-
This is not something I've seen before. I can't tell if something dripped onto the finish, or if that's the finish itself deciding to bubble up. Does anyone have any thoughts? This is on a guitar I just got. I am trying to decide how to let the seller know and to determine the best way to deal with it. It's vintage, so if it requires significant finish work, I wouldn't be happy with the impact on the value, even if the seller agrees to pay for the repair.
-
06-06-2018 09:38 PM
-
looks to me like something dripped on the guitar. Hard to say what, but it was obviously something that melts nitro.
-
My guess is someone sprayed the pots with contact cleaner through the F-holes, and then dripped some on the face. Many contact cleaners have solvents that dissolve nitro. (I found out the hard way)
-
Beer
-
Superglue? Maybe the little perspex block holding the pickguard became unglued (as seems to be the case in the picture) and was glued back using superglue.
-
Little Jay beat me to it, but yes, I've seen that kind of "burn" from superglue. I managed to drip a small amount of it on my old Kay arch top while doing the old superglue/baking soda nut repair.
-
Is the pickguard deteriorating? I see the small celluloid block(usually glued to the p-guard) is detached, from the guard. When celluloid deteriorates, it can give off a caustic liquid, which damages lacquer.
-
This is my guess, too. I found this out on a nitro finish years ago with the old Cramolin R5 cleaner.
Originally Posted by maggles55
-
Thanks everyone. I’m going to see a luthier today. My thought is that it’s Not fixable. And even if it is, I think it would hurt the value nontrivially. I’ll see if the seller is willing to give a partial refund or have them take it back. Any thoughts on how this might affect value on a relative basis? The guitar is otherwise practically flawless.
-
If you replace the pickguard, will it hide the damage?
-
Yes the damage is completely hidden by the pickguard, so purely as a player, I'm not concerned. I talked to the seller. They said they would be able to do store credit return for vintage gear with a possible restocking fee. That's really dissatisfying, since I only wanted this particular instrument and not anything else from their inventory. Fortunately their staff are really friendly, so he's asking the store manager about trying to do a cash refund.
Anybody think I should *not* be upset about this? I mean I'm not trying to be a collector, but I'm afraid of 2 things: 1) that I got a bad deal given the damage, and 2) that, if I ever need to sell this guitar, I'm going to eat the cost of the finish damage.
-
restocking fee??
total b.s., don't let them bully you.
-
It's tough to say for sure without knowing the details of what the seller disclosed about the guitar's condition, the price you paid, and how that price compares to the same model/year without that damage. But (assuming you paid a price comparable to a guitar without the damage, and the damage was not disclosed) if I were in your shoes, I'd be pretty upset. They should either give a full refund without a restocking fee or offer you some sort of consideration for keeping the guitar (e.g., credit or discounts on other stuff or a partial refund money back). I realize used/vintage instruments are sold as is with fine print about other damage that may or not be visible, but if damage this ugly was not in the photos posted by the seller, the ad was deceptive. A reputable seller would make good. Store credit + restocking fee is nowhere near making good IMO. Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
John
-
Yeah, I'm hoping to get on the phone with the manager. I like the shop, but they're acting a bit sleazy on this deal. I've never disputed a credit card payment because I know it's a real burden for the seller, but I informed the sales guy that I might have to do that if they don't handle it appropriately. Hopefully we can prevent it. Originally Posted by wintermoon
-
The complication is that I played the guitar in the shop and then had it shipped. Their policy is that I had a chance to inspect it in the shop. That makes some sense to me, but the damage was behind the pickguard. Without being handed a screwdriver to remove the guitar, I bought it on faith that there was no concealed damage.
This same shop once sold me a guitar with a crack in the back without mentioning it in the description. When I showed them the crack, they said that the crack was a center seam split. My pals Eric and James at Schoenberg Guitars had a laugh at their reply. Fortunately in that particular case the shop was willing to pay for the cost of the repair. It was not a collectible guitar, so I was ok with the repair. Because of their customer service, I have always been willing to give them another shot. Let's hope they don't mess this one up.
-
if you paid w/ a credit card you should be fine regardless of the store's policy
-
The credit card company is on your side period. They lock the funds as soon as you give the word. That isn't much of a thing, but as stated by others depends on what you paid and what the value is.
Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
-
The old Cramolin R5 had 75% Trichlorotrifluoroethane as that CFC was effective as both cleaner and propellant. Originally Posted by Greentone
The rest consisted of 20% Difluoroethane and the last 5% was their "secret sauce" proprietary Cramolin ingredient.
The Deoxit D5 (replacement for Cramolin R5) has that old CFC replaced with odorless mineral spirits (though they told me it was Naptha) and the rest of the formula is the same, except the 5% of "secret sauce" ingredient is now named Deoxit.
Naptha itself would probably not cause harm like that picture showed. If it was in contact with a finish for a long time there could be some softening. But it would not be "hot" enough to leave a tight mark like that -- if there was enough naptha present to stay wet, it would have spread itself much wider.
Even though I suspect the newer Deoxit is not a severe threat to nitro, I'd still never spray it on components still attached to a guitar.
Of course there's a ton of possibilities for other contact cleaners/chemicals that do have hotter solvents, and it's unknown what this guitar could have been exposed to.
Nitro finish does allow spot repairs, but as there's significant checking on the top, the repair spot may be harder to blend in, and matching the sheen may be a challenge.
Myself, if I really liked the guitar, I'd keep it, and ask for some partial refund due to this undeclared defect.
If you do keep it, just leave it "as is" for a while before going for a finish repair. That one scar is hidden anyways, and a scar may be better than a detectable repair (if the nitro was not a repair-friendly as it should be.)
Scars are like tattoos with better stories !
John
-
The finish damage is completely fixable, in the sense that it can be refinished in that area easily enough. It won't match the rest of the finish, of course, unless the entire guitar is refinished. It's not a structural issue, merely cosmetic, but it will certainly hurt the resale value. Collectors don't want refinishes, for reasons I don't really understand. Players shouldn't care much, as long as the finish is stable. But collectability always seems to be involved in sales. It seems to me this is purely a judgement call, and your judgement is the only thing that counts. I would certainly be upset, but I'm far from sure what I would do.
-
Well I have to say my experience with the seller was not positive. I spoke to them again. They began by arguing with me about whether or not it was a big deal and tried to convince me that it was common on vintage guitars. I told them I know these things can happen but they didn’t factor it in on the price. They went on to tell me that the sold it to me for literally dollars over what they paid for it. They also said that they didn’t see it because it was behind the pickguard. I found pictures of the listing online and they had images where the pickup was removed and the pickguard was off. In other words, there’s no way they missed this glaring blemish. They saw it and omitted it from the description. I threatened to chargeback the payment and they finally accepted a cash refund but refused to pay for shipping. I’m shocked. They are admitting that they messed up but they want me to pay shipping? It seems wrong. The seller gave me attitude throughout the whole process and I’m sick of talking to him but shipping a guitar across the country is not a trivial cost. I think they should really own up to their mistake, and really commit to making it right.
-
Well, it appears your choices are to eat the shipping costs or keep the guitar. I have no advice on that. You do have the option to spread the word about this business far and wide, through here, the BBB, Yelp, and whatever other place will accept reviews. I don't often do that, but I don't often get screwed by businesses, either.
-
What shop/seller did you buy it from?
-
So I really dislike the idea of spreading negative publicity as a form of vengeance. However, I feel like I owe it to the community to share info so that they don't make the mistake of paying too high a price for this particular guitar. I personally don't trust the shop at this point to correct their listing.
-
Vengeance won't help anything. Warning others about shady businesses might.
-
If it is someone who sells a good amount of guitars then it is a public service to the community to get the word out. It isn’t vengeance at all if you don’t intend it to be. Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Reply With Quote
Julian Lage Trio - Sat 27th April - Marciac,...
Today, 03:57 PM in The Players