To All The Relic Guitar Haters 

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

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

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

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. ;)

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.

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

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.

Im going over to the gear page and starting a scathing thread before I watch this. brb

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.

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.

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.

I prefer non-relic guitars 🎸. Every nick, ding, smudge and scuff is something that I have accidentally done to them. Just my personal preference. I agree with Samurai Guitarist.

In 50 years people will say - ''It just doesn't wear like a Polly finish''. I'll be 90 years old doing this... 🙄

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

“Fake memories” - Tom Bukovac

I have a Sonic Blue 1960 Fender Stratocaster Custom Shop relic which can happily sit out on a stand and be played ANY time without worrying about damage, discolouration, nicks or dings. It plays beautifully. I also have a Mint- Alpine White 1987 Gibson Les Paul Custom with Tim Shaw's. It also plays beautifully, but it lives in its case in the attic for fear of damage, discolouration, nicks or dings... This is why I love a 'relic'. I've also got two other 'road worn' Telecasters which can sit out on stands - the Joe Strummer 2007 and Chrissie Hynde 2022. They stay out on stands, whilst my Mint Pink Paisley CIJ Telecaster is forced to hide like a recluse in its case. I'm not trying to fool anyone, but for me it's the smoothness and feel of playing these relics, but mainly because they can be ACCESSIBLE at all times. As for the naysayers - "That guitar didn't earn its damage" and the "You're just a poseur" all I can say is "I don't give a f**k what you think !!"😄

Grew up dirt poor in the 60s and 70s…all we could afford was “relics “…😂 they were in a barrel with 3 rusty ‘relic’ strings and warped necks in the back or hanging from a wall next to the automotive parts in the pawnshop….hey, if it makes you happy and play better I’m all for it…😊

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.

To improve the quality of this video, release it in sepia tone. Ridiculous.

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

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.

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.

I don't know, I don't see it. I understand making a guitar more comfortable, but is that ageing? Not in my book.

Nailed it. I have two Nash relics and one from the Fender Custom Shop and they’re amazing in looks and in feel. Nobody is into these because they’re trying to trick people. We just aren’t going to live long enough to relic a new poly guitar.

It's funny the mental gymnastics people do to claim "relic guitars are better". I don't know which group makes better gymnasts, the relic crowd, or the tonewood crowd.

Totally ruffled. I put my own scratches/dents in my stuff thank you very much. No upcharge either.

There is a company called RUF who use a manmade material called RUFFAINE to make their guitars - and what makes it special is that - RUFFAINE can be altered to mimic any density of wood - so that you can custom make any sound profile you want. I would argue that the coating of a guitar has very little to do with the actual sound - and that the most important is the pickups on electric guitars. There is a resonance and sustain profile - but it is small as well. The next in impact are the strings that are used. And then the material. AND if you are focused on the feel of the instrument - why not get an unpainted partscaster ? $5000 for a relic Guitar - is a placebo effect. It places the idea that someone played the hell out of an instrument so it must be seriously good sounding. And it might be seriously good sounding - but I think it comes more from the pickups than anything else.

I can’t agree that filing fret ends smoothing a neck finish to play smoother falls into the ‘relic’ description. As you show, many guitars are built with nicely rounded frets and minimal fishing on the neck to play smoother. Performing those tasks is merely bringing the guitar to a performance spec that is not intended to make the guitar look like something it isn’t.

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.

I relic'ed my amp: Threw it off the roof, now it plays better than ever.

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.

Nope. I'd never pay for faux-jo. I've got a few beaten up vintage lap steels but otherwise I prefer new guitars in near mint condition because I haven't beaten the shit out of them and called it mojo. Which is as pathetic as fake ripped jeans.

The worn jeans example is so funny to me when 99% of the jeans people buy are already washed and worn when you get them. Yes even the 501, even your cowboy cut wrangler. Everything that’s not raw denim is “reliced” to make it comfortable to wear out of the store. And I’m not even talking about the stone washed ones…

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

Every guitar goes through sanding in production, sanding the neck to your desired feel doesn’t seem to me like “relicing” the guitar. If it’s comfort you are after, i believe there are a lot of options to choose from in 2024. Other than that relicing is purely vibe and looks (which is totally fine, I just don’t see the reason to hide it with functional reasons)

I love the feel, but hate the look. Pre-worn jeans, I love. Pre-ripped jeans, I hate. Everyone likes pre-worn equipment. Baseball gloves, Motocross boots, guitar amp speakers, girlfriends, boyfriends, etc. I had to sell my PRS because I was too afraid to scratch it. I only played when I was in a room by myself. It was too beautiful and too expensive. It never broke in and was always "just for looks". Same for Rhett, he looks pretty worn-in, and plays like it!

Dude, doesn’t like the tube screamer and now he’s making an argument for this well….

The relicing treatment on the neck and fretboard server to alter the feel and playability of the guitar. In that sense, there is a mechanical function being served. Relicing the body, as far as I can tell, is more about aesthetic. (I'll happily concede this point, as I'm not an experienced player. It's just what I currently perceive) Both are completely valid. If you want a worn-in neck, so you have a slightly smoother feel as you play, then by all means, go to town on the neck. If you want to put up an older "feel" to your show, then you wear grubby older clothes, you let the stubble grow in so you look rough around the edges, and you relic the body of your guitar, to match the image. Do either of these effect the tone of the guitar? Not as far as I know. Do they effect the feel of playing it? Absolutely.

I'm in the camp that thinks relic as an aesthetic looks dumb over 99% of the time. Case in point: When Rhett first got that Tele, he said it looked ridiculous, and I agree. I get the point that a relic'd guitar 'feels' better and thus, is the reason, and can appreciate that. I guess my gripe or disagreement is the neck example - got a poly coated neck? Scrubbing it with steel wool, to me, isn't a relic as much as it's just fixing it - doing it right, vs. artificial aging. If the industry could stop doing that to necks, and just do it lighter or choose a different method (but not charge us for 'less is more') then the guitar would be fixed - not relic'd. The example of the pre-worn guitar that doesn't look like it is great, but if they charge a premium to just do it right - build it more comfy as a standard, that's where I feel like they're taking advantage. More labor to make it like that? Sure. But if it wasn't such a high falutin feature, and just what was done during assembly as a standard, it wouldn't get what is likely a higher price for it. Build a comfy guitar for a comfy price, instead of guitars that aren't comfy, or take work to complete it after you paid too much up front. The video is great, and covers the argument well, But if they were all built with comfort features for, say, a Fender American Standard price, without the extra aesthetic, that'd be great.

I stopped playing guitar for about 10 years (life got in the way) and one day I saw Fender’s road worn series. I thought what a cool looking guitar and I swear I felt the calling. It was like that guitar was telling me I need to get back on the saddle. Now, from the industry point of view, since then, I’ve brought 4 more guitars, amps, a bunch of pedals, cables, strings, etc, etc so it’s a definitely win for them.

Hey Rhett! Great vid! I also just watched the jazzmaster comparison and was wondering what the white pedal was you used in the beggining with the Ultra? Thanks!

I like the oiled neck idea. That seems to be the part that makes you comfortable. Making the finish on the body of the guitar to look like it survived an inferno doesn't add a thing for me.

Oh, Rhett, how could you?

I have a Carson Hess broadcaster that is indistinguishable from a real broadcaster. I even have a 1950 champ lap steel pickup in the bridge and the old wiring harness. I love it even more than my real 1957 and 1966 telecasters.

I must admit I never looked at reliced guitars since I considered them to be fake like a made-up story, but then I ran into this Del-Tone Jazzmaster, just so slightly reliced, lovely broken in feeling, handwound pups, Descendant bridge en trem, ... Next time you visit Holland, try one at TFOA and you'll understand what I mean. I'm a happily married man 'cause my wife understood why I "needed" this guitar 😁 And did I mention the smell?

I love relicd guitars man. I sort of get the guys who say wear in your own guitar. HOWEVER, screw that. I didn't relic that old ass sg I got at a guitar sale.... I bought it cuz it looked cool as hell. That's all you need.

Just use a matte/satin finish?

Very much agree with your take on this Rhett! I used to feel this shame to like the broken in and beat up look. Now I truly see the work these custom shops are doing as art in its own right. It’s beautiful and anyone that takes issue with it I feel has some issues they need to deal with. I actually have a couple vintage guitars and while I love the honest wear, it’s not MY wear and I never really feel like the guitar is mine, at least not for some time. This doesn’t happen with the custom shop stuff. I feel instantly at home and I’m happy to let my additional bumps and bruises make it mine as we go. You guys can keep the pristine ones, relic mine and relic them GOOD!

How come nobody relics a PRS premium top ? Would play so much better.

I just think it's cool that custom shops exist at all. Because it means when *YOU* spend *YOUR* money, *YOU* can get what *YOU* want. Down to the last detail -- as long as you're willing to pay for it. And to hell with what other people think -- they are not spending your money. Let them spend their money on what they want. I personally wouldn't get something that has that much wear on it -- but that's just my opinion. However, I *do* like the idea of making the neck and fretboard feel worn in, because it does play better. I'm sure if someone wanted to, they could get the custom shop to "relic" only the neck and fretboard like that, while leaving the body of the guitar looking brand new. I just don't get why people are judgy about something they're not paying for. Let people spend their own money the way they see fit.

Been watching your channel finally bought a course! Excited to dig in

In the 80s, we relic'd our own jeans

Relic neck yes, high-quality relic of the body to include finish checking yes but a large portion of the finish having been worn off or removed or whatever that is you have on that telly is a no for me.

Yeah no sorry you can talk a mile of words but this 'feels already worn in' argument is just a fancy way of saying 'well it looks vintage so now I can feel some kind of way' which is saying YES in fact it is all about aesthetics. No shame if you love a relic guitar but let's not pretend if actually plays better because somebody scuffed the paint and hardware a bit.

Well i have reliced 2 squier strats…I love it. They feel good, they look great and guess what…I will keep relicing guitars for fun, because i enjoy playing a broken in instrument and they look dope❤ 100% with you Rhett. But I also have my Gibson LP Studio that I got as a gift back in 1996. That one I leave it as it is which is also 30 years old and I will let it age acordingly. ❤

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.

So relic necks feel better to play which is why they should relic the body?

I would never pay extra for a new reliced guitar, but id be happy to buy a relic used. Just can't fathom paying more for someone to damage my instrument

Artificially relic'd guitars just feel like cheating imo. I get the aesthetic I just think it'd look way cooler and it's 1000x more fulfilling if it happens naturally after years of performing with it. I've never personally had a problem with a neck getting sticky or anything even remotely close to that with any kind of finish on a neck, and I sweat a ton. I have necks that are very high quality with what looks like no lacquer, and ones that look like they were made in a lollipop factory. But I've never experienced the "sticky sweat hands" like what seems every other guitarist in the world is prone to. If a guitar comes artificially relic'd I get that, but don't go artificially relicing good instruments because you don't know how to wash your hands properly lol Plus 9/10 homemade relicing jobs look absolutely atrocious, so do your research if you're considering it

Excellent work!

I have an uncle in the business. He's been playing guitar since the mis 60s. He went on some tours with earth wind and fire, he is a retired college level music theory teacher. We were talking about this a while back. I brought it again when we saw this video. He was saying that replaced guitars are just a good way to get ripped off. Yeah, they might be decent for now, but if u buy the thing, then in 10 or 20 years, now u don't have a guitar anymore. It's wore out. You're the first musician ive heard not agree that it's not different than buying pre-ripped jeans. It's very much like that. The stolen valor thing the one guy said, too. If youre a musician, ur guitar looks like that cause you played it. Not because you paid 10 times more just to fit in with that crowd. Ive also heard about a dozen guitar players say that something like a new, reliced telecaster, doesn't play anything like a real telecaster from the 50s or 60s. So if not even really getting the worn in sound people are paying for. Ive heard the difference in person, hooked up to the same gear. It was an old tube amp. Don't know the brand. But, even people who don't play guitar could tell the difference.

FYI, dried Nitrocellulose, itself, is NOT toxic, nor does it have an odor, but the solvents and some of the modifiers used in the lacquer can be.

Why buy a worn guitar for a higher price than a new clean guitar? Many guitars come with great satin finish necks. Just have the fingerboard rolled if you absolutely need more comfort. I'm with Paul Reed Smith related to artificially aged instruments.

I bought a used Roadworn 2003 MIM Telecaster. Plays great & sounds great for me a bass player. My 1997 Custom Shop Jazz '60s Relic "Cunetto" is in the first Relic series in Basses. Just like it was when I bought it.

Can you give the link to your video ?

Up until a couple years ago, I was one of those guys who thought relicing was just a cosmetic thing for posers. Then I heard the arguments about the ultra smooth feel and playability.. However the most compelling argument was the fact that with a relic you can have a top-notch guitar that you don't feel afraid to wail on. All of that being said, I would NEVER pay $5K for a guitar. Not because it isn't worth it; I just don't have that kind of money to spend on a guitar. A couple years ago I bought a Sire T7 "Tele" for $450.00 brand new. The fit and finish is perfect... not good, not great.... perfect. But mainly, Sire rolls their fretboard edges just like a $5K relic, and it is INCREDIBLY comfortable. Plus, they use an ultra-smooth matte finish on the roasted maple neck. You would swear you were holding the neck of fantastic relic.

Yesterday I was worried because I accidentally made a tiny scratch on my vintera telecaster 's headstock but now it's ok thanks to this video 😉

Great video Rhett!

We need that meme format with the bell curve where the guys on the edges are saying "just buy a guitar you like and play it" and the guy in the center is making this video.

I got a custom shop masterbuild last year, the Blungeon. Ordered it before the prices went up. Custom shop guitars now cost what I paid for the masterbuild. This guitar made me a better player all around.

I like the idea of light relic finish. Aging of the finish in the right places, rolled edges, slightly worn knobs, switches and just a few small dings and scratches so the next ding adds to the effect rather than being that first damage to a pristine guitar. I’ve had a 73 Les Paul Custom for 35 years and avoided and significant damage so it has worn with me the way I played and care for guitars. I use it as a template to lightly relic some of my other newer guitars so they feel more personal to me.

If you had to choose between a 25 year old guitar or a modern reliced high end custom shop, what would you choose?

I agree with a lot of the folks here. A rolled fretboard edge is not relicing, it’s just one aspect of hand work in a high quality instrument. I build guitars as a hobby. I roll the edges and make sure the neck feels nice and smooth. I don’t do anything to make them look old and I don’t consider those steps to be relicing.

I refer to relic my own guitars by playing them. Next you'll saying relic cars are better.

I'm planning to roll the edges of a couple of my guitars and plan to use your previous videos as a guide -- but any chance you could do a more comprehensive video in the future to "breaking in" the necks, featuring different types of wood, finishes, binding, etc? It would be extremely helpful for those of us (like me) that only have about 40 years left on earth.

During lockdown I did a bit of a project where I had a go at trying to build myself a partscaster that had the look of a guitar Richard Thompson played through the 1970’s, 1980’s before he started playing other guitars, before he started playing other vintage Strats. I found a couple of Sunburst finish Squier Bodies, one that was already a little worn shall we say & another that had been cared for a bit more, but was a good price. The newer one already came with a maple neck Found myself another maple neck. Chose myself a couple of different sets of authentic Fender pickups, and parts. Then started the process of sanding of the top layer of gloss, that all poly finishes tend to have. All is fine at this point. In fact, rather like the look of going from a gloss finish to a silk finish. Well, somewhere between silk & Matt finish tbh. However, this is where quite expectedly I got to the issues of using a Polyester finish guitar, is as you sand through the top layers you get to quite a thick base layer and then finally to the wood. And you are then faced with a choice, do you give a hard line with no slope in the finish, or do you give a more natural wear, with a more gradual slope, but with a less authentic final look from a distance, but more realistic close up to how a poly finish might possibly wear. In the end I went for the latter, whiles still trying to still maintain the wear looks. I also came up with a solution to age the revealed natural wood where the finish was totally worn away. Thing is, Fender are never going to issue a Richard Thompson signiture for that period we all know from the late 70’s into mid 80’s and all those great albums. I own a Japanese Fender Telecaster JD like Jerry Donahue used. With its four way switching. I’ve made myself a Richard Thompson RT Strat. The hindsight though is that given the finances I’d probably just get myself Tex Mex or American made Fender Strat and all I would actually do is just knock off the top layer of gloss and make sure the neck was comfortable and simply allow my own wear marks to occur over time , from that point. There’s actually no real need to try to get the exact look of something. Simply choosing the right pickups, switching etc to try and achieve the tone that might be in the head is the best aim. Doing your own relic project is a great way of getting that particular itch out of a system. Btw, the resulting Strats I put together were not bad, one of which I decided to go off on a tangent a bit with my own little twist on the theme.

I just purchased one of your courses… thank you for the invite, discount and everything I love about this channel. Blessings to you and your family … enjoy this Independence Day everyone 🙌🏻🫡🇺🇸

Interesting take. Well explained as always.

My issue is that every single time I want a relic version of a guitar I like (because I prefer them as well) the price goes up in a way that makes them unattainable.

Pre-ripped jeans? That’s all I buy! On the topic of guitars though, I was never a relic fan until recently. I bought the EVH ’78 Eruption model - now I know it’s a “cheap” relic from Mexico but I adore it, the dings and worn through bits, and the smooth neck is stunning! It’s also a lot nicer (IMO) to play than the shiny Stripe series. I’ll never be able to afford a Custom Shop relic, but the Mike McCready Strat is high on my list as it looks awesome and I bet it feels even better.

It’s like buying a used skateboard so you look like you can skate

Music Man uses some kind of waxy, oil rub finish that feels like it's been played for years, but still looks nice. Eventually, there may be a trend with no regard for aesthetics. No burl this or flame that. No paint or stain- just the most select tone wood and best fitment.

I love a relic job that mimics years of lovingly accumulated honest play wear. That tele’s finish looks like it’s been subjected to abject abuse, vandalism and neglect. Not the same thing.

I had an early Fender "Time Machine" series '56 Stratocaster, it was a great guitar, played and sounded super. I played a really early Vince Cunetto reliced Telecaster that a friend had and it was pretty nice too. Though I don't currently own one I am all for anybody buying a well made relic guitar, some of the DIY jobs I've seen can be pretty hideous though. Nice video, thanks for posting.

I have a 1952 Goldtop. My lifetime guitar. It sounds amazing, but looks even better all greened out over 70 plus years. I recently went into a local shop that I frequent and picked up a used Gretsch which is my first Gretsch and I in honeymoon mode with it right now. I have owned dozens of Gibson Les Paul R9' R8's and R7's. I can appreciate the difference in price for them (maybe not so much now, but when I started buying them the difference in price was not so astounding) But I could never bring myself to pay 5k plus for a bolt on neck guitar! As I was leaving the guy I work with said "if you want one of those custom shop Fender's Ill make you a great deal!" I grabbed a 52 Tele with a humbucker in the neck. I have a 51 Tele Vintage Reissue 2 which is FANTASTIC! As soon as I grabbed the neck on the custom shop I thought damn I am in trouble! I felt great and when I plugged it into a Vox AC10 it was alive! He looked around the corner in suprise and said "thats the BRIDGE PICKUP?!" It was just a phenomenal guitar. So much I started calculating what I could move/trade to come up with the cash. He did offer me a great deal. I havent pulled the trigger but it does keep me up at nights at times! I gig and record so I am not a collector per se. But in my opinion there IS a difference. Do you need to spend that much? No. But Damn that Tele was nice!

My counter argument IS : Everyone has different acid and oil levels in their bodies . So everyone’s degree of relic will differ . We all hold the guitar differently , so the touch points will age in different areas . I come from a saxophone background and some people like unlacquered horns because of the relic look . But once you touch an unlacquered saxophone , your body acid/oil will stain the metal and no two horns will ever look the same . The difference is that a new saxophone’s unlacquered brass will look relic as the individual touches it . I have 3 unlacquered saxophones and they all look different after being exposed to the elements.

I saw a custom shop that was relic-ready. It had a very thin layer of paint, meant to show wear.

If it were ALL about the feel, everyone would soften the neck and that's it.

Agree on the comfort of a non-sticky neck and rolled edges, but I don't consider that alone to make a relic'd guitar. That's a design/build choice by the guitar maker. I have zero use for any kind of fake cosmetic aging. I want my guitars to look new despite years of gigs and playing. And they (mostly) do. YMMV...

bought a new tele, took it all apart, tied it a rope, to my truck bumper, dragged it down a dirt road for about 5 miles . did that a few times.... looking better.

I can’t think of any other word than “poser” for people that buy relic guitars. “Relic” it yourself by playing the hell out of it for several years. Use it as a tool and not an art piece.

Glad this weeks post is non controversial! 😂 I bought a ‘66 Telecaster in the late 80’s that was truly worn in. No finish on the back of the neck, checking, dings, chipped, worn, rust, stains etc. Have no idea if it was all real? Part of the reason I bought it…REGARDLESS, I wasn’t the one who had put those miles on the guitar! That guitar had a whole life before I got it. I didn’t feel bad for playing it, or guilty for not being the one who put the miles on. In that same time period people were already making their guitars less pretty (think PUNK ROCK), abusing the finish, adding stickers, taking the finish off, routing the “wrong” pickups into the “wrong” guitars. SRV, Eddie Van Halen, Joe Strummer and countless others fucked up their guitars on purpose, with purpose or just ‘cause! I think relics can be very cool. FYI, I would never look at that Tele and think it’s a real ‘52.

Another aspect of a relic instrument is you may be less bitchy when you knock it against something. It's simply adding more character.

Just bought a brand new guitar for $129 and sanded off certain areas of the body and wooled the back of the neck = Relic Guitar. Now it's worth Thousands and am not afraid to smack it on a door frame. Thx Rhett for the Advice.

Which video did they steel wool the neck of a guitar, I can't find it on Rhetts channel

I switched to satin and raw necks a while back and then satin finishes on the entire guitar. Now that feel is hard to get away from so I totally get it. Very inviting to play a little more often and definitely not worried about a ding or scratch. I am going to try a little less expensive guitar in full relic mode and then we’ll see how it goes. Great video!

I would make a distinction between performance enhancement (rounding/wooling the neck) and relic (aesthetic "blemishes"/aging etc)..

I’ve got a lot of wear and tear on my guitars, I honestly don’t remember any stories that came from them. I had a Guild acoustic that took a tumble off a stage and the back popped off. The only story I got from that was learning to not have a guitar repaired from the shop I went to.

I’ve never understood this argument about poly finishes being sticky. If my hands get sweaty poly becomes more slippery. Where as on my Gibson’s, sometimes the neck or body feels tacky or “sticky” like you say. The older poly finished necks from the 90s or the later satin finished ones seem to be the best for me as they will smooth out with playing over time.

there's a market for it, there's an aesthetic for it- done