A tale of two guitar finishes

[northernguitarguy]

Hey all....finish question

I saw a good friend on the weekend who I used to jam with 'back in the day' He plays a black Les Paul 'Pro' that has P-90s in it. It always sounded great when we used to goof around. My question is about the finish on his neck. His paint has worn away so much that I asked if he had sanded it, the answer being no. Is this normal? I mean his frets, though in need of a crowning still had life on them.

I only ask because my 70's Yammy SG had been so played that it needed to be refretted, but the neck finsh is still nice and glossy and it definitely has not been repainted. Other vintage LPs that I have looked at also had intact paint.

Was this a QC issue from the 70s or does my buddy Ted have 'acid' for sweat?

[taylo166]

Possibly a case of nitro cellulose VS. polyurethane. Nitro wears down much quicker. But also just different players. Some guys are just rougher handlers and do more rubbing than others. All guitars are different as well.

[CHUNKYNECK]

It might be because his is a nitro finish and your is tough poly?
Beat me to it.

[HOT-BRIT]

nothing plays better than a neck were the finish is worn away like that

[northernguitarguy]

OK, next question is why nitro over a poly finish? Cheaper or less time-consuming?

[Ace Warslave]

poly is stronger and takes a lot of work to remove.....

[gtrplayr1976]

I think nitro is just preferred over poly because of it's (supposed)tone qualities. Feels better too. Poly feels sticky to me.

[northernguitarguy]

Originally Posted by Ace Warslave

poly is stronger and takes a lot of work to remove.....

Hmmm.....seems 'better' to use poly? Why wouldn't Gibson use the 'best'

[Oranjeaap]

Nitro is vintage accurate, and by most people considered to be 'the best'.

[taylo166]

Yea nitro is considered best. Poly is what is on most Asian guitars. Poly doesn't let the guitar breath as much as Nitro. Nitro's increased breathability also lends to its fragileness. You can literally rub a nitro finish off with your fingers. Poly is more like a thick layer of plastic over the guitar, choking its breath. But Poly also protects the wood a bit better. Most guitar players are more worried about good tone vs. good looks. Nitro gives better tone.

Personally, I don't care much either way. There's a really good thread in the Epiphone section about dulling down Epiphones shiny poly finishes. Pretty awesome results from what I saw.

[northernguitarguy]

Originally Posted by taylo166

Nitro gives better tone.

No offense, but on an electric? I don't believe that

[taylo166]

You are diving into a sea of long debate now. Much has been discussed on the issue of wood tone on an electric guitar. Like I said, I dont really care much either way.
Nitro is what all early Gibsons were finished with. And today, they are regarded as the best sounding instruments made. As earlier stated, Nitro is "vintage correct." Most of today's Les Pauls have Nitro finishes. My Trad. Pro has it and it is already wearing significantly. It resonates like a beast.

But back to your original post, it's clear evidence of the differences in the two finishes.

[Ansen]

Nitro was first in amerikan industrial laquering, if i remember right. It also was the standard laquer for cars until 50' (?), thats why gibson and fender use it in the past. It was there and it was cheap. Some of the 7ender colours direktly refers to car colours..

Gibson was clever enought (or just grasping? ), not to chance to poly and i dont think, they now ever do.

I dindnt mind, if a guitar is poly laquered, as long , as the neck feels allright to handle.

Sadly, poly dindt bleach or gilb like nitro, also it doesnt work. So it wouldnt chance the colour, like old nitro laquered guitars or the pinkish bindings on newer ones did.

This 79' Aria P2 TS 400 have poly laquer, its one of the best handling guitars i ever played and looks nearly new from 1 meter distance. You have to take a deeper look, for registering all the fine scratches and few dings, which tells you, she isnt a virgin



and yes, i like photos

[HOT-BRIT]

give me nitro lacquer every time!

[acstorfer]

If Gibson ever started using poly instead of nitro it would piss off the purists more than volutes, three piece necks, pancaked bodies, mini humbuckers, change in fretboard woods and anything else they could imagine put together.

[HOT-BRIT]

Originally Posted by acstorfer

If Gibson ever started using poly instead of nitro it would piss off the purists more than volutes, three piece necks, pancaked bodies, mini humbuckers, change in fretboard woods and anything else they could imagine put together.

agreed
but they never will

[sangandongo]

Originally Posted by HOT-BRIT

nothing plays better than a neck were the finish is worn away like that

This is true. My GT is worn to the wood and I love it. So much that I almost want to make it happen on my other '71.

[HOT-BRIT]

Originally Posted by sangandongo

This is true. My GT is worn to the wood and I love it. So much that I almost want to make it happen on my other '71.

just keep playing it and it will happen

[Thumpalumpacus]

Guitars don't "breathe." What is even meant by such a statement? It's silly.

And even if they did, does that mean you could change the tone of your poly-finished guitar by leaving the control-cavity cover off? If you don't finish inside the routing on a Strat, can you still get the benefits of "breathing" while using poly?

The reason Gibson cites for using nitro is tradition and repairability. The second is a fine reason, the first doesn't do it for me, but I understand many Gibson players are hidebound, as pointed out above.

Me, I don't give a shit what the guitar is finished in, because the only time it makes a difference is when I drop it, and I don't do that.

[Zenzeypher]

it's literally because your guitar is coated in plastic, that finish on your Yamaha will outlive you

I like Nitro for its aging properties, I prefer poly for its glass finish on some guitars, but then I also love poly when its been dulled down.

As to poly/breathing/nitro/tone - it doesn't make an ounce of difference, it's all in preference. If people played instead of debating tone - we'd all hear a tone improvement - Myself included

[taylo166]

Originally Posted by Thumpalumpacus

Guitars don't "breathe." What is even meant by such a statement? It's silly.

And even if they did, does that mean you could change the tone of your poly-finished guitar by leaving the control-cavity cover off? If you don't finish inside the routing on a Strat, can you still get the benefits of "breathing" while using poly?

The reason Gibson cites for using nitro is tradition and repairability. The second is a fine reason, the first doesn't do it for me, but I understand many Gibson players are hidebound, as pointed out above.

Me, I don't give a shit what the guitar is finished in, because the only time it makes a difference is when I drop it, and I don't do that.

Here's what I mean good sir since you are having trouble understanding. Wood vibrates when you hit those metal strings. "Breathing" is how much you feel those vibrations against your crotch when playing. You dont feel those vibrations as much when you have a thick layer of plastic coating the guitar, holding in the resonance frequencies, thus hampering it's ability to "breathe".
I know it probably doesn't matter much to the pickups, but it's a fact sir.

It's like using a latex gas station condom vs. a ultra thin condom. One lets you feel the goodness more than the other. A good guitar "breathes" right into your ball sack, letting you know when you're rocking at full potential.

[Marlboro13]

Nitro has no better or worse tone than poly. The reason why people prefers nitro is basically tradition. Most of Gibson lovers like vintage instruments and want to see their guitar getting a vintage look pretty fast. Poly finishes don't do that...It will look like mint for 500 years.

Tonal differences between nitro and poly? come on...a different string brand makes so much more difference.

[Zenzeypher]

Originally Posted by Marlboro13

Poly finishes don't do that...It will look like mint for 500 years.

unless youre a butterfingers like me.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Originally Posted by taylo166

Here's what I mean good sir since you are having trouble understanding. Wood vibrates when you hit those metal strings. "Breathing" is how much you feel those vibrations against your crotch when playing.

Then by all means, say what you mean. It vibrates better is what you mean.

You dont feel those vibrations as much when you have a thick layer of plastic coating the guitar, holding in the resonance frequencies, thus hampering it's ability to "breathe".

Being denser that nitro, poly transmits vibrations more efficiently, not less -- less energy is lost in the molecular interstices. This is why maple typically sounds brighter than mahogany; because it is denser, it transmits vibrations more efficiently, and the high frequency vibrations (which are lost first due to their low amplitudes) survive longer.

Nitro is less dense than poly.

Because of those simple physical facts, I'm very skeptical of this whole "holding in the resonance frequencies" thing.

I know it probably doesn't matter much to the pickups, but it's a fact sir.

When I play my guitar unamplified, I'm not playing for tone anyway. And when I'm playing it amplified, I cannot hears its foundational tone.

It's like using a latex gas station condom vs. a ultra thin condom. One lets you feel the goodness more than the other. A good guitar "breathes" right into your ball sack, letting you know when you're rocking at full potential.

If my guitar had nerve endings inside the finish, you might have a point.

Also, thickness of finish isn't determined by its composition. I have a satin-finished Takamine acoustic that sounds great, not because it's done in nitro (it isn't) but because on the thin top of an acoustic guitar, the thinness of finish (not its composition) allows the top to push the air in the soundbox more efficiently. My Takamine has a very thin poly finish.

[HOT-BRIT]

I prefer the way nitro lacquer feels

[northernguitarguy]

Cool debate I started here! Thanks for your perspectives!

[BillB1960]

Originally Posted by northernguitarguy

Hey all....finish question

I saw a good friend on the weekend who I used to jam with 'back in the day' He plays a black Les Paul 'Pro' that has P-90s in it. It always sounded great when we used to goof around. My question is about the finish on his neck. His paint has worn away so much that I asked if he had sanded it, the answer being no. Is this normal? I mean his frets, though in need of a crowning still had life on them.

I only ask because my 70's Yammy SG had been so played that it needed to be refretted, but the neck finsh is still nice and glossy and it definitely has not been repainted. Other vintage LPs that I have looked at also had intact paint.

Was this a QC issue from the 70s or does my buddy Ted have 'acid' for sweat?

I think it's a tale of two guitar players more than specific finishes. There's a recent rather contentious thread in the Historic section about what is/is not legitimate play wear on a 2007 R9. Fact is people play their guitars with different styles which translates to different wear patterns. They also have different chemical makeups which can make for more or less acidic sweat.

[Ansen]

Originally Posted by taylo166

Here's what I mean good sir since you are having trouble understanding. Wood vibrates when you hit those metal strings. "Breathing" is how much you feel those vibrations against your crotch when playing. You dont feel those vibrations as much when you have a thick layer of plastic coating the guitar, holding in the resonance frequencies, thus hampering it's ability to "breathe".

Sorry, thats still...aehm...bullshit. The beast, i've postet some post above, sends you vibrations over and over. It must'n hide against any of my other guitars.

For example, ALL matsumoku guitars where poly..and there not less out there, which would stand against a good les paul...


I guess, nobody could tell a tonal diference in a blind test with same guitar, different laquer.. but thats just my 2 cent

[taylo166]

I actually have no idea what I'm talking about. I only talk BS on these forums. I lost this argument from the get go. The only guitar I ever had I pissed on to make it look cool.
John Mayer seems to agree with me though with his stripped strat. I know that doesn't make me sound any cooler. Does it? Is it ok to mention John Mayer on here? Maybe SRV would be a better comparison since he removed most of his finish as well.

[HOT-BRIT]

Funny thing is that this thread is in the Norlin era sub section