Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Vintage Fender Jazz Refinishing
- Thread starter onlyruin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fender jazz refinish vintage fender
I get the point about Poly based finishes being thicker, but Nitrocellulose is also a plastic, in fact pretty much the first plastic. Also, the majority of the metallic colours that were available at the time were acrylic paint.
I think there's too much mythology and magic attributed to nitro paint that is probably more likely attributed to the fact that more time and care was taken with the building of the instruments and wood sourcing etc at the time. The same can be said of a lot of the builders who offer nitro finishes on instruments now.
Now aesthetically I think nitro finishes can look pretty amazing when they age a little.
With a "real" classic like that, you want to send it to Gord Miller, and pretty much no one else but a handful of people considered to be at his level. He's one of the few in the business whose name can actually bolster the value of a refinished instrument. You don't want to just take it to some guy that "sprays lacquer" or "specializes in relics." You want a real-deal, well respected restorer's name attached to the work. And, on top of the reputation element, he knows his historical stuff, and his work is simply excellent. I've never seen anyone else do it any better than he does.
Absolutely not. They're kind of the McDonalds of "relic" finishes. Fine for a build. Not fine for a true restoration of a valuable classic instrument, using the original factory techniques.
Absolutely not. They're kind of the McDonalds of "relic" finishes. Fine for a build. Not fine for a true restoration of a valuable classic instrument, using the original factory techniques.
Last edited:
This is a mostly false post. You're not only not an expert, but you're spreading terrible falsehoods.
Firstly, spraying nitrocellulose lacquer is not illegal in many states. It is strongly regulated in commercial use, with volume being the main factor – as it should be, since it releases lacquer thinner fumes into the atmosphere. That's why you almost never see it used regularly for large items any more, like in body shops or furniture factories...but Fender, Gibson, etc. can crank out a bunch of small items like guitars sprayed with it. The volumes of use are regulated, but it's not illegal. In CA, probably the most restrictive state, or one of them, I can get lacquer, no problem. But if I was a business using it in volume, I'd have to account for how much, and what type, I was using.
Secondly, the old myth that lacquer is light and thin and urethanes are heavy and thick is almost entirely false. Either one can be thick or thin. It all depends on how they are prepared and applied. For example, both Fender and Gibson used lacquer in the old days. Fender's finishes tended to be (though absolutely were not always) thin, because they were deliberately applied that way, to save on materials. Meanwhile, Gibson, a higher class guitar company that was a lot less concerned with cost cutting in the pre-Norlin years, often applied their lacquer extremely thickly. For example, I have chips on my '68 SG Standard that show the finish to be thicker than any "poly" finish I've ever seen on any instrument. By the same token, urethane finishes can be extremely thin. In fact, one of the guys you posted, Pat Wilkins, is an expert at spraying them incredibly thinly. As another example, some early G&Ls with urethane have what seem like paper thin finishes.
Thirdly, lacquer does not "breathe." It's a solvent based finish, so the solvent evaporates out initially. Once dry, nothing is passing through it except another solvent or caustic substance – certainly not moisture or air! And permanent solvent encapsulation can be a very real issue with it, which would not be the case if it "breathed."
Finally, the tonal impact is an extremely dubious claim, at best. If this needs to be explained, then there's no point explaining it. But bottom line: If this was a clear thing to prove, there'd be some proof.
Last edited:
Pre-CBS has little to do with whether an old Fender should be restored with nitrocellulose or not. It all has to do with original specs, which were varied, but none of which turned on the division between the pre-CBS and the CBS eras.
Firstly, in the pre-CBS era, nitrocellulose and acrylic were standard finish materials. It depended on the color.
Secondly, there were a few years after CBS purchased Fender in which the finish materials stayed the same.
Thirdly, even in "the poly years," Fender still sprayed lacquer for quite some time. For instance, the color coats or sunbursts remained lacquer though most of the '70s, even though the clear coat over these went to urethane. Additionally, the student model colors of Black, Red, Blue, and White continued to be sprayed in lacquer (nitro lacquer except for White, which was an acrylic lacquer). Occasionally, a pro model would be sprayed with the material from one of these student colors (especially Black). And some Custom Colors continued to be sprayed in lacquer color coats (with urethane clear over them).
The important thing is matching the original specs, whatever they actually were. And the dividing line between these specs isn't really determined by when the CBS purchase happened.
He said it, he's no expert. Lacquer doesn't breath at all, compared to anything. It's actually not even a quantitative quality one can measure when using lacquer. Poly finishes can be thin. Neither finish will impact your tone somewhat, a tiny bit, or in the slightest way measurable at all on a SOLID BODY ELECTRIC BASS. There is no evidence anywhere to suport that statement. All BS.
And $3k for a paint job on a body is NUTS. Take it to a reputable body shop if your going to paint it black. Should be under $1k. They may actually have the experience to burst it for you. I do agree that if you get it back to the period correct color, it will up the value somewhat. Last option is to buy a OEM body already painted.
EDIT: Just noticed a few others chimed in with the same sediments. My apologies for the duplicity.
If your in Southwest MI, This guy can help you out.
https://www.youtube.com/@zimnickiguitars311
Squier Classic Vibe 60s Jazz Bass Body in Sunburst (28312) | eBay
NEW - Allparts Fender Licensed Jazz Bass Body, Alder, 3-TONE SUNBURST - #JBF-3SB | eBay
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate, TalkBass may earn a commission from qualifying purchases.
All good info. On a pre-CBS instrument I would still not restore with poly as some (not you) seem to imply. No matter how superior a non-nitro finish might be, it is going to negatively impact the value more than a proper nitro refin would (also agree that some refinishers add value over others). Yes, the acrylic colors tend to get lumped in as "nitro" when they are not. Still, the clear coats were nitro throughout the pre-CBS era. The only time I've seen acrylic clear was on some of the outsourced metal flake finishes.
I'm pretty settled on a black nitro finish at this stage. Like I said, I'm not concerned about the effect another refinish will have on the value. I'm also the annoying type of owner that goes for vibe over authenticity, so I'm pretty much abandoning all hope of recouping an investment in exchange for the hope that I'll just really like this bass and keep it for long enough that my poor decisions will be my kids' problem. The life of a compulsive instrument collector!
As an eBay Associate, TalkBass may earn a commission from qualifying purchases.
I would contact Mas Hino. Not that he would necessarily refinish it himself, but would certainly know who would do a high quality job in/around NYC. Mas was the luthier making Olinto bases until last year. He is located in upper Manhattan. MAS HINO NYC Guitars & Basses
Not trying to start anything here because I know the love people seem to have for Mas, and I do respect his work, but I have had more than one experience with him that would lead me to not seek him out. I'm sure he'd kill it, though.
MJT did my 51 P bass [body] to my specs, just like how I found it over 35 years ago, and it came out exactly as I requested. MJT does not strip the old finish, they only deal w/ paint ready parts. This was the 3rd project MJT has done for me.
Last edited:
IYHO. Once it is refinished, the value has decreased. So, it wouldn't matter, as long as the color is correct, and it looks like it did when new. IMHO.
Having worked in a vintage shop that was not my experience. Sure, a refin knocks a lot off but it is not always the same - an authentic refin definitely brings more and, as stated previously, ones done by certain refinishers can bring more yet. I sold a bass I had refinished by Tom Murphy and that was clearly a selling point.
Personally, I passed on one of the '59 Jazz Bass prototypes precisely because it had been refinished (neck and body) in poly. If the refin had been 'right', I would have bought it. That bass has since been stripped and expertly refinished by Joe Riggio. Certainly worth more now.
Mas is complex, I think. I've dealt with him (and his wife, if it's via email) a few times over the years and own one of his basses. His pickups are amazing and he really has a mastery over what makes up vintage tone. His original designs are very cool (though I'm not so into that huge headstock look). And his setups are second to none, especially with fretless. So his basses sound and feel wonderful. But when it comes to finish work, I'm not sure if the bass I have is representative, but it is certainly not up to the rest of the standard he sets.
I recently had a bass painted a solid color at an auto body shop. Final price was $230, with turnaround time of less than a week.
As an eBay Associate, TalkBass may earn a commission from qualifying purchases.
