Keira WitherKay wrote
well yeah long as the guitar still sounds fabulous...the finish in my mind is secondary.... most of the pristine guitar set will recoil in horror if they saw my nylon........ not that you notice it from a distance but the sides and back and front of headastock have been 'Tattooed" heheheh with art ..... and the names of songs i have composed on that instrument....and so becomes in itself a work of art... well to me anyway ......... i have thus far left the top alone.... but i have been using it long enough that the finish is worn off where my thumb and pinkie rest ........... and the gorgeous white of the spruce top is showing through ........ i'll post some pics sometime.... to shock or please..whatever you take is on guitars.....
and yeah i see a guitar as a tool ...meaning if this one which i do love breaks or gets stolen ... i will simply replace it with another suitable instrument.... i somehow can't get sentimental over guitars maybe thats why i can like the road worn ones and beaten and abused ones............yet i am pedantic over the tone........
Well I think that's a valid way of looking at it. Guitars are tools. Obviously you want a good tool, but one, valid way of looking at them is as the tools of the trade. I have seen players who can certainly afford to buy a new one using guitars that sound great, presumably play great but look like crap.
John Martyn's an example. Look at all the gaffer tape on his Martin D28. Not to mention the dings, the beer (I presume) stains etc. Martin Carthy played a Martin 000-18 that got progressively more beat up as the years went on. He bought it 2nd hand it already had a series of gouges left from the previous owner's thumb pick. These days he plays a newer Martin but that bears clear signs of being on the road. Richard Thompson had a '59 strat that was looking pretty beaten up by the time he retired it (it was on at least it's 3rd neck and 2nd bridge). He recently retired a Lowden acoustic that for some years has had marks and stains on it.
I don't say that this equates to abuse. These are working musicians who travel a lot with their axes are not in the same financial league as the Who or the Stones and can afford to have vans full of heavy-duty cases for cosseting their instruments.
Carthy and Martin both speak of the quality of their guitars and seem to hang on to the "retirees". They just don't see those guitars as being anything more than really good quality tools that gave them years of service. They value them and keep them in good playing condition - but that does not have to mean good cosmetic condition. They want the guitar to play and sound great so they can do their job.
I'm not sure they tattoo their guitars. That sounds a bit on the kinky side. Next thing you know the guitar is going to have a nipple ring.
