De-Lacquering your fretboard

holland · Post by **holland** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:55 am

Evening People,

Has any formite taken Ed Romans up on his offer of de-lacquering the fretboard on their Rickenbacker yet?

I think Rick do lay it on a bit thick and generally prefer the feel of the natural wood on my fretboards. I am therefore thinking about having it done to one of mine.

I welcome any comments you guy's may have.

tennis_nick · Post by **tennis_nick** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:08 am

There will be alot of "RIcks are great as they are" change it are you crazy? types of comment, but I can say, this mod looks like it'd be great! even though the rick laquered board feels good to me, I like the unfinised rosewood alot too!

there was an ebay er a few monthes ago who had Ricks with un laquered boards, trapeze tailpieces, and "regular" 12 string arangement, who kept boasting about how they were "supposed" to be made.

sold pretty cheap, wonder if anyone here got one?

ben_brown · Post by **ben_brown** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:41 am

It's not lacquer...it's conversion varnish for what it's worth.

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:12 am

Zubair..You can use Acetone on a white cotton cloth to remove the finish from the fingerboard. Extreme care must be taken as not to get any Acetone on the neck /body finish or the plastic binding. Put Acetone on cloth, rub the fingerboard until a desired effect is reached. This is a long process time wise. There are other ways to do this, but this is the simplest way without doing a complete refret.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:18 am

Ricks are great as they are.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:45 am

I think if everybody thought Rics are great as they are, the refinishers/repairmen wouldn't have many clients (if any)...

brammy · Post by **brammy** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:05 am

Ricks are great as they are... but personalized mods are always just that - personal preference.

But since I just got my brand new 350v63 with it's shiney fretboard, I cannot understand why anyone would want to un-shine it. ACETONE? I'd rather slit my wrists than bring acetone anywhere near my now-favorite guitar.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:13 am

Sheena, when I said, "Ricks are great as they are", I was referring to the instruments as they are designed and conceived, not to one individual instrument which may need restoration or refinishing.

jimk · Post by **jimk** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:15 am

I'm not expecting my Ric to arrive for another year but....

RIcks are great as they are" change it are you crazy?

JimK

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:20 am

Well, i just thought that de-varnishing fretboard is technically closer to re-finishing or changing hardware than a total alteration... or is it not? What would be the effect?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:33 am

I am not trying to contradict Dale's post above, but I am attempting to make any person who wishes to do this, aware of the difficulties which need to be anticipated.

First, acetone. strictly speaking, is not a solvent for CV; it mayl soften the CV but will not actually dissolve it. It is, however, hell on bindings and fretboard inlays.

The "sharks-tooth" deluxe fretboard inlays are polyester resin and will have their surfaces softened, although this will re-harden with time. There is a danger of surface-checking whenever polyester resin is solvent-compromised, as well.

The "dot" markers used on standard models are thermoplastic and will dissolve or shrink if too much acetone is applied.

On unbound necks, where do you position the seam between the CV finish and unfinished areas? If at the edge of the fretboard (like a C58), how do you keep it looking clean and sharp?

Dale is a professional luthier with lots of experience. No doubt he's done this more times than he can count. But anyone without his expertise and background, would be well-advised to proceed with caution.

teb · Post by **teb** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:27 am

I have one, but hell would freeze over twice before Ed Roman would ever get near one of my Rickenbackers. My 360 and 360/12 and 660/12 had it, my 250 and 2030 didn't. My current 12WB had it, but was switched when the full-width frets and new nut spacing were installed by Mark Arnquist.

It's a different look and as far as I can tell, a purely cosmetic preference issue. In some ways, I think it may look a bit neater or cleaner than varnish piled up against the frets, but I can't necessarily say that I think it looks better. It's just different. The rumors that it makes the neck faster, etc. seem to be bull from what I can tell. I'm not the least bit sure that I could really tell any substantial feel differences if I was playing in the dark.

kcole4001 · Post by **kcole4001** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:36 am

A lot of guitar players really do seem to believe that the unfinished board is 'faster', but I'm not convinced.
That may be one reason for so much anti-RIC sentiment in people's minds.
I can't understand why, otherwise.

teb · Post by **teb** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:45 am

We're assuming, of course, that all the excess finish was properly removed from the top side of the frets themselves during the final set-up. Soft, sticky, poorly-polished frets would most likely feel pretty slow.

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:27 am

Over the years I have done this, I don't recommend this modification, but if someone asks to have it done, who am I to argue with them. It was a simple question and I gave a simple answer. I also use a box cutter blade as a scraper blade to take the finish off, simple, works quick, but do it carefully.