Printable View
I am seriously considering having my SG refinished.
I like the Faded Worn finish, but I confess that I'm thinking about having it redone in heritage cherry. There is this very fine luthier in São Paulo who is trained and certified by Martin and Gibson (trained in the US), quite famous and well known.
But at the same time I refrain from having a new Gibson altered in any way.
What would YOU do?
As with most things related to guitars and gear, I normally wait for a while to see if "this is a passing thing or not". If you're sure that the current finish is going to keep bugging you then might as well see what it's going to cost. That would be my next step anyway. Second opinions ( especially from a qualified luthier) are often helpful in able to gain new perspective. The nervous-Nelly in me also has to consider "What if I get this refinished and I don't like the end result as much as I thought I would and/ or what do I do if something actually gets damaged in the process?". Would the refinish be worth it if something were to go wrong? My most perfectly sounding, playing, and set-up guitars I would not let anyone touch due to the possibility of something else getting messed up. Personally, I change my mind fairly frequently in regards to what colors I think that I would like to have so again... if it were me, I would wait a while and/ or consult with the luthier.
I wouldn't paint it heritage cherry.
Pelham blue or TV yellow, I could entertain that thought.
Man... Pelham blue would look sweet! Sorry lol.
:ola
Color is personal. Choose what you like.
I am a fan of mods to new guitars, or lesser recent vintage ones. Unless it is a fine restoration, altering good vintage makes me nervous. But a new one? Go for broke!
I wouldn't touch it (says the man with a Strat that he bought new and has replaced the body, neck, pickups, electronics, tuners, pickguard...).
Quote:
Originally Posted by VibroCount
Thing is, the new ones WILL be vintage in a couple of decades... I wonder if I'll like saying "I had it refinished back in '17" rather than "it's entirely pure. It's a Faded Worn Brown 61 Reissue, that's how Gibson made them in 2012"
simple. buy another one in cherry. problem solved
you're welcome. I accept cash, gold, pelts, psychedelic consumables as payment.
When I owned my Les Paul Standard Faded, the finish bothered me the whole time. I went the way of selling it and buying my LP Traditional. However, I thought so often about getting the Faded refinished.
If you love that guitar but find that the finish bugs you, definitely get it refinished. I LOVE heritage cherry SGs.
The other option is to sell it and spend til it hurts to get an SG in the finish you want. I'm glad that I plopped down the money on my Les Paul Traditional. I'm so much more happy with it, and I never think that I wish it were different. It's a nice feeling to know that I have guitars that I wouldn't change for anything. It wasn't like that with my Faded--I was never fully happy but tried for a long time to love that guitar. Eventually, I grew to dislike it, even resent it. Like a baddddd marriage partner--you try to make it work, but you develop a hatred for that person.
Sergio,
I'm sure this will somebody's nose out of joint - but you did ask.
When it comes to refinishing, the cost is usually prohibitive and when you're done, it will still be an SG with a maple board.
Use the money instead to procure a proper Les Paul. I personally don't enjoy SGs or LP double-cuts. In my experience they're neck heavy, and after you strap one on the nut is in another time zone. They're awesome if you're playing on the 17th fret, but how often does that happen in real life unless you're in a Molly Hatchet tribute band? If you like your SG you'll go bananas over a Standard, or a even Studio. Trust me.
Now, having said all that, if you LOVE the guitar and don't care, get it repainted. For me, a guitar needs to have some shine and flash to look good onstage. I find the faded finishes to be ... lacking in stage presence. Remember, the average audience members listens as much with their eyes as their ears.
Finally, as an alternative, maybe you can find some cute hippy artist chick and have her recreate Clapton's "The Traveler" or you're own interpretation of it. That would be a cheap alternative and you'd have something truly unique. Seems like a faded would be a great canvas for something like that.
All above is my opinion. Yours is entitled to vary.
Chuck
Chuck is not wrong. I think you'd love a Les Paul. But if you're set on an SG, put out the bucks to buy a Standard or if you like the sound, a higher priced reissue. I'm like Chuck--I think audiences like a glossy finish. Even if you have to save up for a while, get the guitar with which you'lll be 100% happy. Rather than go through a series of cheaper guitars, it's better to spend more on one that you can truly love.Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
Sérgio, I'm really torn on this issue. Part of me wants to say, "It's your guitar, so do with it as you please." The other part of me, the part that keeps all his guitars the way they came (I had to debate buying my Aztec Gold Stratocaster because the middle pickup had been replaced with a Fender Custom Shop Texas Special as the original had become inoperative. Not that you'd notice by looking at it) wants to say, "A purist never changes an original."
I think the biggest question would be, "Does changing the color also change the sound?"
To me, a "vintage" reissue will never be vintage. It will always be a reissue. My 1999 AVRI '62 Jazz Bass will never be a 1960's stack knob. I had zero regrets replacing the mint green pickguard with a black one. (The look of mint green on Dakota Red was vomit inducing.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sérgio
Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore Angler
I agree with 90%.
The 10% I feel differently is the part about the Les Paul. I've owned and played some, and although they're outstanding guitars, you just don't compare them To SGs, it's an apples and Oranges thing To me. The SG is a particular taste, just as the Lester
Dude you are a lawyer, Right?
Think about it like this if a case you are about to consider counseling is a no win situation but you know for a fact the person is innocent. would you still take it? If you thought for one second you could help this person clear their name but in fact know it's still a no win would it be worth your time?
The same applies to the guitar in question it is what it is... Keep it play the shit outta it save you money buy one in the finish you want..
sell it and buy the one you want.
at the end of the day it's just a guitar. you don't commit to a guitar like you do a spouse, child or pet.
Agreed SG's and Pauls are apples and oranges. I love both. Paint it if it makes you giggle! Life is too short to worry about upsetting the cosmos. If it makes you enjoy it more personalize it.
:applauditQuote:
Originally Posted by renderit
There are too dad-gum many people out there who want to make people do things THEIR way. Screw 'em.:kick
As much as I value all the opinions given above (I asked for them after all!), I think Old strummer and Renderit nailed it.
Guys, I never thought of painting the SG to make it "vintage correct" in the first place. A 61RI SG will never be (even the CS VOS ones aren't strictly VOS).
The idea was to customize it! I like the heritage cherry color, that's all. I don't see the faded "worn" finish or the baked maple board as problems. Maple is actually a great wood for necks and boards!
I like the faded finish and the color, the guitar is beautiful, plays nice and does the job:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/BE...0=w477-h635-no
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/S0...9=w932-h610-no
Hell, it's a Gibson SG, it's two 57s on a mahogany body with two pointy horns and a "wrong" strap button. No big deal, really. It isn't any more different from an old one than a current SG Special is from the 60s ones that had p-90s on... It's a modern Gibson guitar.
Anyway, I've made up my mind: I'll leave it alone and see how it ages. If I think it's not beautiful to my eyes, I'll just have it sprayed and then I'll decide about the color.
I plead guilty on this one. I bond with my guitars even more than I do with pets. No pet will ever outlive or be a part of me as my guitars are.Quote:
Originally Posted by redisburning
Quote:
Originally Posted by VibroCount
My mother language isn't English, so sometimes I can't express myself too clearly.
When I say that it will be "vintage" I don't mean "vintage like collectible or valuable", I mean it will be old and belong to a certain period: these faded 61RIs were made from 2012 to 2014 IIRC, and in 30 years someone will be able to hold one, show it to his son and say "this is how Gibson made the 61 reissues back then, they were faded, had a matte headstock and were available in worn brown, worn cherry and ebony."
I think I understood you. But a vintage reissue will always, no matter how old it gets, be just a reissue of an instrument considered a classic. (If people value "stock" -- then why change tubes in a vintage amp?) Is a Japanese reissue '62 Jazzmaster more valuable or less valuable with the stock pickups (which look and sound nothing like any other Jazzmaster made) and stock pots (which are cheap and small)? Or does it become more valuable with other more accurate pickups and pots?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sérgio
There are many reasons to buy a guitar. One is to play it. Often, as we play our guitars, we want to make them "better" and better can mean many different things. It might be to look the way we want it to look. To sound the way we want it to sound. To feel the way we want it to feel.
Another reason to buy a guitar is for investment. We hope our choice of guitar will become worth more than what we pay for it in the future. Often this means as stock and as perfect as the day it was manufactured.
I doubt any reissue will ever be worth even half (most likely, less than a tenth) of the model it emulates. Keeping a reissue "vintage" might be nice if you like the exact look, feel, and tone of the reissue, but -- to me -- this seems like the perfect instrument to personalize.
I still don't think it will have the cache that a non-vintage reissue will have. You seem to really love this guitar but are seriously considering the refin. I wouldn't let the non-stock idea keep me from getting it like I wanted it. Of course, if you really like the matte finish, then by all means leave it stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sérgio
I have to admit that I don't like matte finishes, so my advice is highly subjective.
That's definitely a way of seeing things.Quote:
Originally Posted by VibroCount
Regarding the 61 SG Reissues, however, things get just a tad more complex, in my own point of view... These reissues aren't meant to be strictly a "reissue of an instrument considered a classic", like a VOS Custom Shop 61' Les Paul is... Gibson USA makes Sg editions that have many features of the old '61s, but they are definitely modern SGs, in fact. They have no vibrato devices, they have modern Nashville bridges, one ring snot colored tuners, different necks, different colors (considering the standard colors Gibson offered back in the early '60s)...
That's why many people see those as basically and alternative to the Standard model of the year, one with more "vintage" features, but definitely a modern player.
And it being so, in MY own opinion, as they sum up decades, they can become kinda something you can date and tag...
Anyway, like you said, this is just breeze-shooting (and it's cool! That's what makes guitar forums such a relaxing place), 'cause I am a guitar player, not an aficionado. I buy whatever plays good and sounds good, as long as they're cool for classic rock and blues, I mean strat, SG, Les Paul... I just don't fancy superstrats and such.
This '61 RI played and felt better than the Specials and Standards I tried, so I bought it and play it live.
Until I saw these I would have agreed. Tell me this don't get you goin'!Quote:
Originally Posted by ch willie
https://reverb.com/item/6072445-d-an...ftfD_BwE&pla=1
Note to self: Do not clicky on any links from ren.
Now where did did I bury that coffee can of 10's?
:lmao:
Okay, have to admit that looks great.Quote:
Originally Posted by renderit
I like him too, his posts are awesome, aren't they?Quote:
Originally Posted by CoyotesGator
P.S. I too want to reach for the pile of dollar bills under my mattress after checking out that link
Well I'm a sucker for gloss or matte, either one... so I didn't stand a chance.
:starts looting sofa for quarters:
oooo, noice, veddy noiceQuote:
Originally Posted by renderit
Here is the ch willie version...
https://reverb.com/item/6503606-d-an...lectric-guitar
I've lusted many times for exactly that model. You know me, brother! I do want a semi-hollow one day, and the 335 I want is out of my price range for now. I'd play that d'Angelico with no shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by renderit
I crave for a Midtown!Quote:
Originally Posted by ch willie
http://www.gibson.com/Products/Elect...-Standard.aspx
Stock guitars will always be worth more than modded ones, regardless of whether their vintage or not. But, I'm an inveterate modder. A guitar is worth more to me if I like the feel and sound. I couldn't care less if it's stock or not, I'm not a collector. Just my thoughts
Couldn't say it better myself. I've modded with pickups 3 of my 7 guitars, and they're worth more to me than they would have been with the stock pickups. I don't plan to ever sell any of them. After the pickup swap, they became life-long keepers.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckocaster
I understand and appreciate stock guitars, but they're worthless to me if they don't play and sound good.
There are many modifications which can be undone as easily as they are done. Pickguard and other plastics swaps, pickup changes, different strings, strap locks, etc. I think a key is to retain the original parts so if the time comes when the modifier needs to sell or give away the instrument, the recipient can keep the modifications or restore it to as close to stack as possible.
No one could restore my Strat to stock with original paint, because I have added pinstriping to the body. It would require stripping paint and refinishing it. But everything else could be restored in less than an hour or two's work.
Here's a thought... if more guitars are modded as the player likes, it drives up the price for the fewer stock guitars which remain.
Here's another... if you have a 1927 Ford Model T roadster, it may be more collectible if it is stock than if it was made into a hot rod, but it would be far less reliable and impossible to drive on modern freeways. I think I might prefer the one with the OHC V-8 than the original hand crank four. The stock would be nice in a museum, the hotrod be more of a gas to drive. (That's a bit extreme, but what am I if not an extremist?)
I've only had two guitars that were modified. The first was my 1957 Gibson ES-225, which I had to have the tuners replaced because time had worn them to a crumble, and the tuning pots, for much the same reason. Those mods were necessitated by the need to have a playable guitar.
The other is my 50th Anniversary MIM Strat, which I bought with the middle pickup replaced (using a Fender Custom Shop Texas Special) because the original had become inoperative. It's a perfect match cosmetically, so I consider it a wash. Every other guitar I've owned has remained stock. If I don't like the way they sound, I won't keep them.
All good points VibroCount! And I totally understand and appreciate that mentality, I try not to be too invasive. Pup and guard swaps are usually as far as I will go, more than that and I'll buy something already butchered or build my own. Guess I forgot to mention that
I don't think I have a guitar that's stock (my Martin acoustic is stock, but not my electrics). I look for something that suits me well overall then tweak it a bit to my liking. The fewer tweaks the better- sometimes just a small wiring change (like so called '50s wiring). Sometimes its a matter of improving quality, usually of electronic components.
To be honest, as much gear as I have, I don't have much to mod anymore. I only have one piece of Fender gear- my '66 Vibrolux Reverb and one Gibson (unless you count my '64 Epiphone Olympic and recent ES-335 Pro). The Gibson is my '59 ES-225TD.
My Tele, Strat, Princeton Reverb, tweed Champ and Deluxe are all really nice clones, mostly built by me and tweaked to my liking. Although you might consider them to be pretty extreme mods, they're pretty close to the originals. Other than the ES-225, my Gibsons have been replaced by Carvins.
I just do what works best for me (that does not include refinishing guitars).
I like this forum. We can disagree, and understand why the other people take their positions and there is no threat to us for having a different outlook.
The original post asked for opinions on refinishing his guitar, and we have all presented logical alternatives: some yes, some no, and many in between. And no one chose to attack the person with the "other" point of view.
Glorious!
I was seriously considering one of those when a used Carvin SH645 showed up used so I bought it. Past experience with Carvins lead me to believe that I'd prefer it- plus it has stainless steel frets. What an awesome guitar! One thing to consider is that these chambered mahogany guitars sound more like a Les Paul than they do an ES-335. More focused, less "woody" or hollow. They can be great guitars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sérgio
I'm still lusting for a really good ES-335!
Exactly! Refreshing to be able to have a civil conversationQuote:
Originally Posted by VibroCount
well, always might be a bit much.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckocaster
put PAFs in a gibson and it's at least worth what the PAFs are worth.
but more generally yeah if youre looking to get money out of your guitar it's typically better to leave it alone.
personally I dont buy into the "Ill keep it forever" mindset just like others dont buy into picking up guitars you may not keep for very long (which is something I've definitely done just to try them out). Im sure there's room in the world for both.
FWIW I'd rather dump a guitar I dont like than try and make it better. I save the mods for my really good ones (like the PIO caps and Wizz pickups in my lester)
When you have guitars that feel right and sound right, no reason you shouldn't have a keep it for life mentality. I LIKED my American Standard Strat and Tele, but with a pup change, they really came to life, and now, I can't imagine wanting any others. So yeah, barring financial ruin, I'll be keeping them for life.
Ouch! :haQuote:
Originally Posted by redisburning
Quote:
Originally Posted by VibroCount
Where do I sign?
You're still not going to get your $ out of it, original PAF's or not. I'm not concerned about recouping my money, I work on my guitars for fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by redisburning
And totally agree with your last statement! I tried in the past, but you can't take a crappy guitar and make it sound amazing. I buy guitars I already like, and then tweak them from there. Gotta have a good solid foundation for any work.
Cheers buddy 👍
I'm late to the discussion but I'll put in my 2¢ anyhow. Good guitar or not, the SG in question is not an expensive or rare one. I'd say do whatever you want w/it. If you do some of the work yourself you might learn something, & if nothing else, you will make the guitar unique & personalized.
Hopefully, Sergio is not all thumbs like me. And I once saw the result of a guy like me who had better leave it to the pros. He tried to sand the finish off his Epiphone Les Paul Std. He made huge divots in it. Looked like absolute hell. I tried to make him feel better and told him, "Well, at least it's unique, and it has character." He glowered at me. Ha ha, he was totally hurt that he'd done that to his guitar and couldn't afford one that he wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogs
If you can do that kind of work, it's great. If you're like me, though, seek a professional.
Yes, many imports are finished w/some sort of poly & require great care when stripping because what is strong enough to melt the finish will also melt binding & inlay. I would not use sanding to remove large areas of finish.
But Gibson USA still uses lacquer so that should be relatively easy to get off. A heat gun is an effective way to remove finish as opposed to chemical strippers
After listening carefully to all of you and talking to the luthier in São Paulo, I decided to leave the SG as it is.
If it wears funny and I don't like how it looks, I'll have the job done.
Cogs, I don't think I'd risk doing it myself, I'm all thumbs and have no experience at all... Since even these ordinary Gibsons and Fenders are awfully expensive here, I wouldn't risk damaging one of them.