-
Patrick I love how our arguments get better now that they're in bold font
In two posts we have material for 5 or 6 new threads.... only to come to the same end conclusion.....
-
06-26-2012 07:57 AM
-
Don't forget about Chet Atkins" DA. A total redo. No history lost there.
-
I dont see the validity of that comparison at all. Chet's DA is an extremely valuable part of history because of Chet and his importance to music today. Not because of its originality as an instrument.
If a similar guitar with added pickups, bigsby etc would appear without such a connection, anyone would remove the non original parts in an attempt to restrore it. Right ?
As for the teardrop ; if I had been Chinery I'd rather had kept it in the original state. Maybe it had some problems with the neck set or bracing or whatever I dont know. But Chinery had enough players. It was such an unique piece; why mess with it. Or refin while it still had the original lacquer. It is not that it had been in a fire or so. Here 's a pic before the restauration
Last edited by fws6; 06-26-2012 at 09:41 AM.
-
Yeah . . . how 'bout that bold face font? I guess it happened because I multiquoted off of your original post, which was done in bold face? I guess we're just "bold faced" guys.
Originally Posted by fws6
Patrick I love how our arguments get better now that they're in bold font
In two posts we have material for 5 or 6 new threads.... only to come to the same end conclusion.....
-
In this picture and from that distance, it really doesn't show how bad the guitar actually was. It was a total disaster. It wasn't just in "player" condition. It was an absolute mess. Refinishing it was, in my opinion quite appropriate and the only right thing to do. If left to continue to deteriate . . . as it most certainly would have, it wou;d have been lost to us all . . . forever. Scott did the right thing. Originally Posted by fws6
I dont see the validity of that comparison at all. Chet's DA is an extremely valuable part of history because of Chet and his importance to music today. Not because of its originality as an instrument.
If a similar guitar with added pickups, bigsby etc would appear without such a connection, anyone would remove the non original parts in an attempt to restrore it. Right ?
As for the teardrop ; if I had been Chinery I'd rather had kept it in the original state. Maybe it had some problems with the neck set or bracing or whatever I dont know. But Chinery had enough players. It was such an unique piece; why mess with it. Or refin while it still had the original lacquer. It is not that it had been in a fire or so. Here 's a pic before the restauration
-
It was a total disaster ? absolute mess ? what does that mean ? I looked up an old thread on this guitar and understood all plastic parts were detreritorated; several grain direction cracks, and some playwear through the finish. I understand now that the refin happened three years prior to Chinery's ownership too so nothing to do with him.
-
fws6 . . . good stuff man. Thanks for the update on the refin. I was under the (informed) impression that Scott had it refin'd right after he bought it and before he took possession of it. Thanks for the clarification.
But, can you see now that it would have done no one any good without the refin?
-
I agree. I hadn't seen the guitar before restoration. It doesn't seem to require a full refinish.I'm sure I have that copy of 20th Century Guitar at home. I'll check it out when I get off vacation.
-
Originally Posted by Archtop Guy
Man oh' man that's one pretty guitar. Sure puts an Excel to shame just as she is, so there's always a silver lining. She 18"?
Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 06-27-2012 at 12:26 AM.
-
Triggs????????
-
No return call as of yet. I'll let you know.
-
She's not only 18" she's over 18 years old,legal!
-
Originally Posted by Patrick2
surely you gest! I'm a po' retiree
-
Nice sunburst!!
-
TY! Easiest playing guitar I ever owned. And it's an 18...go figure! Originally Posted by Archtop Guy
-
Not casting any aspersions on luthiers in general but there's one luthier in particular who did not reply to any of my emails when I asked him about sending a second-hand archtop I was considering buying that he had built back to him for inspection, set-up, touch-up and installation of a floating pickup. I emailed, waited two weeks for a reply, and then emailed again. No reply. So, I emailed a third time. He was previously quick to reply when I asked about custom ordering a new guitar. I was clear in my emails that I was happy to pay for the services; his time and expertise must be paid for. Still no reply. I quit emailing. Originally Posted by Archtop Guy
I came to the conclusion that some luthiers only care about selling new instruments and do not care about their instruments bought second-hand on the used market i.e. instruments not bought directly from them.
I did not complete my purchase of the said archtop and lost a $100 in the process but I felt it was a good decision. The archtop remains unsold to this day and it has been more than two years since it was put on the market.
Meanwhile, let me put in a plug for Mr. Steve Andersen. Steve was courteous and prompt and helpful with advice about the used Andersen archtops that I found on the used market. He was happy to maintain and service the archtops that he built, no matter that I would not be buying them directly from him but from the previous owners or second-hand dealers. I don't have an Andersen archtop...yet. And I have plied Steve with enough questions to owe him a big one.Last edited by Jabberwocky; 06-28-2012 at 04:01 AM.
-
I know that there are luthiers out there that find it hard to find the time to answer questions and still be able to work on their creations. Most will simply answer all calls and emails after work hours.As in any business some are more customer oriented than others. Artists !!??.
-
My misunderstanding. For some reason, the way your post read, I thought you were saying that it is a Triggs build D'A II. That's why I used all of those question marks. Kinda like saying . . "are you shittin' me????" Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
surely you gest! I'm a po' retiree
It's a reall pretty gfuitar though . . . .
-
This thread has wandered away from the original question but I thought I'd throw in my two coins (this is an international group). I have a Triggs built in 1995 that has suffered the same problem -- lost some finish. I have done nothing to change it and it keeps sounding better all the time. I see no reason to think of it as broken.
Bill
-
I understand exactly what you're talking about when you say it gets better and better. I read in Benedetto's book that the finish is there only to protect the wood. The best sound an archtop has is actually before the finish goes on. If an insignificant amount of wood is exposed that won't deteriorate or look bad, then why bother. I've got a nice vintage guitar that has most of the finish on the back of the neck gone and it's just fine. It doesn't even look bad. In fact it looks like it's part of the sunburst. Do you have any pictures of it? I wouldn't mind owning one if I had the bucks. Originally Posted by WilliamScott
-
Received a call from Jim Triggs on the 4th. Gave me two options. First was a cover the guitar with a "retarder", to soften the finish and hopefully make the cracking less visible. This could be tried first and if it fails go to plan B, a total refinish. Both options were reasonable cost wise. Thanks for the input Bill and hot ford coupe.
-
I think you are over thinking this man. But, with a guitar like that, I can understand your apprehension. Here's my opinion; I couldn't live with the current condition of that guitar. I would NOT put a bandaid of a fix on a $10K guitar . . . I would go for the entire refin. I would NOT have the refin done by the guy/company who screwed it up to begin with. I would NOT allow someone who recommended a "retarder" whatever the hell that is . . instead of a total refin. I would seek out someone who is known for their expertise in refins and get it done properly. I would do the due diligence of locating the person that a strong consensis believes to be the best of the best and pay what ever they ask for a perfect refin. Originally Posted by Archtop Guy
-
I am, for sure, over thinking this! I do not want to mess up this guitar. Mr. Triggs is using a different sprayer than he did during my guitars making. I don't know why there was a change in sprayers. But Mr. Triggs' reputation is still intact and he is still producing a high quality product. If I go with a total refin through Mr. Triggs at least it should now have a new "warranty". In Mr. Triggs' defence when he used the word retarder he was simply relaying his talk with the sprayer. Neither has seen photos yet so they really don't know the damage yet. I'm leaning towards Triggs because he is the the original factory. If I had a real DA And John was still with us,I'd want him for the job. Thanks again for the slap in the face,I needed it.
-
Follow you heart and your gut instincts man. That's what I always do. Originally Posted by Archtop Guy
-
Archtop Guy, I don't know. If I were you, I would leave it alone. How much is the refinish gonna cost you? A $1000? Why not put it away for six months and then look at it again? I don't know how long you've had the guitar but sometimes when we've lived with a guitar for a while, the flaws that bothered us initially become a whole lot more acceptable as part of its character. Can you be sure it won't crack again after the refinish? And then what?
Play it and enjoy it. And if it becomes unbearable, why not sell it on and buy another? You bought it with its finish cracked. You sell it with its finish cracked and you may break even. With a refinish, I am not so sure that the next buyer won't use that to knock the price down some more. So you end up paying more and getting less in return.
When I got my first nitrocellulose finished guitar many moons ago, I freaked out over how easily it marked and checked. No matter what I did. Over time, I have come to accept that as the nature of nitro and if not, then get poly-whatever finish. The player in me says, Sod that obsessing over the finish, get playing. The gearhound in me says, Protect that guitar. Protect that guitar. As I grow older, the player tells the gearhound to shut up. The player is winning.
Spiral, who used to post here frequently, ordered a Triggs San Salvador. The neck finish was a little "soft" when he got it and came off in his hands. Spiral was pretty unhappy about it. If my memory serves me, just about the time Spiral put it up for sale, he felt the finish was sufficiently hardened that it was playable. Yeah, he also sent it to a local set-up guy and the fella put a nick in the soft finish of the top with the eraser nub of a pencil! All this is anecdotal though.
I am all for just leaving it alone for the next six months. And if it still bothers you after living with it for that time, by all means, go refinish it. Cracked nitro is not as bad as it initially looks.
My ha'penny's worth.
NB After looking at your picture and the crack lines for a while, you know what, if this were my guitar, today, as a cured gearhound, I would find them more than acceptable. Will not bother me in the slightest.
https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guita...vel-hands.html That's the one.Last edited by Jabberwocky; 07-07-2012 at 04:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
Gary Zimnicki - 1925 L5 Derivative Archtop [Sitka...
Today, 12:03 PM in The Builder's Bench