• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

I don't get it....why buy aged guitar???

Pellman73

Active member
Joined
Aug 9, 2016
Messages
1,748
I'll admit I only read about 20 posts before I skipped to the end to give my opinion.
I'll tell you why I will only buy an aged guitar ( I have three True Historics and a Fender Heavy Relic)
It is because I can play them all I want and NOT DEVALUE them. Every nick, bump, scratch, rust spot, blemish
etc. etc. etc. that I put on the $7000 guitar will come back to haunt me down the line when I go to sell it.
The buyer will beat me up for every little tiny imperfection. Every time I bump the guitar into my computer
desk, my sons cymbal etc. etc. it is literally like throwing a couple hundred dollars down the drain. Now people
will say, "well I am never going to sell this guitar" right......Now some of you are saying"That never happens to me
I buy a guitar and then want to sell it down the road to finance another one!".Look in the mirror and say this three times.
Now with an aged guitar every time I bump, scratch, hit, bang drop, sweat on the thing it looks cooler.When I go to sell said guitar
I have my luthier (who happens to be outstanding and can out perform any PLEK machine) level and crown the frets
and I can sell the guitar in "mint" condition! In fact the guitar will go up in value depending on the economy and the
current supply. Right now Gibson isn't shipping any new Custom orders from I have been told....
Also when you get a Murphy Aged guitar it can actually increase the value of your guitar. The aging is so realistic and
time consuming that there is a reason he has such a great reputation. If you haven't seen a Murphy in person you need
to hold judgement until you do.

Opinions??Come on I can take it......

I feel the same way and have made this comment a few times before

if you want a Closet queen that's one thing. But if your gonna play it? I think it makes the experience much more enjoyable not worrying about scratches and dings.

the relic jobs to,some degree should also just be appreciated, in my opinon, as an art form of a sort-- not to make a fake old guitar...but a reliced guitar. It's mental gymnastics but I'm there now. I ha've two heavynrelic custom shop strats and they are amazing to look at and play. I did think they were dumb Before I had one and now I've got a few Gibsons and fenders w em

but for sure scratches and dings on a relic guitar do not detract from value and that is almost the best reason to have one. I have a pristine r7 w one ding on the front that probably decreased the value by a few hundred dollars... at least!

But to each his own!!
 

Guitardon

Active member
Joined
Feb 3, 2002
Messages
2,114
I just bought a Gibson Les Paul True Historic and I'm happy to be the one who'll age it as time goes. I'm not sure I understand the idea of buying a guitar massacred by someone else though :hmm

I hope you are 20 years old and play a lot of gigs. And take your guitar in and out of cold and hot environments. If that's not the case you will never experience and aged guitar. I have a 2002 which is 15 years old, and I have two aged historics, as well as several brand-new mint condition out of the box like 1959's. The aged ones by Murphy make me happy to play because they feel like it original, my 2002 even though I've played hundreds of gigs with it just doesn't have anywhere near The kind of aging original nitrocellulose lacquer would've aged. But I love that guitar too. The new shiny fresh out of the box ones are beautiful too, if I was a kid in the 50s that's what I would've seen if I would've bought one. So all I can say is, I can't convince you to like or not like the age guitars, but Murphy does an incredible job of making them look and feel just like an original, take it or leave it but there are some of us who like all of them. New guitars that I've been beaten and played and gigs, new guitars fresh out of the box, and Tom Murphy H guitars. They're all great guitars. I don't think Gibson has anything New the offer, I think they've covered all the bases and they've given us a choice of whatever each of us prefers. If you don't like him don't buy them, if you do go ahead and grab one you won't be disappointed. Just my two little sense
 

LowMach

New member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
74
I just bought a Gibson Les Paul True Historic and I'm happy to be the one who'll age it as time goes. I'm not sure I understand the idea of buying a guitar massacred by someone else though :hmm

You're kidding right? It's so obvious! It is the internet's fault. People see photos of the beautiful vintage Les Pauls and want to harness a bit of that experience for themselves.

Shouldn't you minty lovers be buying PRS guitars.
 

surfreak

Active member
Joined
May 6, 2002
Messages
1,111
Vince did sub-contract work for Fender in a shop he built in Bolivar Missouri. He used to check his colors and aging by comparing them to Strats and Teles in my collection.
I wish I could remember the dates of this. He stopped in 1999, but I do not recall when he started. :hmm


As far as I know he started in late 1995, and shipped the first batch back to Fender in early 1996. I have one of his earliest Nocasters, which was shipped by the Custom Shop in Feb 1996.

You may also want to check this out, as it gives interesting insight on the Relic program: https://www.guitarbroker.com/product/1995-fender-nocaster-relic-1st-ever-produced/

Interestingly, his aging jobs always look very good, yet they are not particularly accurate at simulating real wear and tear: for example, he would not artificially check the finish, and he would lacquer over the bare wood "elbow patch".

In a way, the current relics are more accurate, but at the same time the overall quality of those earlier CS Fenders seems higher to me.
 
Last edited:

duaneflowers

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
2,520
I don't get it... why black jelly beans? I mean you just have to throw them in the trash, right? :hee
 

Steve Craw

Formerly Lefty Elmo
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
5,141
Must resist commenting in one of these stupid "I don't get the aged thing" threads.....must resist...must resist!
 

jens5

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
35
This thread is great. Now I can sell my, what was once new, my 20 year old Collings OM-42G for more. I'll just list it as Aged instead of used.
 

renderit

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
10,015
This thread is great. Now I can sell my, what was once new, my 20 year old Collings OM-42G for more. I'll just list it as Aged instead of used.

Yeah, Collings is aging guitars now. Really.
 

jens5

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
35
Yeah, Collings is aging guitars now. Really.

I was being facetious. I find it interesting that this aging thing only applies to Electric guitars and artificially increases the value. A well worn acoustic is just considered used and without historical provenance, it's value would decrease.
Strange.
 

RavenTooth

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
56
I have a new perspective on this since going to LA last weekend and playing several vintage 50's guitars in person. I played several Specials and Juniors as well as two '54 gold tops, one with a $45,000 price tag. Seeing real aging on old guitars in person is very cool, so is playing them. Later, I got handed a Dave Johnson heavily aged reissue to try. The thing really felt like the vintage guitars I had just been playing. It instantly felt awesome. All the wear and checking looked perfect. It also sounded great. If I had $10k or whatever in my pocket it would have been pretty hard to choose between the '58 Special and the DJ. I mean, it really feels like a burst (which is somehow more awesome after just playing real gold tops). Now would I have liked it as much if it wasn't artificially aged? Probably, but it would be different. I guess I'm saying it sort of tricked me on a subconscious level into being a real vintage guitar.

But its greatness could also be attributed to simply the hard nitro and Ron Ellis pickups.
 

GotTheSilver

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2007
Messages
2,419
I was being facetious. I find it interesting that this aging thing only applies to Electric guitars and artificially increases the value. A well worn acoustic is just considered used and without historical provenance, it's value would decrease.
Strange.

Gibson has experimented with aged acoustics. They sold an Aaron Lewis Southern Jumbo a few years back. It came in two versions. One version was unaged. The other was aged to be like Aaron's original 1952(?) SJ, with significant aging. Reactions seemed to be mixed. I don't think Gibson has done a truly aged acoustic since then, but I'm not sure. I think they may have done other acoustics with very light aging.

I think that part of the problem with aging acoustics is that they age pretty easily on their own and don't require the artificial aging.
 

MeHereNow

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
677
I don't get why you keep starting these shinkicking threads..
You "Hate" plaintops, think naming a guitar is "Cringeworthy", and now this again..
As already said by yourself, you don't understand/get it...
We are aware of that by now.
Thank you..
 

captainvideo

New member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
87
I think aged guitars are silly.
Last year I purchased a VOS R4. I wanted a 2013 or later R4 and finding a gloss version was nearly impossible so I had to go VOS.
The guitar plays and sounds great which is most important. I do think it's a little ridiculous to look down and see aged parts.
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,272
I must respectfully disagree.

Some of the recent aged Les Paul's especially the CC's look and feel like an old guitar. Hat's off to Gibson. Unlike some of over-the-top relic'd Fenders, most of the LPs seem tastefully done. Take an old Les Paul and one of these aged Les Pauls and you'll see how close

Mojo can't be faked because mojo like the Easter Bunny and Ghost's isn't real.

Pretending can be pretence but some people like aged guitars because they appreciate the aesthetics and/or the broken-in feel. How is that pretentious. How is buying an old worn guitar different than buying a new worn guitar. Is "mojo" transferable? The person buying the old guitar had no hand in the aging. Melvyn Franks bought the Peter Green / Gary Moore Burst. Those Green fans not fortunate enough to own the Peter Green burst may have bought the Gibson's Collector Choice #1. Does that make them pretentious?

Well as I said my post was intentionally over the top and tongue in cheek. It is directed at the goofy claims of some as capturing the feel or "mojo" of a real old guitar. I am sorry but i own lots of real ones and none of the aged ones capture anything other than the look. THE LOOK is what it is all about and that is fine. Plenty of people want that look, the appearance of an old guitar. It is a fashion choice, like color or type of flame and as such i have no problem with it.

It is the goofy claims that some make that this cosmetic thing somehow imbues the guitar with magical mojo mystery mechanics of playability and tone that is used so much around here. I also own plenty of new guitars and have played many aged ones. They do not play better or sound any different because of the aging. BULLSHIT! It just ain't so and the claims that they do are almost always made by those that can't simply own there own choice and have to justify it by adding these claims of vibe, mojo and magic. I JUST LIKE THE WAY THEY LOOK. That's the reason and it is that simple. I like it, it's my choice if you don't you don't have to buy one.

I don't and I don't buy any, or refuse to pay more for what is in effect a damaged guitar. My choice, my reason. Yet over and over those that buy these aged guitars, (and don't get me wrong I do think some look pretty cool), feel they need to add some qualifier beyond the simple fact that they just find it appealing. That is where all the fake crap comes from.

It is like a color. Like what you like, no one is saying red sounds better than brown, … yet ...
 

Jwehrman

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
54
I just bought a Gibson Les Paul True Historic and I'm happy to be the one who'll age it as time goes. I'm not sure I understand the idea of buying a guitar massacred by someone else though :hmm

I understand the sentiment above, but there is an aging spectrum. I'm not a fan of heavily aged guitars either. It only accentuates it is in fact artificial. However I own a lightly aged TH, and it's just right for me. They added a few, tastefully placed dings. It also has a light amount of weather checking. The silver hardware is also worn down. It has a lives quality that makes it feel like home o me.
 

slammintone

New member
Joined
Jul 19, 2001
Messages
1,924
I haven't had an aged Historic LP but I have seen and held and played several. I've become a fan because the better ones are reminiscent of Bursts that have seen far too much of the elements of weathering, time and play. Some sound very good which is no surprise since many unaged LPs sound great. I've seen real vintage 50s Gibsons that just look old and yellowed and worn and dulled without all the lacquer checking. And I've seen actual lacquer checking on many late 60s to mid 70s Gibsons. Long story short, I've grown to appreciate the look and the effort creating that look and feel of an aged instrument and wouldn't mind one or two at all.
 
Top