Laminates?

[capnjuan]

Definitely possible either way. Maybe Hans can weigh in.

Agree .... but Hans can't take our call now, he's on the phone to the King of Mesopotamia .... :wink: Best wishes, J

 

[capnjuan]

This guitar's been played in every time zone on the planet. I never treated it like a museum piece.

Really something special CQ. So many guitars acquire those finish fractures that look for all the world like thermal shock; the kind that show up in one direction but not another ... and then on eBay the sellers pass it off as cool checking. Your guitar has that alligatoring that is what I think of when people talk about checking; like you see in the lacquer and varnish on vintage furniture. CJ

 

[john_kidder]

Hans can't take our call now, he's on the phone to the King of Mesopotamia ....

That would be General Petraeus?

 

[capnjuan]

Hans can't take our call now, he's on the phone to the King of Mesopotamia ....

That would be General Petraeus?

Yes; that would be he ... sigh. CJ

 

[john_kidder]

Hope I can stop this swerving veer before Hans gets back with the answer to the original question, but I thought I'd see if by chance General Petraeus of Mesopotamia actually played the guitar. No such luck, but click on the picture below for a sort of modern Mesopotamian guitar clip:

 

[capnjuan]

The General is just the most recent in a line of colorful characters running the show over there including the Mufti of Baghdad who arguably laid the basis for the Sodomist ... I'm sorry, I meant the Saddamite reign of recent years. GWB probably induced him to take the job by telling him he could play air guitar anytime he wanted.

 

[capquest]

This guitar's been played in every time zone on the planet. I never treated it like a museum piece.

Really something special CQ. So many guitars acquire those finish fractures that look for all the world like thermal shock; the kind that show up in one direction but not another ... and then on eBay the sellers pass it off as cool checking. Your guitar has that alligatoring that is what I think of when people talk about checking; like you see in the lacquer and varnish on vintage furniture. CJ

One time years ago I thought about having it refinished but Augie Loprinzi told me not to do it. Your thoughts?

 

[sitka_spruce]

Let's go back to that RW back, shall we? Is it divided into two boards or is it just one? How is the grain cut? And that compared to the sides?

Mahogany and maple archbacks are/ were (?) usually cut so that they look more like plywood and are one piece. The grain and the pores look rather differently than that of the sides. Feasably tapping the back should sound stiffer should it be a laminate than a solid piece of wood.

How is it with maple archies? Are these a mirror image on the inside from that of the outside?

 

[capnjuan]

One time years ago I thought about having it refinished but Augie Loprinzi told me not to do it. Your thoughts?

Hi CQ; everybody's got their own sensibility about re-finishing but if the close-ups of your guitar are representative of the finish overall, I'd leave it alone. That isn't a '62 Ford Falcon in good condition except for the paint. John Kidder has posted some pics of a Guild archie whose finish he re-freshed with Mcquire-X (I've hosed up the spelling). According to him and the pics, several hours of work produced an extraordinary satin finish, glowing the way oiled leather does.

If you are having a hard time resisting the urge to mess with it, I might suggest finding a $100 beater somewhere, try the X, and see if you like the results. It has extremely fine grit which removes the small surface scratches that deflect/refract light and contribute to that opaque, milky, or sort of lifeless look that generic guitar polish doesn't fix. And as Steffan correctly pointed out, the whiteish polishes aren't so great on finishes that have lots of fine scratches. If you went the beater route, you'd find out whether you like the results, how to do it - it takes a little practice -, and under the: "Man, that's way too much trouble" theory, you might decide you don't want to screw with it thereby protecting your guitar from your making a mess out of it ... what's the road to hell paved with? Alternatively, if the beater turned out good and you still didn't want to DIY, you could get someone else to do it but I think re-finishing gets reserved for project guitars. CJ

 

[chazmo]

One time years ago I thought about having it refinished but Augie Loprinzi told me not to do it. Your thoughts?

Hi CQ; everybody's got their own sensibility about re-finishing but if the close-ups of your guitar are representative of the finish overall, I'd leave it alone. That isn't a '62 Ford Falcon in good condition except for the paint. John Kidder has posted some pics of a Guild archie whose finish he re-freshed with Mcquire-X (I've hosed up the spelling). According to him and the pics, several hours of work produced an extraordinary satin finish, glowing the way oiled leather does.

If you are having a hard time resisting the urge to mess with it, I might suggest finding a $100 beater somewhere, try the X, and see if you like the results. It has extremely fine grit which removes the small surface scratches that deflect/refract light and contribute to that opaque, milky, or sort lifeless look that generic guitar polish doesn't fix. And as Steffan correctly pointed out, the whiteish polishes aren't so great on finishes that have lots of fine scratches. If you went the beater route, you'd find out whether you like the results, how to do it - it takes a little practice -, and under the: "Man, that's way too much trouble" theory, you might decide you don't want to screw with it thereby protecting your guitar from your making a mess out of it ... what's the road to hell paved with? Alternatively, if the beater turned out good and you still didn't want to DIY, you could get someone else to do it but I think re-finishing gets reserved for project guitars. CJ

Cap, I think Loprinzi guided you well, but it's entirely up to you. If you hadn't had to have the top replaced, I might argue to keep it original, but that's not possible anymore. If the aesthetics are important to you, there's no question that a refinish job would shine that gorgeous rosewood back/sides. I know you said you don't play as much as you used to; maybe shining up the ole' F50R is your ticket.

I was unhappy with the faded gold tuners on my '71 F50R, so I recently replaced them with some very shiny new Grovers. I didn't have to do anything to the guitar though, and I kept the originals if I want to swap 'em back.

Beauty is most certainly in the eye of the beholder. Your axe, to me, is great just the way it is.

 

[chazmo]

Let's go back to that RW back, shall we? Is it divided into two boards or is it just one? How is the grain cut? And that compared to the sides?

Mahogany and maple archbacks are/ were (?) usually cut so that they look more like plywood and are one piece. The grain and the pores look rather differently than that of the sides. Feasably tapping the back should sound stiffer should it be a laminate than a solid piece of wood.

How is it with maple archies? Are these a mirror image on the inside from that of the outside?

There probably was no 17"+ wide Braz to cut this thing from, s_s, so you can see that it's bookmatched. I'm not sure about the sides, but I guess the point is that this was somewhat experimental from Guild (they didn't do arched rosewood in (any?) other production models). Cap's guitar was one of the very early F50Rs ordered from Guild.

I'd love to be able to look closely along the back seam on the inside of Cap's guitar. It's not covered with a strip, so maybe there's some evidence at the joining whether it's laminated or not.

I think Guild's maple, lam. arched backs are not bookmatched (i.e., one piece). At least, the ones I've seen.

 

[sitka_spruce]

Let's go back to that RW back, shall we? Is it divided into two boards or is it just one? How is the grain cut? And that compared to the sides?

Mahogany and maple archbacks are/ were (?) usually cut so that they look more like plywood and are one piece. The grain and the pores look rather differently than that of the sides. Feasably tapping the back should sound stiffer should it be a laminate than a solid piece of wood.

How is it with maple archies? Are these a mirror image on the inside from that of the outside?

There probably was no 17"+ wide Braz to cut this thing from, s_s, so you can see that it's bookmatched. I'm not sure about the sides, but I guess the point is that this was somewhat experimental from Guild (they didn't do arched rosewood in (any?) other production models). Cap's guitar was one of the very early F50Rs ordered from Guild.

I'd love to be able to look closely along the back seam on the inside of Cap's guitar. It's not covered with a strip, so maybe there's some evidence at the joining whether it's laminated or not.

I think Guild's maple, lam. arched backs are not bookmatched (i.e., one piece). At least, the ones I've seen.

I just figured, since the maple laminates is constructed by layers of wood produced much like the way those apple pealers peal apples - they go around and around the tree. That's why the maple archies look like had they were made out of plywood.

 

[john_kidder]

One time years ago I thought about having it refinished

Personally, I think it looks beautiful the way it is. But the inherent beauty might be enhanced with a deep polish, which can bring the surface up to a lovely gloss while maintaining that patina earned through the years.

As the Cap'n says, I've had great success with Meguair's "Scratch-X". It was first recommended to me by Chuck Baker at Rufus Guitars in Vancouver - I was skeptical that an automotive "cut-wax" would do the job, but he was absolutely right. I've done it with several guitars. Here's a '56 X50 after, as John says, several hours hard work:

This was your pretty regular-looking 50 year old guitar when received - the polish gets rid of the dullness, old sweat haze, and fine scratches. It really is hard word - one needs to use the right sort of soft cloth without the ability to scratch the finish (I really like the micro-fibre car cloths), so that the very very fine abrasives in the polish do the work. As it says on the tube "removes: light scratches and swirls; oxidation and blemishes; bonded contaminants".

Be prepared to sweat, and be prepared to be delighted with the result. Buy a tube and try it on a beater, or even on the back of the neck of the F50R. I think you'll be well pleased.

 

[capnjuan]

Thank you John; this time I saved it off. The last time X got discussed, Hideglue signed off on it as the best way to ehance and preserve guitar finishes. I don't have anything whose finish is far enough gone to justify the effort but if Capquest is interested, I can't think of anything better than your X-50 that 'explains' why it would be worth the effort. J

 

[Terry Allan Hall]

This guitar's been played in every time zone on the planet. I never treated it like a museum piece.

Really something special CQ. So many guitars acquire those finish fractures that look for all the world like thermal shock; the kind that show up in one direction but not another ... and then on eBay the sellers pass it off as cool checking. Your guitar has that alligatoring that is what I think of when people talk about checking; like you see in the lacquer and varnish on vintage furniture. CJ

One time years ago I thought about having it refinished but Augie Loprinzi told me not to do it. Your thoughts?

Lotta mojo in that original finish, so I'd leave it just like it is.

Hard to improve on "perfect". 8)