-
50K is a lot of money for a guitar
.
-
03-17-2014 12:18 PM
-
As I wasn't in the shop during the repair I've no idea how the original binding was removed...the guitar arrived with much of the outer binding layer chipped away, and of course much of the final layer raised from the wood...but it required a total binding replacement. And the guitar is a late 80's model. The luthier suggested the adhesives, my term, used by the builder lacked some compound that impacted their durability.
Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
So, after reading between the lines here it sounds like this is a major undertaking as it's no walk in the park. Add to that that the guitars owner from day one wanted the guitar done yesterday, and of course wants the total repair bill to be a very very very bare minimum expense. It's my guess, that this guitar is about to be listed for sale, because either the owner needs the cash bad, or simply has other archtops he wants to buy. There's a back story to the middle man, that many of you might find appalling, but since its the internet I'll not go there in this post. Ev'1 knows him. I don't need to confirm who he is...what an *ss.
no, not a blonde. and who in their right mind would reshade a $50k archtop...even I know better than to do that. Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
Yes, it is...and hence the stress for any luthier taking on such a repair. Originally Posted by GuyBoden
50K is a lot of money for a guitar.
-
So, the $350 average my guy charges for a neck reset is so much work it isn't worth the trouble for most luthiers? If that is the case, why bother doing neck resets that are a total waste of your time? I don't get that....good thing I'm not in the repair business. Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
-
>>> So, the $350 average my guy charges for a neck reset is so much work it isn't worth the trouble for most luthiers?
That is a question for those 'most luthiers' you mention. I can not imagine doing one for under $850, and even at that it would have to be some sort of goodwill maneuver.
>>> If that is the case, why bother doing neck resets that are a total waste of your time?
Oooops. I think that many do not see it as a total waste of time.
If you run at less than 100% capacity, then there is some fixed cost allocation that is helped by low margin work.
Low margin products and services are also often a very valuable part of a total proposition from a business. The classic case study would be that when you get rid of your lower margin products or services you may also be getting rid of your non-commodity value to your customer. So then the serious squeeze starts on what used to be your higher margin products or services and you race to the bottom.
(Well in guitar-dom the "bottom" is ass-hat myths, "tone killers", sustain from cheese fumes, "all Gibsons need to be planed", and so on. So maybe commodity work is a step and a half above that bottom.)
>>> I don't get that....good thing I'm not in the repair business.
There are many who do quite well. Some lead an "examined business life" and could almost tell you why some services are rather low margin activities. Some just go with a flow and do well also.
Jazz players make poor money to a great extent yet find this a worthwhile activity even when doing the lousiest paid gig of the year.
I do know that for me it was more like:
1. Luthiate and really learn how it all works. Fun, hot girlfriend.
2. Figure you need to generate some more significant $$$ in some sort of "long-run".
3. Note that if you can luthiate and deal with guitar myths and those people who love them, you can also make a notably good living in other hand-to-eye-to-people work.
4. Go do that while keeping up with your higher end guitar customer base.
5. Go do it some more while having a blast.
6. Get sick of airplanes, note that "long-term" finances are in order, and head back to 80% hands-on and more guitar emphasis.
7. Continue to have said blast on the other end of having kids (now 25 and 30).
8. Find that guitar gasbag myths have not changed in the least, which should be comforting I suppose.
How your guy justifies a given low-margin project may differ a great deal from mine own. He is still likely to be quite good at it.
All in my opinion.
ChrisLast edited by PTChristopher2; 03-17-2014 at 02:53 PM. Reason: spelling
-
This may be a very ignorant and naive question, but that's what I am here for. Don't all vintage guitars of any value eventually need binding repaired or replaced, and even a partial or full refinish? Based on the pictures in the link that 2bornot2bop posted the guitar does not appear to be terribly old, and certainly having to replace all of the binding now is unfortunate and will affect the guitars value in the short term. However... such a guitar will likely be around for another 50+ years, and perhaps much longer. Won't the long-term value of the instrument be preserved or even enhanced by having work done now (done well, of course) that will allow the instrument as a whole to age more gracefully? I am not convinced that the tone of this guitar will suffer any ill effects by this work, unless the work is very poorly done. Even with a full refinish, if the tone were to be negatively affected at all it would seem to me that it would be over the short term only, with improved tone over time. I know, it's what the guitar is worth today that the current owner cares about, but perhaps I am unique or odd in that to me, if I have $50,000 to spend on one guitar, I am not buying such a guitar in the hopes of flipping it to make a few bucks. If I want to make real money I will invest it properly and over time make much more than I would selling (almost) any guitar. I would not worry about that guitars value today, but rather I would do the best for it that I can to keep it playing optimally when I finally pass it on to my son or sell it when I can no longer play like crap. Just my ignorant and naive perspective, so start throwing things at me now.
-
I believe you might be thinking of Mark Lacey. He used to be a tech at Gruhn in Nashville, then he started building guitars there . . then he went out on his own. IMO, he's one of the top 5 or 10 luthiers in the country. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
However, this is work that can be expertly done by dozens of luthiers. My guy in Union City, NJ . . Ronald Orlandano used to do this exact work on D'Angelicos on a regular basis. The now deceased Aaron Cowles, Kalamazoo Michigan would do this as though it was child's play. There's another guy in Kalamazoo . . Pete Moreno who could do this work. Also . . has anyone ever seen the binding and inlay work of Bozo Podunavac? I'm sure he'd know how to remove and replace binding. (Is he even still alive?)
-
<snicker> Bozo...
-
"Jane, you ignorant slut…." - still one of my favourite openings, heh. Originally Posted by snoskier63
...a very ignorant and naive question...
Well, the goalposts keep moving, which is always a good way to optimize margins in the wild west of so-called "vintage" guitars. The fiddle boys figured this one out from day one - violins and such are designed and built to be disassembled and reassembled on a regular basis. Fingerboards and pegs are replaced. Necks are lengthened. Soundposts are replaced. Not so much with guitars.
Hardcore vintage guys won't replace worn frets, but then again, they don't play the guitars they buy. So refrets affect value and will continue to do so for quite some time. However, once the plastic binding and inlays on '59 Les Pauls crack, crystalize and fall off, they will be OK to replace, but only with the right kind of binding. Once the PAF pickups short out due to corrosion in the windings of the coils, it will be OK to rewind them. Etc. etc. Rust never sleeps, and the institutions that take money from investors know which side of the toast is buttered.
The bonus will be a new market for sealed display cases filled with the right kind of inert gas, clad in the right kind of UV filter glass that prevents binding from crystalizing and metal from corroding.Last edited by Hammertone; 03-17-2014 at 11:41 PM.
-
[QUOTE=Hammertone;408130]"Jane, you ignorant slut…." - still one of my favourite openings, heh.
Well, the goalposts keep moving, which is always a good way to optimize margins in the wild west of so-called "vintage" guitars. The fiddle boys figured this one out from day one - violins and such are designed and built to be disassembled and reassembled on a regular basis. Fingerboards and pags are replaced. Necks are lengthened. Soundposts are replaced. Not so much with guitars.
Hardcore vintage guys won't replace worn frets, but then again, they don't play the guitars they buy. So refrets affect value and will continue to do so for quite some time. However, once the plastic binding and inlays on '59 Les Pauls crack, crystalize and fall off, they will be OK to replace, but only with the right kind of binding. Once the PAF pickups short out due to corrosion in the windings of the coils, it will be OK to rewind them. Etc. etc. Rust never sleeps, and the institutions that take money from investors know which side of the toast is buttered.
Great post Stephen! Now, about the sealed cases . . . Scott Chinery already had them in his home over a decade ago. But, then too . . he also owned hundreds of the worlds most coveted, rare and expensive guitars. While most were sitting prominantly on display and within easy reach for visitors to reach out and grab them . . there were a few that were in very special cases.The bonus will be a new market for sealed display cases filled with the right kind of inert gas, clad in the right kind of UV filter glass that prevents binding from crystalizing and metal from corroding.
-
Originally Posted by Patrick2
No, i was thinking of Megas. I believe he is still on the west coast.
-
Hammer,
Perhaps you hit on the crux of my confusion. For the life of me I can't understand why one would buy a guitar to simply display it on a wall for people to admire visually. Beautiful guitars are made to be played, so play the damn things! I realize there are many collectors interested only in displaying their possessions, be they guitars or anything else, but I challenge you all to look at it my way. If a man or woman has a beautiful partner/spouse, do they simply want to be seen with that beautiful person, or do they want to be seen, and then go home and get wild and crazy with each other? When all is said and done we lose our looks and ability/desire to get wild and crazy, and likewise we lose our ability to play these beautiful instruments. While we can and should treat these instruments with the respect they deserve, we should also pay the creators of such instruments the respect they deserve by playing their instruments every day, and then passing them on to the next generation to do the same with physical repairs performed as needed in order that the instruments be maintained in top playing condition for as long as possible. To have a beautiful guitar that can only be seen but not heard is in my mind a crime. But I digress.
-
Quoting a post from another forum:
"Playing, collecting, disregard for financial gain, focus on financial gain, touring, recording, jamming, moderating [or posting to] a forum, building a website, writing an article or book, decorating one's rec room, building an altar to [insert name here], whatever.
Some or all of the above, in a variety of combinations and ratios.
There are no rules to this, no lines to be drawn. All it takes is the money to do it, whatever the "it" happens to be."
That includes refinishing, putting it out with the trash (which has indeed happened, famously, to at least one D'Angelico), throwing it onto a bonfire (which almost happened to a $6,000 archtop that was rescued by a friend of mine), and god-knows-what-else.Last edited by Hammertone; 03-18-2014 at 05:05 PM.
-
As though I really needed something else to put me in a very angered frame of mind . . a pompous ill advised stupid post such as this one comes along. Is your post above "the world of guitars as it should be according to snoskier63"? Who the hell are to to proclaim what beautiful guitars are made for? You challenge collectors to look at it your way? Why? Why would you want to do that . . and further more, why would collectors want to look at it your way? Who the hell do you think you are to to try to dictate to others what should or shouldn't be the motivating factors for one to buy and own guitars? I'm a collector . . and I have no problem what so ever with you buying guitars simply to play them and not to display them. Frankly . . I couldn't give a fuck less what you do with your guitars . . . or your women for that matter.. Why the hell would you care what collectors choose to do with their guitars? Your self righteous post disgusts me. Originally Posted by snoskier63
-
Wow P2,
This makes my responses to the latest guitar-myth-jackass post seem positively "nurturing".
Plus you smell funny.
Gotta go with Hammer on this one (which is frightening enough as a concept) - it's all good and there are all sorts of ways to enjoy guitars.
I am a devout non-collector, but in my opinion collectors drive some aspects of design, quality, and attention to detail that benefit all players.
So I suppose I am not just neutral on the collector-outliers, but rather find that they help a rising tide that lifts all boats.
Now as regards jerk-mythology outliers,...
Anyway, Sanka-brand there big guy.
Chris
-
I suppose "Sanka-brand" as an expression is outdated by some decades.
-
I forgot fixin' em and buildin' em, which is your bailiwick, Chris.
Which reminds me of an AA that I saw when I was a mere pup, in university, down Boston way. It belonged to two brothers, lovely fellows, who happened to be excellent players as well. I shall not mention their names. Not sure whether they did it or it had already been done, but I vaguely remember (hey, it was the 1970s) the headstock overlay and inlays having been removed and the resulting light maple surfaces filled in with coloured Sharpies. Perhaps along with portions of the top, rims and back. Things get a bit foggy….Last edited by Hammertone; 03-18-2014 at 05:45 PM.
-
Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Not at all. "sans caféine"became "Sanka" over 100 years ago and is still going strong.
Last edited by Hammertone; 03-18-2014 at 05:27 PM.
-
>>> your bailiwick, Chris.
Hey, I see no reason to bring my bailiwick into this. I mean how would you even know that I had it,...
OH CRAP!, laptop camera was on,....
The shame.
-
Yeah . . it was an overly harsh post, to be sure. Definitely more harsh than necessary. However, I grow very weary of ass-holes who would like to be able to buy any guitar . . or as many guitars as they'd like to, but just can't afford to do so . . so they rail against those of us who can and do, by proclaiming "that's not what guitars were made for". I know many collectors all over the country . . some outside of the country. They ALL play. Some really well . . some not so well . . but they all play. Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Sanka sucks!
-
We're family-friendly here. It sounds salacious, the way you say it. Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
-
Perhaps my post was ill-advised, which isn't the first, nor will it be the last time that happens. I certainly do not begrudge anyone that has the financial means to do whatever they want with their money. After all, in most cases they worked hard for it and earned that right. And yes Patrick , your response was a bit on the harsh side considering I was simply expressing an opinion that I am entitled to as you and others are entitled to buy guitars that you don't play. You are also entitled to call me whatever name you choose if it makes you happy, but perhaps forums like this that will include points of views other than your own are not places for such sensitivity. If I worried so much about the opinions of others I would be a miserable SOB. I am the first to admit that my playing sucks, and is likely much worse than yours. While I don't have unlimited means I am more fortunate than many and can afford to buy guitars that I can't make sound the way they were made to sound, and to all that have heard clips of mine I sincerely apologize for the agony I put you through.
Perhaps I should have phrased my post to say that I could never have such a nice guitar without being like a kid in a candy shop every day and playing the crap out of it, then nobody would have been offended, and what fun is that? 
Just keep in mind that dissenting opinions are what get people more than just pissed off, but they drive thoughtful discussions, or in this case outright anger. No offense intended, just providing a differing opinion that may or may not be worthwhile.
-
By the way, I am listening to Grant Green burn up the fretboard, and can't possibly be a miserable SOB when doing that.
-
The name calling (ass-holes) in reference to yours and other posts expressing similar opinions was way out of line. My sincerest apologies . . which I hope you'll accept. Not an excuse .. but, I was still seething due to have read still yet another post seeming to demeaning the intentions and actions of guitar collectors, such as myself. Originally Posted by snoskier63
Perhaps my post was ill-advised, which isn't the first, nor will it be the last time that happens. I certainly do not begrudge anyone that has the financial means to do whatever they want with their money. After all, in most cases they worked hard for it and earned that right. And yes Patrick , your response was a bit on the harsh side considering I was simply expressing an opinion that I am entitled to as you and others are entitled to buy guitars that you don't play. You are also entitled to call me whatever name you choose if it makes you happy, but perhaps forums like this that will include points of views other than your own are not places for such sensitivity. If I worried so much about the opinions of others I would be a miserable SOB. I am the first to admit that my playing sucks, and is likely much worse than yours. While I don't have unlimited means I am more fortunate than many and can afford to buy guitars that I can't make sound the way they were made to sound, and to all that have heard clips of mine I sincerely apologize for the agony I put you through. Perhaps I should have phrased my post to say that I could never have such a nice guitar without being like a kid in a candy shop every day and playing the crap out of it, then nobody would have been offended, and what fun is that? Just keep in mind that dissenting opinions are what get people more than just pissed off, but they drive thoughtful discussions, or in this case outright anger. No offense intended, just providing a differing opinion that may or may not be worthwhile.
I interpret these sort of objections to collectors not buying a guitar for the sole purpose of playing it until the frets wear off . . . equally as ill founded as I would . . or possibly as you might . . if I were to post something like "why would a wanker who can't play at a level of proficiency of a George Benson defile such a beautiful guitar by actually playing it?"
Unfortunately, I took out a whole bunch continuously building anger from other similar statements, in my harsh reply to your post .. which was actually less offensive than some/most other posts I've read on the subject. As a collector, I've read and been offended by comments such as . . "wow . . what a beautiful guitar! I hope that thing actually gets played and doesn't become a trophy on some Wall Street stock broker's wall with the sole intent of gratifying his already too big and greedy ego". So, unfortunately when ever I read something similar . . even to a lesser degree . . I react as though the remark was aimed at me personally. Peace man . . .
-
Ya gotta work harder on that. I've perfected the skill of becoming a miserable SOB when ever I want to. It now come quite easily to me . . . quite frequently. It just takes a lot of practice. Originally Posted by snoskier63
-
Patrick, as they say in my part of the world "shit happens!". Apology not needed, but it is appreciated. As for my playing, I just wasn't meant to be the next Grant Green, and I am good with that...sort of.
I will continue to practice and enjoy the challenge, and to sort of get back to the original topic I will not hesitate to have all of the binding replaced on my favorite archtop should it rot as that on the D'Angelico being discussed. I want this guitar looking and playing as good when my son gives it to his son or daughter as it does now. He is only 9 (Thursday), so it will likely need something significant done to it to achieve that 70 - 80 year goal. As for being miserable, it just ain't me. Opinionated? For sure!
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions