Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
Don't forget that modern finishes wear much slower than vintage ones. Also unlike most players in the '50s and '60s, few modern players gig with only one guitar, so each sees less use/wear.
To continue with your jeans analogy - the point at which your jeans are the most comfortable is usually just before they disintegrate. The preworn jeans look right and feel comfy from the first time you wear them and still have years of life left in them.
Anyway, some guys don't want to wait to get a guitar that looks "right" from the get-go. It's a style thing and it doesn't matter if we wouldn't do it ourselves. It doesn't detract from the music (I mean, is Dan less of a player for it?).
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the "relic" thing is insane. Nor am I criticising Platansky as a player at all. Or even criticising his choice in guitars. Just wondering why it's necessary for a player who spends so much time playing those guitars would even need a distressed guitar - because it would get there on its own. That was my only point.
But I take your points. If you're regularly using more than two guitars the wear will slow down a lot. Even nitro finishes these days have been beefed up (usually with polyurethane I understand) to stay intact for ages while still looking and feeling like nitro. I'm also hearing what you're saying about a guitar that looks old but also hasn't taken all that much physical stress, and hence isn't that likely to malfunction or break.
As you say, I'm not into it myself, and I think it's kind of hokey, but I do get where people are coming from with it. Still, to take what you've said, first prize for me is just not babying the guitar so that it ages with you.