Does Honest Player Wear Hurt The Value of a Rare and/or Desirable Guitar?

[crunchee]

Like the question says...provided that the player wear is honest play wear and the guitar doesn't look like it's been dragged behind a truck down a country road, and that the guitar hasn't been altered or modified to the point where it can't be returned back to stock condition? I started thinking about this after seeing some of the recent vintage Gibson acquisitions by HFC members, plus the fact that some actual '59 LPs do get loaned out by their owners on occasion, to be played by a lucky few. By extension, this question could also refer to recent premium/custom guitars like Shishkov and very late model custom ordered Hamer USA models. Also, is keeping a guitar in 'mint' or 'near mint' condition actually WORTH the trouble of keeping it hermetically sealed and untouched/unplayed? Is the value going to be affected to the point that such a guitar should NEVER be picked up and played by anyone? I know that there's tons of variables and possibilities at work here, especially depending on what guitar brand/model/version/year is being referred to. TIA!

[Jeff R]

Personally, I want honest play wear, "used but not abused," in a vintage guitar and if the said use resulted in the guitar missing more paint that it retained, so be it. It tells me the guitar is good enough that it was actually played, for good reason, and not a case queen. Reminds me of a vintage guitar show in Texas probably 20 years ago when a dealer showed me a pristine, and I mean CLEAN, mid-50s strat. He let me hold it and upon examination, there was a good reason it was in virtually mint condition - the neck had enough twisty mixed with relief to shoot arrows off it it was so unplayable.

That's why when I was recently shopping for a vintage Les Paul in my price range, I intentionally sought a Norlin-era that was stock where it counts, pro-modified if need be where it counted, but missing a lot of paint in all the good ways. I ended up with a vintage Les Paul that's a player with "the look" and it cost one-third of what I would have paid in a current Gibson Custom Shop/Historic whatever they call it.

[Jeff R]

On a related note, what constitutes "vintage" nowadays? When I started going to guitar shows in the 90s, Norlin-era LPs and CBS strats were not vintage. Now they are vintage, or at least they are priced as so compared to 20 years ago. Those shows of the 90s, when nice stock CBS strats and nice Norlin LPs were $500 and a grand respectively, all day/every day and as many as you could load home, are long gone. The '76 above will soon be 40 years old, so yeah, it's vintage in my opinion. Opinions aside, is there some vintage guitar formula or a cut-off date or something else I'm missing?

[velorush]

If you hold the purpose of the instrument is making music, it is a finite resource with a limited lifespan, to be used until no longer functional (e.g.,Blackie). If you hold the purpose of the instrument is an investment it is (still)a finite resource of limited lifespan, but the ownership strategy must change from making music to protecting (lengthening) that finite lifespan. Having almost never turned a profit on any of this stuff and refusing to hold on to anything I don't play with regularity, I have my thoughts, but others will vary greatly.

I've yet to hesitate on a buying good instrument, however, because of honest playwear.

[kurtsstuff]

I only go for the guitars with "Dishonest" play wear....They sound dirtier..

[velorush]

To add to what the other Jeff said, in the 80's, my three-bolt Strat got no love whatsoever. As Fender made their comeback into the '90's it only got worse. I sold it for (IIRC) tree-fity around '93. I'm shocked that the same guitars are now held in such high regard and command prices as "vintage" due only to the passage of time.

ETA: not meant as a slag on the three-bolts, only that the truth to me is somewhere in between the old hate and the new accolades.

[ARM OF HAMER]

Well....................this 1979 Black Hamer Sunburst has certainly been well played. I don't think that when your talking something this old its a huge detraction as long as the rest of the guitar is straight. For me the essence of cool is a well played guitar. .. HERE i know I'd never sell the guitar for what I paid for it so..................i guess the wear has increased the value...............atleast for me.

[DaveL]

My concern with guitars with alot of player wear is the inability of ebayers to give

an honest assesment of the frets. I hear "tiny spot of wear" or "plenty of life left" or

my "luthier" just gave it a good crowning...

yeah, and I'll be getting a good freakin crowning right in the wallet cos the

dude rounded the edges too much or some other nonsense, I gather...

[ARM OF HAMER]

Its a good thing to use caution and know what your getting when buying a used guitar that does have a lot of play time on it. Does not mean its not a great guitar but certainly as things are used and age through time the parts can get broken,lost,worn out,and switched out for something else more available...........all that and more.Best way to buy a guitar is in person then you can check everything out first hand but sometimes you just have to settle for good pictures and a good description and roll the dice. That Black 79 Sunburst of mine was in Edmonton,Canada so I had no way to check it out in person so I just got pics and info then pulled the trigger..................AFTER talking with Steve. [sERIAL] of course. Its a GREAT guitar in every way you could want one to be.

[kizanski]

A museum piece/under-the-bed example of any guitar will always be worth more than a guitar with wear - honest or otherwise.

[it's me HHB]

I've always been into wear/ relics. I actually felt like most Hamers I've owned were too nice lol

[ARM OF HAMER]

A museum piece/under-the-bed example of any guitar will always be worth more than a guitar with wear - honest or otherwise.

I have to agree, people are always looking for the best example they can find, whether it be guitars,cars or most anything else........... there is no denying that.

[crunchee]

A museum piece/under-the-bed example of any guitar will always be worth more than a guitar with wear - honest or otherwise.

I have to agree, people are always looking for the best example they can find, whether it be guitars,cars or most anything else........... there is no denying that.

I shoulda put a definition/clarification on what constitutes 'honest playing wear', especially since not everybody is into the relic'd look...plus, multiple dings and more-than-just-a-little-missing-finish tends to drop the condition to 'very good' status more or less, and most people looking for a guitar tend to avoid that, IMO. I was thinking more along the lines of a guitar in solid excellent condition, with some fret wear (but not unplayable), pick haze on the front, mild belt-buckle marks and jean-rivet tracks on the back, and a few mild dings and dimples here and there...in other words, the same condition that a good amount of USA Hamers from the last twenty-five years are still in, the kind of wear that you'd expect to get if you only played the guitar at home or in a controlled environment with responsible supervision, and not a full-blown gig where anything could happen.

[ARM OF HAMER]

That Black Hamer Sunburst HAS "Honest" playing wear. Maybe just a tad bit more "Honest" than what your refering to. I know what you mean though, some thing that could accurately be described as in excellent condition................what most people would be looking for when buying a used Hamer guitar. ..

[kizanski]

Don't get me wrong: I've never gotten scared off of a guitar because of wear.

The '58 Esquire which I used to own was refinished before I bought it, and THAT paint had been worn through to the bare wood, and the wear in the fretboard was in the form of rutts which your finger could almost get lost in.

If there was ever an example of honest wear, this was it. But there was a reason for the wear. The guitar was a string bender's wet dream, and the pickup was possessed.

A few here have played it and know I ain't bullshitting.

That said, all of that wear effects the price, no matter how cool it looks or how great the neck felt because it had been "broken in" (putting it gently).

[tomteriffic]

On one hand there's a lot of appeal to a museum piece, excellent condition example of a given guitar. Witness the Bloomington Gold rankings/certifications for Corvettes. But I think that there's more than a little truth to the saying that the under the bed ones got left under the bed because they were dogs. Or, as a friend of mine said when fondling the wreckage of my '63 Junior "the good ones get played".

[kizanski]

On one hand there's a lot of appeal to a museum piece, excellent condition example of a given guitar. Witness the Bloomington Gold rankings/certifications for Corvettes. But I think that there's more than a little truth to the saying that the under the bed ones got left under the bed because they were dogs. Or, as a friend of mine said when fondling the wreckage of my '63 Junior "the good ones get played".

All true, but the mint "dog" will always fetch more money than a worn "good one".

Get it? "Fetch"?

See what I did there?

Anyone?

Is this thing on?

[crunchee]

On one hand there's a lot of appeal to a museum piece, excellent condition example of a given guitar. Witness the Bloomington Gold rankings/certifications for Corvettes. But I think that there's more than a little truth to the saying that the under the bed ones got left under the bed because they were dogs. Or, as a friend of mine said when fondling the wreckage of my '63 Junior "the good ones get played".

I think that used to be true before guitars started getting 'collectible' for collectibility's sake, but not so much anymore...mainly because there's a glut of 'collectible' guitars on the market right now IMO, along with the generic mindset that "if some of them are collectible now, then eventually they'll ALL be collectible". It's still fairly easy to find essentially unused guitars that were made in 1990 because of that mindset. I've seen very few guitars that are younger than 25 years old, that I would call 'played to death'. Used? Yes. Abused? Yes. Broken? Yes. Played to death like old guitars were? Not yet, not really IMO. Of course, that might be because they're ALL dogs, if one goes by that old rule. Or maybe, it's because players have gotten into the habit of treating guitars like 'future collectibles' instead of 'guitars', regardless of whether they actually are collectible or not.

[Jeff R]

I'm one of those that put in a round on Kiz's pictured Esquire and I will attest that it was PERFECT. Funny, to this day I couldn't remember the body color or the wear on it (I would have sworn it was an off-white or a creme color), I think it's because that guitar made you play with your eyes closed it felt and sounded so good. All I remembered were those fretboard divots, the "perpendicular scallops" as I called them and how unbelievably good they made the guitar feel under your fingertips. It was my favorite player in his stable at the time and knowing his collection then, that really said a lot. As a player, its assessed value in my hands and ears were very good, if not prime, vintage money. Because it was a "10" of a pre-CBS Esquire if you took visuals and original parts out of the equation.

[tommy p]

I think it depends on the buyer. Some only consider minty instruments and will want $300 off if you put straplocks on one. Others (like me) don't mind the normal wear-and-tear.

I've bought three new guitars in my life; the rest were used. I only have one of the three new ones left and that's a 12-string Guild acoustic that never sees the light of day. I have two used guitars that are in "like new" condition and they never get gigged because I don't want to be the one that puts that first mark on them. All the others get played and I don't care if I bang one into something.

[Studio Custom]

A museum piece/under-the-bed example of any guitar will always be worth more than a guitar with wear - honest or otherwise.

Which ironically maybe a sonic dog or overly heavy example, hence the lack of use.

[kizanski]

A museum piece/under-the-bed example of any guitar will always be worth more than a guitar with wear - honest or otherwise.

Which ironically maybe a sonic dog or overly heavy example, hence the lack of use.

How is that ironic?

[django49]

I continue to be amazed at the number of virtually unplayed high end instruments that pop up. It is not uncommon for them to have had multiple owners before me. Sometimes they were bought as "investments". More often, it seems, they were someone's all time "dream guitar" (custom ordered or otherwise) and the thought that they WOULD become THE ONE that would be played out proudly, without regard to wear and tear.....

Reality sets in with some combination of "I am not worthy of that guitar" and "Wow, I really spent that much and I cannot bear to see the first ding". And it tends to get left behind, safe and sound, while a "lesser" instrument gets all the work. THe case queens are not NECESSARILY of lower quality, but they often fail to be "broken in enough" to let their potential shine through.

Yes, I have been guilty of all of that.

[gorch]

I would like to see Ebay and other shops displaying the wear value of guitars, amps and other equipment included in the total amount just like tax amounts. So, buyers would notice the honest wear value spot on.

[velorush]

I continue to be amazed at the number of virtually unplayed high end instruments that pop up. It is not uncommon for them to have had multiple owners before me. Sometimes they were bought as "investments". More often, it seems, they were someone's all time "dream guitar" (custom ordered or otherwise) and the thought that they WOULD become THE ONE that would be played out proudly, without regard to wear and tear.....

Reality sets in with some combination of "I am not worthy of that guitar" and "Wow, I really spent that much and I cannot bear to see the first ding". And it tends to get left behind, safe and sound, while a "lesser" instrument gets all the work. THe case queens are not NECESSARILY of lower quality, but they often fail to be "broken in enough" to let their potential shine through.

Yes, I have been guilty of all of that.

My one remaining Gibson falls into that category. I bought it new in 1994; the price was more than I should have paid for a guitar at the time. It was never meant to be an investment - I was afraid to mess it up, so it languished in its case for years. I didn't play much at all in the years following, but finally started back around 2000. I bought a Strat and rarely got the Gibson out of the case. When I did it didn't sound that great to me.

When I started playing in church services the Strat was more alien (i.e., rock-n-roll) to the older folks, but an arched top Gibson with f-holes had an "acceptable" look, so I started playing the Gibson (sitting next to a grand piano). Within a couple of months of starting the guitar absolutely opened up! Suddenly there was a resonance, a "live" quality it hadn't had before. It was an amazing transformation. Sounds great now.

The greatness of the guitar likely has no correlation to 'casequeenness.' It could be, as you say, it hasn't been played enough to allow whatever "breaking in," "loosening up," or whatever, to allow a guitar reach its potential.

[Armitage]

Mint beats wear, in my book, but honest wear beats abuse or faux wear by a mile.