Fender Introduces New "Road Worn" Guitar Line

[thesilentdrummer]

Guitar Center - Fender Road Worn

Everyone knows how cool a well-loved guitar looks. Nice, shinny new guitars are pretty, but as far as a true gig master goes, you have to have a worn look.




In my opinion, though, this is just as retarded an idea as the people who make jeans with holes in them and then charge more than a normal pair of jeans. I mean, if you want the worn look, then work for it.

[magno]

WTF? that really is retarded.
Who is going to buy this?
The sad fact is that somebody is going to spend a grand on this farce of a guitar.
Is this going to affect the used price of beat up guitars?. hahahahah
So like a scratched/marred looking old fender is now worth as much as a pristine NOS fender? hahahahahahah
or maybe more hahahahahah

[garageband]

but as far as a true gig master goes, you have to have a worn look.

I never heard such nonsense. I think it's just sad. I like playing gigs with nice equipment and keep it up, polished and fresh and in tune and everything else involved with being professional. People who beat the crap out of their equipment, regardly of their line of work, have something wrong with their heads. Really.

[crash]

Originally Posted by garageband

I never heard such nonsense. I think it's just sad. I like playing gigs with nice equipment and keep it up, polished and fresh and in tune and everything else involved with being professional. People who beat the crap out of their equipment, regardly of their line of work, have something wrong with their heads. Really.

Whoa there, easy big fella!

You've never heard of the guitar relic trend? You might be a little out of touch, It's been going on for over a decade. Fender does it, Gibson does it, and seymour Duncan even offers a line of relic'd pickups. It's for people who want to have something that looks and feels vintage that they don't have to track down and pay an arm and a leg for. A reasonable desire.

I have a buddy who has actually run a very good and reputable guitar relic-ing business. He gets authentic vintage fender necks and bodies made new, paints them official vintage colors, decals them and then goes through a painstaking process to age the finish and make them look like they have been lovingly played for over fifty years. There's nothing wrong with what he does or with his customers who like what he does. It's just a matter of taste, no need to get personal.

We aren't talking about trashing your guitar here. Anyone in the vintage market will tell you they aren't looking for instruments that look like they've been drug across a gravel parking lot to every gig for fifty years.

A little normal wear marking and finish checking is highly desirable for many of us. Only about half the guitars I've ever owned were brand new when I bought them. I like going to pawn shops and hole in the wall places and finding treasures there. I like a cigarette burn under the e- string where some hard gigging dude let it burn down while he was too busy playing to notice it. Finish checking tells me that the mahogany or alder or basswood under that paint has aged to tonal perfection. Who knows what kind of stories a guitar like that could tell. And they are all imprinted into the atomic structure of that wood.

So get off your high horse mister bright and shiny

[garageband]

Serious? I've been in the gear peddling business in the past and sold relic'd guitars. How could I not know about this ridiculous stone washed acid faded distressed fad? Ive owned old guitars and new guitars. Both have their points. Making a new guitar look old is just fakery. Sure, I've got a Epiphone Les Paul Junior that I modified the peghead on, painted and added a "Gibson" decal. Cost me an afternoon and about $25 in materials, not hundreds or thousands.

Sounds like somebody is all caught up by the hype. When I smoked, I used an ashtray, not a guitar. My Leslie cabinet has a burn mark from some "hard-gigging" douche-bag leaving his smoke to burn down on it. Wow, you know, that does make it sound better.

[crash]

Originally Posted by garageband

Serious? I've been in the gear peddling business in the past and sold relic'd guitars. How could I not know about this ridiculous stone washed acid faded distressed fad? Ive owned old guitars and new guitars. Both have their points. Making a new guitar look old is just fakery. Sure, I've got a Epiphone Les Paul Junior that I modified the peghead on, painted and added a "Gibson" decal. Cost me an afternoon and about $25 in materials, not hundreds or thousands.

Sounds like somebody is all caught up by the hype. When I smoked, I used an ashtray, not a guitar. My Leslie cabinet has a burn mark from some "hard-gigging" douche-bag leaving his smoke to burn down on it. Wow, you know, that does make it sound better.

Yes it is a fad. I'm not trying to sell these things. The relics fender and Gibson make look like somebody took a power tool to them. I don't own one.

Instruments get wear on them when you use them. Are you going to slag on SRV because all the finish was worn off his strats. Gimme a break kid.

I'm simply offering the idea that some people like relics and that is ok.

Like I said, Garageband (Odd tag for someone who likes his stuff all shiny, tite and pro looking), there really isn't a need to get personal unless you've got some kind of problem inside. Let it out in your music if you can, not on your fellow musicians. You are my fellow musician, yes?

It's a matter of what people like and don't like. Let's hear what you're playing or recording. That should say more about you than the venom you're blowing off here.

[Chad_Rushing]

I've got an Ibanez acoustic that I've had for over 10 years. Not really old enough to be called vintage, true, but she still (with a very few accidental exceptions) looks as sleek and glossy as when I bought her. I wouldn't have it any other way. And if my strumming pattern wears out my finish, I'll have it fixed. I've been a gigging musician for about the same amount of time, and I would say that having a nice, shiny, well-cared-for instrument and equipment goes much further to getting me more gigs than having stuff that looks half worn out.

I personally can't stand Fenders anyway. I've tried (and owned) their acoustics, electrics, amps, and just never cared for them (well... the amps aren't too bad I suppose). Why I would buy one that is intentionally made to look worse is beyond me.

[crash]

Originally Posted by Chad_Rushing

I've got an Ibanez acoustic that I've had for over 10 years. Not really old enough to be called vintage, true, but she still (with a very few accidental exceptions) looks as sleek and glossy as when I bought her. I wouldn't have it any other way. And if my strumming pattern wears out my finish, I'll have it fixed. I've been a gigging musician for about the same amount of time, and I would say that having a nice, shiny, well-cared-for instrument and equipment goes much further to getting me more gigs than having stuff that looks half worn out.

I personally can't stand Fenders anyway. I've tried (and owned) their acoustics, electrics, amps, and just never cared for them (well... the amps aren't too bad I suppose). Why I would buy one that is intentionally made to look worse is beyond me.

Most reputable repairman would tell you that refinishing pickwear on anything less than a very fine handmade acoustic will usually cost more than the guitar is worth. If you've got the bucks and it's worth it to you, go for it!

I have a very fine handmade acoustic, and I play it a lot. It would cost me way too much to patch up pick wear. I'd have to re-do it every five years!

Acoustics have never been Fenders long suit, they should probably stick to strats and tele's, but that doesn't bring down the whole name.

Whether you like them or not is a matter of personal taste, just like apples and oranges.

I'm not a vehement Fender advocate, they are a HUGE company encompassing a lot of brands these days, but there are some points of success that you can't argue:

The fact that the formula that Leo Fender came up with tinkering around out in his little shop over 50 years ago is still a standard for electric guitar tone.

Fender also still cranks out a product of about the same value and cost as they did in the early 50's.

Even their cheap stuff sounds and plays pretty good.

I wouldn't go too far out of my way to spend the money on a relic. But if I tried it, the tone was killer and it jumped up into my hands and said "Take me I'm yours", and I had the money...well...I wouldn't be held back by stubborn pride.

[Chad_Rushing]

Oh, I'm not talking about fixing up a wee li'l scratch, laddie! I would have to have worn clear through to the wood to even worry about it, really. And she's very worth it to me. She's MORE than paid for herself many times over, lol. Got a better feel (yes, IMO) than most higher end stuff I've played. I swear there must have been one inspired Korean in the factory the day she was made. I played every single one they had in the store, and that was the one I liked. (I don't just buy the first thing I see, lol)

And yes, Fender acoustics aren't anything to write home about (except a 12-string I had once by them. Not bad at all), but I'm talking about their electrics mainly. They're just... twangy...

I like the SGs myself. Rich, smooth tone that makes for some killer distortion. (I almost said the "w" word there...)

[garageband]

But when you want it, where else can you go for such twang?