie's Trigger would not be acceptable!