Well its very hard to get that pattern down along with the right shade and all. I bet yours is later part of 67 right?
because it looks like alot of early 68s.
How to tell a refin
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
-
jingle_jangle
- RRF Moderator
- Posts: 22679
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:00 am
- Contact:
Now we're getting nowhere, gentlemen.
First off, what's wrong with a refin?
I should re-phrase: What's wrong with most refins?
They are done by amateurs, that's what. Here's a fact that will be shocking to many of you:
most professional luthiers have no idea about how to duplicate a factory finish on a Rickenbacker
And that's not taking into account the scads of amateurs out there who couldn't refinish a tin can, who have wrecked thousands of beautiful guitars over the years because their inspiration exceeded their capabilities.
A properly-done refin to pro standards will be undetectable, except for one thing: it will look new (or as some would have it, it would BE too new!)
Ken, it takes some practice to get that "pattern", but since it's the first thing observers notice and one of the first things a well-versed collector will look for, a good refinish will capture and the guy spraying it better have a handle on it, or he should practice some more!
Shading and color matching is something that finishers have seldom gotten correct on Rickenbackers. The shaded finishes (FG, AG, two-tone brown, and now BBR) are done with different types of materials than many finishers are used to, and require a study of techniques and level of dedication that most working stiff luthiers are loathe to tackle. 80% of the so-called "Luthiers" out there are incapable of doing reasonably professional finishes, and those who do, usually charge an arm and a leg, because it takes constant practice and fresh materials, not to mention an insane eye for detail and infinite patience, to do a proper job, especially on a Rickenbacker instrument. Even more especially on an instrument with a shaded or burst finish.
Color-matching is an art, and cannot be learned. You either have an eye for it or you don't.
You need to be a chemist of sorts to understand the various paint types, and be conversant with concepts such and cure times and flash-off.
A well-done refinish should not decrease the value of a guitar, any more than it decreases the value of a Deusenberg automobile! This whole thing about "mojo" coming from something being old and nasty, is utter nonsense that has been perpetrated by the vintage instrument dealers out there.
Antique car dealers have a network of restoration shops and painters who do incredibly beautiful and expensive work to bring old cars back to their original beauty, in many cases exceeding the standard to which the car was originally built.
Guitar dealers have a network of sorts, but it is thin on the ground and fragile and often breaks down, so it could be said that this network and its weaknesses (not the least of which is the unreliability of the workers!) cause the dealers to go about as conservatively as possible in their dealings with the public. They do not like to deal in refinished instruments. That's the reality of it. And now, the celebrity guitar "mojo" thing has trickled down to the point where "fake mojo" has acquired market value. Thank you, Devil's Spawn (marketing folk).
(more)
First off, what's wrong with a refin?
I should re-phrase: What's wrong with most refins?
They are done by amateurs, that's what. Here's a fact that will be shocking to many of you:
most professional luthiers have no idea about how to duplicate a factory finish on a Rickenbacker
And that's not taking into account the scads of amateurs out there who couldn't refinish a tin can, who have wrecked thousands of beautiful guitars over the years because their inspiration exceeded their capabilities.
A properly-done refin to pro standards will be undetectable, except for one thing: it will look new (or as some would have it, it would BE too new!)
Ken, it takes some practice to get that "pattern", but since it's the first thing observers notice and one of the first things a well-versed collector will look for, a good refinish will capture and the guy spraying it better have a handle on it, or he should practice some more!
Shading and color matching is something that finishers have seldom gotten correct on Rickenbackers. The shaded finishes (FG, AG, two-tone brown, and now BBR) are done with different types of materials than many finishers are used to, and require a study of techniques and level of dedication that most working stiff luthiers are loathe to tackle. 80% of the so-called "Luthiers" out there are incapable of doing reasonably professional finishes, and those who do, usually charge an arm and a leg, because it takes constant practice and fresh materials, not to mention an insane eye for detail and infinite patience, to do a proper job, especially on a Rickenbacker instrument. Even more especially on an instrument with a shaded or burst finish.
Color-matching is an art, and cannot be learned. You either have an eye for it or you don't.
You need to be a chemist of sorts to understand the various paint types, and be conversant with concepts such and cure times and flash-off.
A well-done refinish should not decrease the value of a guitar, any more than it decreases the value of a Deusenberg automobile! This whole thing about "mojo" coming from something being old and nasty, is utter nonsense that has been perpetrated by the vintage instrument dealers out there.
Antique car dealers have a network of restoration shops and painters who do incredibly beautiful and expensive work to bring old cars back to their original beauty, in many cases exceeding the standard to which the car was originally built.
Guitar dealers have a network of sorts, but it is thin on the ground and fragile and often breaks down, so it could be said that this network and its weaknesses (not the least of which is the unreliability of the workers!) cause the dealers to go about as conservatively as possible in their dealings with the public. They do not like to deal in refinished instruments. That's the reality of it. And now, the celebrity guitar "mojo" thing has trickled down to the point where "fake mojo" has acquired market value. Thank you, Devil's Spawn (marketing folk).
(more)
“I say in speeches that a plausible mission of artists is to make people appreciate being alive at least a little bit. I am then asked if I know of any artists who pulled that off. I reply, 'The Beatles did.”
― Kurt Vonnegut
― Kurt Vonnegut
-
jingle_jangle
- RRF Moderator
- Posts: 22679
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:00 am
- Contact:
It's sad, but true that since dealers set the price, they will undervalue any guitar with a refinish, regardless of authenticity, attention to detail, and general excellence, because 95% of refins are pure ****.
Doesn't have to be that way. Dealers can be made to consider a guitar on an individual basis, and to see the merits of a beautifully-refinished instrument. Their eyes don't lie--they know if they can make a profit on an individual unit or not, and eye candy will always sell well.
In sales and exchanges between collectors, don't let anyone tell you that because you have a beautifully-refinished Rick, it's worth less than his equivalent "original" model with nicks, scratches, checked finish, buckle rash, etc. Nonsense. Move on to someone who won't try to make the new finish a negotiating point.
Don't let the salesmen and marketing wonks tell you what's beautiful and what's desirable. Go with your own taste and common sense.
BTW, you can tell the age of a guitar's finish under black light, but only if the topcoats are nitrocellulose. Old nitro will glow faintly; new nitro will not. BUT there's even a way around this, and counterfeiters use it all the time.
Additionally, I think that if an instrument is truly a part of history (and SRV's Old No. 1, and Albert King's Gibbie V would be good examples), then it should be left alone, period.
But the Strat played by Eddie Wisniewski at the Gorton High School Senior Prom in 1966, which he later traded for a Burns Bison, HAS LITTLE MOJO. So go ahead and get it refinned, but at least get it done right.
That applies ten times as much to Rickenbackers.
Doesn't have to be that way. Dealers can be made to consider a guitar on an individual basis, and to see the merits of a beautifully-refinished instrument. Their eyes don't lie--they know if they can make a profit on an individual unit or not, and eye candy will always sell well.
In sales and exchanges between collectors, don't let anyone tell you that because you have a beautifully-refinished Rick, it's worth less than his equivalent "original" model with nicks, scratches, checked finish, buckle rash, etc. Nonsense. Move on to someone who won't try to make the new finish a negotiating point.
Don't let the salesmen and marketing wonks tell you what's beautiful and what's desirable. Go with your own taste and common sense.
BTW, you can tell the age of a guitar's finish under black light, but only if the topcoats are nitrocellulose. Old nitro will glow faintly; new nitro will not. BUT there's even a way around this, and counterfeiters use it all the time.
Additionally, I think that if an instrument is truly a part of history (and SRV's Old No. 1, and Albert King's Gibbie V would be good examples), then it should be left alone, period.
But the Strat played by Eddie Wisniewski at the Gorton High School Senior Prom in 1966, which he later traded for a Burns Bison, HAS LITTLE MOJO. So go ahead and get it refinned, but at least get it done right.
That applies ten times as much to Rickenbackers.
“I say in speeches that a plausible mission of artists is to make people appreciate being alive at least a little bit. I am then asked if I know of any artists who pulled that off. I reply, 'The Beatles did.”
― Kurt Vonnegut
― Kurt Vonnegut
Paul, I respectfully disagree. IMO, a refin, good or bad reduces the collector value by 1/2.
The instrument has been altered. Whether it's a good job or not really doesn't matter.Refinned once or 100 times, doesn't maek a difference. It's not an original instrument.
The instrument has been altered. Whether it's a good job or not really doesn't matter.Refinned once or 100 times, doesn't maek a difference. It's not an original instrument.
" It's not where you are, it's who you're with.".
-
jingle_jangle
- RRF Moderator
- Posts: 22679
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:00 am
- Contact:
Marc, I didn't say it didn't reduce the value. You are missing my larger point--these values are arbitrary and set by the big guy dealers. In turn collectors follow like sheep, as do smaller dealers because it's easier to be a follower than to think for one's self.
It lowers the value, because dealers SAY it lowers the value. If antitrust busters ever went after the major collector guitar dealers for price fixing, the vintage guitar landscape would be flattened as far as the eye can see.
Originality is vastly overrated in guitars, because there are so many botched instruments out there, messing up things for everybody (not to mention dishonest vintage dealers spreading nonsense in order to make their jobs easier, maximize their profits and build undeserved credibility.)
Your "respectful disagreement" reveals just the mindset that dealers like to see--obedient and spouting their version of the Collectors' Bible. As you say, it's your opinion, but why?
There is absolutely no logical reason why this needs to be so.
Unless we all go on like lambs, braying that it's true because some dealer told us or we read it in a magazine.
It lowers the value, because dealers SAY it lowers the value. If antitrust busters ever went after the major collector guitar dealers for price fixing, the vintage guitar landscape would be flattened as far as the eye can see.
Originality is vastly overrated in guitars, because there are so many botched instruments out there, messing up things for everybody (not to mention dishonest vintage dealers spreading nonsense in order to make their jobs easier, maximize their profits and build undeserved credibility.)
Your "respectful disagreement" reveals just the mindset that dealers like to see--obedient and spouting their version of the Collectors' Bible. As you say, it's your opinion, but why?
There is absolutely no logical reason why this needs to be so.
Unless we all go on like lambs, braying that it's true because some dealer told us or we read it in a magazine.
“I say in speeches that a plausible mission of artists is to make people appreciate being alive at least a little bit. I am then asked if I know of any artists who pulled that off. I reply, 'The Beatles did.”
― Kurt Vonnegut
― Kurt Vonnegut
-
ken_swearingen
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 6:00 pm
-
throw_this_away
- Intermediate Member
- Posts: 618
- Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:59 am
- Contact:
I guess this argument depends on your outlook when buying a bass… are you primarily looking at the instrument to ‘play’ or to ‘collect’???
People that are looking for a ‘Player’ want something to gig/jam with. They want something that sounds, feels, and plays well. They are not thinking of resale values that much. Looking good and being mint is great… but re-fretts, re-finis, dings/dents and mods are not so bad as long as it still performs. If you are looking for a player, you will probably let your eyes, ears, and hands be the judge of true value.
‘Collectors’ go more for the vintage "vibe" and the resale value that goes with it. Original everything is key, the more rare and exclusive the better; mods are heresy. People also get vintage because of nostalgia and/or because the like the feel of the older designs. A bass bought to collect will be babied, as condition and originality is key. For the prices paid… I don’t blame them when they frown at refins… if a collector wanted a bass with a new finish… they would get a new model… they are paying for vintage originality.
…but just because something is 100% original vintage, it doesn't mean it is actually better. Don't let the vintage guys hear this, but the newer stuff is just as good... if not better as far as quality and playing goes (there are plenty of exceptions... thin necks and all)... improving product is the long term job of guys like John Hall.
With that being said I didn't buy my vintage 4001 to hang on the wall. A local guy had it... let me play it, and I fell in love with the look and feel. My 72' is gigging along side my 96' tomorrow night... no preferential treatment. I paid for it... so I am going to get my moneys worth. I bought it and use it all the time… thinking like a player… but I also admit that the collector in me also influenced me to get it.
People that are looking for a ‘Player’ want something to gig/jam with. They want something that sounds, feels, and plays well. They are not thinking of resale values that much. Looking good and being mint is great… but re-fretts, re-finis, dings/dents and mods are not so bad as long as it still performs. If you are looking for a player, you will probably let your eyes, ears, and hands be the judge of true value.
‘Collectors’ go more for the vintage "vibe" and the resale value that goes with it. Original everything is key, the more rare and exclusive the better; mods are heresy. People also get vintage because of nostalgia and/or because the like the feel of the older designs. A bass bought to collect will be babied, as condition and originality is key. For the prices paid… I don’t blame them when they frown at refins… if a collector wanted a bass with a new finish… they would get a new model… they are paying for vintage originality.
…but just because something is 100% original vintage, it doesn't mean it is actually better. Don't let the vintage guys hear this, but the newer stuff is just as good... if not better as far as quality and playing goes (there are plenty of exceptions... thin necks and all)... improving product is the long term job of guys like John Hall.
With that being said I didn't buy my vintage 4001 to hang on the wall. A local guy had it... let me play it, and I fell in love with the look and feel. My 72' is gigging along side my 96' tomorrow night... no preferential treatment. I paid for it... so I am going to get my moneys worth. I bought it and use it all the time… thinking like a player… but I also admit that the collector in me also influenced me to get it.
Good point.. I want my 4001 refinished, refreted, and Geddy mods done to it. It'll be my 4001GL.. and it'll be a PLAYER! Plus it's my first Rickenbacker.. so I'll never sell it.
How much does a refin (Jetglo) and refret go for?
How much does a refin (Jetglo) and refret go for?
1976 Rickenbacker 4001
2011/05 Fender Standard Fretless Jazz Bass
2005/11 Fender Standard Jazz Bass
2011/05 Fender Standard Fretless Jazz Bass
2005/11 Fender Standard Jazz Bass
-
ken_swearingen
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 6:00 pm
I believe I've come to the conclusion that other than the overspray, it seems to be "all there" and is not a refinish. The patterns correct, the truss rods are clean.Just happens to be a very clean example. It's possible you know...
..there must be some kind of test to be 100%....
..there must be some kind of test to be 100%....
" It's not where you are, it's who you're with.".
-
ken_swearingen
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 6:00 pm