Historic makeovers VS factory as to value retention and authentic aging?

[dale5150]

I have looked at a couple of historic makeover done historics which look very nice. How do they hold their value over time compared to factory pieces? I think their aging looks more authentic to me although I havent seen the new ML guitars.

 

[Duane_the_tub]

You will rarely, if ever, recoup the cost of an HM when selling a guitar.

 

[sd_guitars]

This is something ive been wondering too. Debating having my R7 sent off to do a full deluxe makeover vs. just buying a Murphy heavy aged. I think the Murphy would be easier to resell but the HM is a higher quality reissue

 

[calieng]

Couple things. HM full boat is $4.5k including Brazilian board. I bought one a year or so ago and had to return it to the seller because the neck had slightly twisted when the board was steamed off. Not shitting on HM because I have a guitar with them now.

With Murphy Lab - depends on if it just becomes the normal run of the Historic Les Paul. Once they decide to do the VOS in the new nitro formula...not sure if they drop a little in price or maintain value over the near future.

Should buy it because you love it not for resale.

Want an investment - buy a good condition vintage guitar.

 

[dale5150]

I look at everything as an investment. I do not like depreciating assets of any kind. I have had guitars that I liked when I got them and later didnt like so much so I sold them. I just dont want to take a beating if that happens and this is a big investment for an instrument.

 

[calieng]

I look at everything as an investment. I do not like depreciating assets of any kind. I have had guitars that I liked when I got them and later didnt like so much so I sold them. I just dont want to take a beating if that happens and this is a big investment for an instrument.

Kinda takes the fun out of playing a guitar.

As Duane said you will almost never get your money back on HM work. It is more for your own enjoyment. The ML might hold value or even apprecite a little. Remember a stock guitar (or anything) is always more valuable than a modified one over the long term.

 

[BDW60]

I look at everything as an investment. I do not like depreciating assets of any kind. I have had guitars that I liked when I got them and later didnt like so much so I sold them. I just dont want to take a beating if that happens and this is a big investment for an instrument.

Then do not do a HM. You’ll most likely get smoked if you resell. They do great looking work, but it doesn’t add up unless the guitar is a lifetime keeper and you will not be in the position of having to move it due to finances or GAS.

The only way I would even consider it is if I found a great price on a fantastic used historic (say 3,500), and swore to myself it would never be sold. Then you more than double price for the full package. Then you have close to $8K in it with shipping X 2.

In the end, a HM guitar is just a modded guitar. The mods are really great, if you like an aged guitar, but they’re still mods. And mods take a beating in the classifieds for the most part.

 

[Brek]

Or I suppose buy an HM on the used market, the hits already been taken? I see in U.K. and Europe sellers ask crazy high money for them, although yet to see one sell.

 

[Tim Plains]

Murphy aged hold their value because it's original from Gibson, although HM are clearly better by a mile. HM's deluxe package costs $4,200, there was a deluxe package R7 for sale here a few years ago for $4,200, so that should give you a rough indication.

 

[Brek]

Couple things. HM full boat is $4.5k including Brazilian board. I bought one a year or so ago and had to return it to the seller because the neck had slightly twisted when the board was steamed off. Not shitting on HM because I have a guitar with them now.

With Murphy Lab - depends on if it just becomes the normal run of the Historic Les Paul. Once they decide to do the VOS in the new nitro formula...not sure if they drop a little in price or maintain value over the near future.

Should buy it because you love it not for resale.

Want an investment - buy a good condition vintage guitar.

I feel after living with the Murphy lab a couple of weeks and chipping it already, hard lacquer, it’s not for general release. I think they would have a nightmare of ‘my new guitars chipped’ exploding all over the internet ‘Gibson qc sucks’. I mean it happened prolly with the originals hence the move to catalysed and plasticised lacquer, and colour fast pigments.

There is a market for the ‘as close to historic’ as possible, a number of us are fully onboard with that and what it entails, which I admittedly only fully realised after buying one, I got what I wanted and couldn’t be happier with my choice. But for people who want a great looking guitar to play that will be able to resist the knocks of day to day life, the VOS finish is that product.

 

[ARandall]

I look at everything as an investment.

If all you can think of is money, then don't buy any guitar.

Instrument ownership is part enjoyment of the instrument itself and of course the process of creation of music. If you can factor that in, then any money laid out becomes infinitesimally small by comparison.

 

[calieng]

I feel after living with the Murphy lab a couple of weeks and chipping it already, hard lacquer, it’s not for general release. I think they would have a nightmare of ‘my new guitars chipped’ exploding all over the internet ‘Gibson qc sucks’. I mean it happened prolly with the originals hence the move to catalysed and plasticised lacquer, and colour fast pigments.

There is a market for the ‘as close to historic’ as possible, a number of us are fully onboard with that and what it entails, which I admittedly only fully realised after buying one, I got what I wanted and couldn’t be happier with my choice. But for people who want a great looking guitar to play that will be able to resist the knocks of day to day life, the VOS finish is that product.

Maybe the PRS finish is a better bet as it is pretty thin but also very durable. I don't like plasticizer in the finish.

I would be fine with a VOS using the new nitro formula and just let it crack along the way as it naturally ages.

I think the new dyes are a lot more stable. The True Historic pore filler/dye was a nightmare for the first few months of ownership. Could not even touch the guitar without it bleeding everywhere. I am not seeing that with Murphy Lab at all.

 

[Sct13]

Les Paul's are not an investment guitar in any capacity....they make way too many.

I have had two HM's and have no regrets. Both beautifully done, gigged and recorded. I wish I kept them actually

HM is about the process, and the fact that you can do this to ANY Les Paul.

You find a beater, one that's been gigged and abused a little ....= perfect a HM candidate. Also look at Kims nitro and his freezing process is better. I'm not sure Murphy lab has it down yet....(I need to see / play one yet) but from some recent photography I see some quick freeze results that I'm not sure Kim does.

So if your into investing you should spend it on real estate ....cause Les Pauls is just hookers and blow .....almost...

(I never lost any money....but you don't turn around much profit)

 

[rockstar232007]

I look at everything as an investment. I do not like depreciating assets of any kind. I have had guitars that I liked when I got them and later didnt like so much so I sold them. I just dont want to take a beating if that happens and this is a big investment for an instrument.

Then you're going to be sadly disappointed.

If I was a gambling man, the last things I would buy as an investment are guitars.

The guitar market is very finiky, and unless you have deep pockets, the odds of finding anything that's going to appreciate significantly enough to make it worth it, are pretty low.

 

[mjross]

I look at everything as an investment. I do not like depreciating assets of any kind. I have had guitars that I liked when I got them and later didnt like so much so I sold them. I just dont want to take a beating if that happens and this is a big investment for an instrument.

You have answered your own question!

 

[Cory]

Murphy aged hold their value because it's original from Gibson, although HM are clearly better by a mile. HM's deluxe package costs $4,200, there was a deluxe package R7 for sale here a few years ago for $4,200, so that should give you a rough indication.

Spot on - I’ve gone down the HM road once - great guitar, but ended up deciding I still preferred factory finished historics, and when it came time to sell it I lost more than I’d care to admit...

 

[BigJim]

I had a HM LP 57 3PU Custom, it was a fantastic guitar, the relic treatment and paint was really convincing. Since it was a custom, they didn't replace the fretboard, pretty much a refin and recarve (neck and body).

I bought it low, and sold it high, as it was really a badassed guitar that was of only a few they had done up to that point.

 

[dale5150]

I am glad some of you are rich enough to blow thousands on a guitar that you havent been able to play and just gamble it. I am not in that realm so it is a BIG investment to me. I do not buy guitars for an investment. I buy them to play. However if I do not gell with one I dont want to take a bath on it. I have bought guitars in the past that I wasnt thrilled with and how much it cost had nothing to do with how it played. I am comparing an already done HM guitar to a Gibson piece. Thanks to all of the people that understood this and answered accordingly.

 

[amorrow]

I had a HM LP 57 3PU Custom, it was a fantastic guitar, the relic treatment and paint was really convincing. Since it was a custom, they didn't replace the fretboard, pretty much a refin and recarve (neck and body).

I bought it low, and sold it high, as it was really a badassed guitar that was of only a few they had done up to that point.

Aw, you sold it!? I think you’re talking about my first historic...bought it after graduating college. Did a lot of tweaking to that guitar while I had it, and it was a nice player...and definitely had that vintage vibe.

To the OP, before this year my preference was non-aged Gibsons...or maybe HM or comparable makeover if you insist on aged. However my opinion has changed with the new Murphy Lab heavy aged models...I’m impressed with them.

 

[BDW60]

I am glad some of you are rich enough to blow thousands on a guitar that you havent been able to play and just gamble it. I am not in that realm so it is a BIG investment to me. I do not buy guitars for an investment. I buy them to play. However if I do not gell with one I dont want to take a bath on it. I have bought guitars in the past that I wasnt thrilled with and how much it cost had nothing to do with how it played. I am comparing an already done HM guitar to a Gibson piece. Thanks to all of the people that understood this and answered accordingly.

If you’re in a position to let the original owner take the HM resale hit and buy used, that’s a different story. Would I consider a used HM for $4.5-5K vs. a used Gibson aged for more money? Absolutely. I would probably never pay more than 1/4th of the HM cost on a used one. That’s just because of the market I have seen here.