Why Do So Many People Hate Relic Guitars?

🎸Get 50% Off Any Course With Code " GET50" At Checkout ⬇️

Thanks to @samuraiguitarist for chiming in, Check out his "Craft Of Soling" Course Here for 75% Off!

Relic Guitars are a contentious subject with many guitar players today, some love them and others absolutely hate them. I think in many way relic guitars are better than their non relic counterparts and in today's video Im going to tell you why.

My Most Popular Courses

🎸 Fretboard Fundamentals Bundle:

🎸 The CAGED Course:

🎸 Barebones Guitar Theory:

🎸 Breaking Out Of the Pentatonic Box:

My Favorite Gear (affiliate links)

Line 6 HX Effects

Neural DSP Quad Cortex

Zoom H6

Shure SM57

Sennheiser MD 421-II

AEA R92

Sennheiser MKH 50

Universal Audio Apollo x8p

Want to get in touch?

0:00 Intro

[samuraiguitarist]

That was a fair and rational opinion from rhett even if I dont agree with it

[Briandnlo]

The most important part of choosing a guitar is the nose, aroma and fragrance it gives off when the sommelier uncorks it.

[jaymichael]

I'll save you'all 10 mins of the click-bait title.... Rhett prefers satin necks and rolled fretboards, has really nothing to do with relic finishes but no one would get all pissed off and click if that was the title. ;)

[tummy_fritters]

I like the look of relic guitars, but I have to disagree that rolling the fingerboard and steel wool-ing the neck is relicing. For a guitar to be reliced, I think it has to give the impression of being a relic in all aspects--it has to show that it has significance as an instrument, which means it has to look like it was used a lot. Increased ergonomics like a rolled fingerboard and non-sticky neck, are just a development in production methods, and actually signify a later stage of production.

[dalejones]

I think we may be getting a few things mixed up together here, myself. "I" would suggest that rolled finger boards and rounded fret ends are not the same as relic guitars. Sanding the paint off and artificially aging the fret board is what I'd call a relic job. It would seem to be purely for aesthetics and have no affect on the playability. However, A natural or mat finished neck and rolled finger boards and rounded fret ends are all upgrades to a guitar that can be accomplished without artificially aging anything so that it looks old. Total novice here and this is just an observation that could totally be wrong. Thanks for a great video

[scottheins]

The most important advice on guitar buying I ever got, from my first teacher, when I was 16: You need to buy the guitar with *looks* that inspire you most--it's what will get you to take it off the wall and play more, which is how you improve.

[ignazioorru]

Relic or not, a good guitar is a good guitar, a bad guitar is a bad guitar, period.

[davehopping]

Back in the day, the nitro-finished Fenders started looking relic-ed the minute they got gigged, and the maple fingerboards got divots if you even THOUGHT about playing them. Drove guitar players nuts and there were innumerable rattle-can refins. That is why there are so few original-finish Fifties Fenders left, and I suspect a lot of those are restorations masquerading as original. It's also why Leo went to rosewood fingerboards starting in 1958. It's ALSO why CBS went to poly in the early '70s. Rolled fingerboards and satin neck backs are ergonomically useful but can be part of new production without a banged-up body trying to impersonate an original.

My take on relics is that by this time in history, no one now active remembers that once-upon-a-time your average-Joe player could make a decent living just playing music in the local bars, so today's dentists, accountants, and urban planners who do play have to make do with looking like they were real musicians.

[rome]

A lot of these reasons you listed are why I only buy used guitars. They don't have to be vintage to be broken in. You can get a guitar from 15-20 years ago for much cheaper than a new guitar. And it will often be very comfortable to play. Sure, it won't be as worn down as a vintage or relic'd guitar, but it will have been played enough to get rid of the rough edges and sticky neck.

[_Olorin]

I think most people's issue with relics is not the "broken in" part. It's the esthetic and the fact that you are deceiving people about the nature of the instrument and the time you might have spent on it. Yes, sanding the fingerboard and the back of the neck is a sort of "relic" that makes your guitar feel better. The finish being uncomfortable is not an argument for relic'ing, it's an argument against the finish. Does the finish feel bad? If yes, then why is it there? Find another one if you're gonna get a custom guitar. And making the guitar look like it was played even though it wasn't makes a prop out of it imo. I'm all for making your instrument more comfortable with strategic sanding and modding, that's absolutely a way to make it your own and improves your instrument. But that is not the argument against relic'ing for people who don't like it. I whole-heartedly agree with Ol' Sammy G about earning the ageing. The only reason for a relic look, as you admittedly argue after his clip, is that it looks like it's from the 50s because a newer one will never age the same way. It's a fetishization of the vintage. To each their own of course! Let's just be honest about why people like relics and pay (a big) extra for it, it's not the feel, even though the feel is improved.

[Irnman]

I just have to clear this up because it bugs me. Polyurethane is the finish polyester is a fabric

[j.aut.]

I'm 45, have played ~ 30 years. I can give all the reasons why I like relic'd guitars, but if nothing else, I enjoy them. I also have a new non-relc'd guitar that I wouldn't really want to get dinged up. Both have their place.

[frag]

Rolling fingerboard, making the neck mate doesn’t count as relicing because it doesn’t look old. The neck doesn’t wear that way.
Relicing is aesthetic and adjusting the neck is ergonomics. You should buy custom shop with intact finish and “relic” neck.

[timwhite]

I've been repairing guitars for over 25 years, so this isn't something i share really often, but personally i recoil from relicing. I don't think it's because in making it look old, they're making them look more valuable as much as it's imbuing it with a sort of manufactured character.
There's definitely truth in the idea that they're more comfortable and lived in feeling, and that they tend to sound better due to the things that happen in the relicing process: thinner finish, lighter and dryer wood, etc. But there's nothing keeping people from building a new unreliced guitar with all of those same characteristics: the neck profile, fretboard shaping, thinner and harder finish (they changed the finishes more to last longer than to make it any safer. They add plasticizers and inhibitors to make it more mailable longer so it doesn't cheque and flake off, but there's still finish without them), etc.
I get why people like them, i just don't ever see having a guitar built for myself and opting for an aged look. 🤷

[JacobR.]

My favorite aspect of having a lightly reliced guitar is that you don’t care if you get a ding or scratch. With a shiny new guitar, the first ding is a travesty, with a reliced guitar, it adds character. You’re 100% right about a reliced guitar feeling way, way better

[jeremyadler]

So true! When I bought my tele, I had no intention of buying a reliced guitar but fell in love with how a reliced one felt. 7 years later, the neck on that guitar still makes me happy every time I play it.

[wolfgangritter]

I have three main guitars, I did sand off a bit of the shiny lacquer on the neck on two of them (Ibanez Artcore AF75, Harley Benton TE70) and I do appreciate the fact that my No. 1 (Music Man St Vincent) already has a nice soft finish. This is adjustment to personal taste, but I wouldn't call it "relicing", as I did it right away after I got them. But then, this may be just different wording.
But I just cannot grasp the fact that someone's willing to pay around 5600 Dollars for a Telecaster with a relic finish. This is just beyond me. I get it, quality wood, quality tuners, well-crafted pickups, exact measurement, acute craftmanship in putting the components together. But it's a freakin' Telecaster - literally the prototype of mass-produced guitars. I don't mean this in any derogatory way, I love the simplistic design, but incredibly variable tone. But paying effing 5600 Dollars for a Telecaster with all the ingredients of a 50s design plus "relic" is just ridiculous, sorry.

[The_Cadaver]

Sanding down the neck, fretboard, or fret edges is just a MODIFICATION.

The flaking paint and artificial fret gunk is a "relic" thing. IMO obviously.

[ericolson]

For me the sweet spot was Fender's short-lived Road Worn Player series. Neck finishes were nicely broken in but an even, consistent fashion over the entire length without patches of extreme wear/ discoloration.

[RadRumblings]

Rhett one of the biggest (at least for me) advantages to a relic guitar is that you dont have to handle a finely made instrument with kid gloves. I had an ES335 that i left in the car on a cold night accidentally that ended up checking in the cold in a weird way and it basically was a $1000 mistake. My Novos I bang on stuff all the time and it doesnt matter because no one can tell what was intentionally done and what was accidentally done