Vintage and Modern Inlay Material ???

jwilli · Post by **jwilli** » Thu May 29, 2003 8:57 am

I like it! I like it! What color are you going to paint it?

maizeandblue · Post by **maizeandblue** » Thu May 29, 2003 1:24 pm

It's going to be burgundy (glo) with a trapeze tailpiece, toasters, open backed Sta-Tite tuners and a stereo 370 harness.

Personally, I think the inlay material is VERY close. Not as white as the vintage material, but it looks great to me.

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Thu May 29, 2003 5:31 pm

John Hall, what'ya think?? Close to crushed pearl??

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Thu May 29, 2003 9:22 pm

I think John already commented on this stuff on AGR awhile back. It's "close" if you're not real picky, and you aren't trying to exactly replicate a 60s radically radiused fingerboard; the material is nowhere near thick enough.It's not as "clean and clear" as the original, either.And the particles are more like fragments, not "flakes" like the original.Trust me on this one, John; I saw a Lot of this stuff in raw form during my short tenure at Rick 30 odd years ago.
Bottom line, though, if Warren likes it, that's cool.A happening project he has there...

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri May 30, 2003 7:03 pm

As Don said, I have seen this material in person. There is some similarity but the texture, color, and configuration is quite different than the original. If anything, it's probably better looking material aesthetically than the real deal.

maizeandblue · Post by **maizeandblue** » Sat May 31, 2003 7:31 am

I think the real vintage stuff, of which I have a small sample, is very nice. What I like about the original vintage material is the whiteness and the fact that it has a bit less shell to it. The MOP sparkle is rather thin and ultimately the inlays were laminated before being cut and inlaid. The additional thickness that came from the lamination increased the aesthetics (to my eye). I'll take some high resolution images when it's all done and everyone can chime in with their comments. Best, WL

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Sat May 31, 2003 10:57 am

I wonder if Rick would consider using this stuff if it was made to thicker specs, like the original?Then again, if Rick was going to start using something again to attempt to replicate some
material from the past, and with all the "detail freaks " out there, myself included, before too long, you'd get the old"close, but no cigar" complaint.So to those who long for a good crushed pearl inlayed factory reissue,you'll have to bite the bullet Until the day comes the real deal can be found.JH has taken enough flak from the public, even after bending over backwards to retool the C series.Good thing the C 64 12 string didn't have crushed pearl; we might Never see the guitar!!

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 2:20 am

My thoughts are that it looks like the best alternative so far that has surfaced, unless the formula and processes for the original CP can be replicated by a new vendor....the new stuff looks pretty good, and maybe some small changes in its process could bring it even closer to the original CP inlay.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 8:57 am

As I said, though, a Big prerequsite is that it would Have to be thicker than it is,as it now can really only be used on fairly flat radiused fingerboards, which, when coupled with fretwire
with some height to it, make string bending a dream.Ricks, especially the old ones are Not known for flat fingerboards....

maizeandblue · Post by **maizeandblue** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 5:32 pm

The radius on mine is 10" and the inlay worked out well. As I mentioned, my material was laminated (double-ply) prior to inlay and it definitely made a difference. I plan to take some high resolution images when it's finished and I'll email them to those who would like a good close up of the board (and guitar).

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Jun 05, 2003 1:35 am

Warren: Please include me on your list. Thanks.

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Thu Jun 05, 2003 1:55 am

Me too, please.
[email protected]

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:27 am

Ditto.

maizeandblue · Post by **maizeandblue** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 4:14 pm

I was thinking of gold pickguards for the ongoing 350 project. Does anyone know if a set of guards from a 325v59 or C58 would fit this project? It was originally a 1989 350, in case the year matters. Thanks for the help...

krick · Post by **krick** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 3:52 am

I have a 1989 350 that I put 325V59 pickguards and nameplate on. I had to drill a hole for the fifth pot but it worked out well.