G&L "Rustic"

[TDR1138]

Looks like G&L is now doing relics...

http://guitaradoptions.com/store/pro...cat=268&page=1

[Chef]

Yes
they showed some at namm...

[Madcity Fats]

I love G&L and good for them for exploring whatever market will keep the company viable for years and years to come. But ...

You mean I can buy a brand new L2000 and beat the living s#!t out of it, or I can pay an extra grand for one someone else has already beat the s#!t out of?

Well that's an easy call. Then again, I'll be the first to admit I don't get the whole pre-worn thing, I don't care if it's jeans or bass guitars. I have no problem buying a guitar that shows plenty of wear, but I'm not about to pay extra for something I can achieve by loaning my gear to a careless friend.

[Chef]

I hate to be the one to point this out, but, you're contradicting yourself.

[Nedmundo]

I'm curious whether this will work for G&L, because players don't tend to buy them for the image, and vintage "naturally worn" G&L's aren't prohibitively exepensive (yet). Fender is quite different in both respects, so I expect its "Road Worn" series to work out, at least for awhile. In fact, I'm not sure it would work as well for any other brand except possibly Gibson. Maybe G&L's guitars that look like Fenders will succeed more easily in the "distressed" market, because at least they'll have the image. I guess the new Jazz clone fits too, and the SB-2 is close.

But I don't exactly comprehend this market, so who knows? I understand wanting the feel of a broken-in neck, but that doesn't mean the entire instrument needs to be banged up. Don Grosh, for example, has a "Vintageizing" process to create a worn feel on the necks, but that's it.

[Madcity Fats]

Originally Posted by Chef

I hate to be the one to point this out, but, you're contradicting yourself.

Let me clarify, because I'm really not:

I should have said I have no problem buying a USED instrument with plenty of wear, but I'm not about to pay a premium for a new instrument that looks like I let my 7 year old nephew play with it for a month.

That is to say, I'm not picky about dings, scratches, etc. so long as the bass plays and sounds good (and isn't being advertised as "mint," obviously). But there's nothing one can do to "wear out" a guitar that I think adds any value to it whatsoever.

So I won't pay extra for such a feature. Obviously, plenty of people do, and if having an instrument that looks vintage helps them enjoy it more and make more music with it, that's all that counts. I'm not trying to tell anyone how to spend their money, let alone start a flame war.

I was just really surprised at the price these rustics are apparently commanding. There are all kinds of beat up old G&Ls on eBay that go for < $1K, which is a helluva lot less than the old beat up Fenders go for. I can't buy a vintage '62 jazz cheaper than a '62 Custom Shop relic reissue. But I can buy at least two early eighties G&L basses for the price of that rustic. Just sayin'.

[Chef]

I still think you're contradicting yersef...by mkaing this point:
"I love G&L and good for them for exploring whatever market will keep the company viable for years and years to come"

and then calling it silly for them to sell relic'd basses...which, is G&L taking advantage of a market niche...potentially.

I don't really care...just sayin'...

[Madcity Fats]

I see, I misunderstood you.

Well, I do love G&L, but that doesn't mean I'm ga-ga for everything that rolls out the factory door.

For instance, I don't like active basses. I have nothing against them or anyone who plays them, but they're just not for me. But where would a passive electronics G&L loving guy like me be without the L2000?

I don't think anyone who is inclined to buy one of these is going to reconsider it based on the opinion of some nobody dork like me, so I just threw my $.02 in the well.

[Chef]

[TDR1138]

What I think is interesting is that these (well, at least this example) have modern features, such as the 6-bolt neck. Fender's relics really are designed to be pretty good replicas of their 50s/60s-era instruments. I'd almost be a little more interested if G&L started bringing back the old 3-bolt neck, black crinkle bridge, original-style headstock, etc.

I agree with Madcity Flats in that the real Fenders that the relics are imitating (i.e. a '62 Jazz) are worth a lot more than the Custom Shop relics. So, in that respect, I get the relic thing, and can understand the price. Makes an instrument like that more accessible to someone who can't stand to pop for a $10k instrument. But yeah, when I can buy a used and abused 80s/90s G&L for $600-$800, why spend in excess of $2k for a new and abused bass?

[derick]

The real reason that relics have such value is that, these days, nobody's going to play an instrument 10,000 hours to relic it naturally. So, a worn out instrument does have it's own mojo, but I'm not sure that a brand new relic'd guitar has the same vibe. Did you see Bruce Springsteen's telecaster at the super bowl? It was trashed, the finish on the back was 60% NOT finished.

If it's good enough for Bruce, it's good enough for me. Except that he started out with a new axe, and wore it out himself and so should everybody else.

-Bit of a Relic Myself...

[snappytom]

Originally Posted by Nedmundo

.........
But I don't exactly comprehend this market, so who knows? I understand wanting the feel of a broken-in neck, but that doesn't mean the entire instrument needs to be banged up. Don Grosh, for example, has a "Vintageizing" process to create a worn feel on the necks, but that's it.

Agree .... I don't quite understand it.
Love G&L's, also love a nice clean instrument in good condition. They are not museum pieces to me, I take them to places where drunks do stupid things, let trusted individuals play them, and use them up myself. But I like the mojo to be my own. 2nd choice is an old bass with natural ageing, a distant 3rd would be one of the instant relics.

[ljazz]

Originally Posted by TDR1138

What I think is interesting is that these (well, at least this example) have modern features, such as the 6-bolt neck. Fender's relics really are designed to be pretty good replicas of their 50s/60s-era instruments. I'd almost be a little more interested if G&L started bringing back the old 3-bolt neck, black crinkle bridge, original-style headstock, etc.

I agree with Madcity Flats in that the real Fenders that the relics are imitating (i.e. a '62 Jazz) are worth a lot more than the Custom Shop relics. So, in that respect, I get the relic thing, and can understand the price. Makes an instrument like that more accessible to someone who can't stand to pop for a $10k instrument. But yeah, when I can buy a used and abused 80s/90s G&L for $600-$800, why spend in excess of $2k for a new and abused bass?

Amen....

I'd rather get one already mojo'd up for th 6-800, or get a new one, and spray my mojo all over it.

Ljazz

[chunkstyle]

Originally Posted by ljazz

.... and spray my mojo all over it.

Ljazz

LOL! gross....

[ljazz]

Edited..... sorry, but too gross, even for me .... so I removed it..... see my next post.

Ljazz

[Chef]

Not safe for work no-mo.

And, just kinda gross.

unzub'd

[ljazz]

In all seriousness, the issue I would have in getting something "rusticed" (is that a word?) would be the new features incorporated into the later models. I guess the whole point for me would be the fact that it should be modeling an old classic. Why not a reissued 1st gen SB1 or 2 with the rustic treatment?..... 3 bolt and all. Or an L1000?

My point with the above posts was a laugh (of course I was thinking Austin Powers kinda mojo, and not what's been implied), but I fail to see how it's worth the extra 1 grand (approx) for a broken in bass, instead of a reliced version of the 1st generations. Heck, G&L doesn't even have reissued versions.... wouldn't that have been the better place to start?

Ljazz

[Skarekrough]

Originally Posted by derick

The real reason that relics have such value is that, these days, nobody's going to play an instrument 10,000 hours to relic it naturally.

Exactly.

In some sense I think we've given in to this whole over-consumption nonsense and relicing of a brand new instrument is a sub-conscious device to appease and quiet the mind of our guilt for owning more gear than we'd ever need in our lifetime by having something that gives the outward appearance of having owned and played it for decades.

In a sense, I think it's a side-effect of the GAS that we have not just come to embrace, but become unhealthily obsessed with.

[Nedmundo]

Originally Posted by Skarekrough

In some sense I think we've given in to this whole over-consumption nonsense and relicing of a brand new instrument is a sub-conscious device to appease and quiet the mind of our guilt for owning more gear than we'd ever need in our lifetime by having something that gives the outward appearance of having owned and played it for decades.

In a sense, I think it's a side-effect of the GAS that we have not just come to embrace, but become unhealthily obsessed with.

It might be this way for some. The "relic" phenomenon has inspired additional thought about whether I'd rather have a large arsenal, or just a few workhorses that, with more concentrated playing time, would develop more "mojo" over the years. But I'm over 40, take good care of my instruments, and don't gig frequently these days, so it won't make much difference.

Besides, the main reason I've considered thinning the herd is the excellence of my SB-2 and Fender Jazz V, which have rendered all others but my four string Jazz unnecessary. The possible additional "mojo" to the SB-2 and J-basses would be a nice side effect.

[El Tookay]

Personally, I'm more interested in the sonic mojo, rather than the visual.

Real mojo doesn't come out of a spray gun.