Tech tips from Stew Mac-this just doesn't seem right...

[boobtube21]

I get these tech tip emails from Stew Mac every so often, as I suppose anyone who's ordered from them does. Just now I got this one:

http://www.stewmac.com/tsarchive/ts0129.html

This is just a knee jerk reaction but...does this seem borderline unethical to anyone? I know this forum has a big problem with discussions on how to make your own Fender headstock decals...and understandably so.

This to me is almost worse because it is pretty much an attempt to disguise the fact that the back of the guitar was replaced...so it isn't just a fake part like a neck or knob or tuning peg, it's basically the whole guitar. Now the next unsuspecting buyer can be told that the guitar is all original (if the seller is dishonest enough to do so) and if they don't know what to look for on the label, get duped out of a lot of money.

Add to that, StewMac is basically instructing anyone and everyone on how to do this...it just doesn't seem right to me. Again, just my knee jerk reaction.

Thoughts?

[chuckocaster]

there in lies the dilemma; it's really nice to have a "correct" looking guitar, but at what cost. there are some many thieves out there that you usually can't do this stuff. i'd imagine though that most of the people who subscribe to the email (i do) are trustworthy enough to know when and where to use this type of knowledge. the hard part is that i don't trust anyone. i've been burned a couple times, and i'm sure others on here have too.

[boobtube21]

That's just it Chuck. If you're doing it for yourself, or ask a luthier to do it just for your own preference, it's harmless enough. But for the potential buyer down the line, there's well, potential for swindling.

I just feel like there should be some indication left behind that work was done, that the instrument is not all original. Like an additional sticker or an ink stamp or something. But, the owner may rightfully have a problem with that. A dilemma indeed.

[chuckocaster]

double edged sword amigo! we're on the same page dude. any guitar i work on i sharpie my logo and date in. not huge as to detract from the internals, but enough that people will know if it's every opened up. that's the best i can do.

[Cogs]

I used to know a tech that would screw an eyelet into the heel of every neck he worked on so he could hang them from a shelf. I knew I would never let him work on my stuff.
It's not like that particular label is being used by Gibson at this time, or that someone would go to all the trouble to countefeit some obscure guitar that has only mediocre collectability. Dan Erlewine is the consummate professional & is only interested in restoring a an instrument to its original state. It's too bad someone might use that technology for evil instead of good, but as I said today in another place, you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater because then all you have is a wet, critically injured baby.

[Bassbob]

Well, we spend tons of money making guitars period "correct" and in a lot of cases it is very hard to tell that the guitar isn't original. People who know what they're looking at know though. The moral of the story is do your homework before buying a used guitar.

[TT100]

I get those SM emails too.

If the intent is to mislead or misrepresent, I'd call it unethical. When I built my Weber kit I printed up a label similar to that of a Fender. Obviously not real and I had a typo in the Power Consumption but it was in fun. The buyer knew it was a kit and nothing more.



Stuck on to tack varnish then lightly stained.

TT

[phantomman]

Great looking tube chart, TT!

Lord knows, I've made my share of repros......



But I never attempt to pass a re-creation off as an authentic period piece.

As others have mentioned, such skill and technology is a double-edge sword.

[Mesotech]

It's not like counterfeiting money, or is it?

I don't see the harm of doing this for your own personal satisfaction, with no intent to profit from those ignorant of the fact. However, therein lies the problem. At some point, somewhere (and perhaps after you're gone) the piece will be sold, and most likely purported to be original (due to lack of prior knowledge by the seller or reseller). If the replica item is really good, it make take numerous sales before it is discovered. A case in point, there is a well known Les Paul burst floating around that is not authentic. However, it was bought and sold many times by people who believed it was. It was "authenticated" numerous times by various experts, and still it was 'fubar'. Numerous years later, another burst was discovered with the same serial number, and a documented lineage that was undisputable. The 'fubar' burst instantly dropped in value once the real guitar was identified. Someone lost a ton of bucks, and noe one in the purchase/selling chain was trying to scam anyone (except for possibly the first seller or buyer). I'm sure the same or similar has happened to vintage 'anythings' over time.

Even if you leave some unobvious tell tale indicator, it might be dismissed in the future, or ignored. If you're very concerned about someone being misled in the future, it's best not to try and replicate anything.