Page 2 of 2
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:58 am
by dub
Pens wrote:I liek the naked SG. I would be inclinded to say if it's a 1961 Gibson and it doesn't have a finish, do not put one on.
It's already been devalued. Keeping it that way seems to be saying that the preference of the next person to have it is more important than your own.
I say paint it an awesome colour
you like. You could always strip it back before you sell it, and its in the same condition again.
Great bunch of guitars. Welcome to the forum!
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:29 pm
by Pens
dub wrote:Pens wrote:I liek the naked SG. I would be inclinded to say if it's a 1961 Gibson and it doesn't have a finish, do not put one on.
It's already been devalued. Keeping it that way seems to be saying that the preference of the next person to have it is more important than your own.
I say paint it an awesome colour
you like. You could always strip it back before you sell it, and its in the same condition again.
Great bunch of guitars. Welcome to the forum!
It's not about the value. It's about the idea of don't fuck with something that is that old.
That's like buying a cool old toy 1960s raygun that's beat up, and repainting it. THIS KILLS THE CRAB.
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:57 pm
by Leisureclub
I'm in the "paint the old guitar its original color" camp but learned just last night that I'm in a tiny minority(amongst my friends at least).
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:18 pm
by littlericky
The Melody Maker didn't come from Gibson unfinished. It's your guitar paint it any color you want.
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:06 pm
by paul_
Yeah, the resale devaluing was done when the original finish was stripped. Any new finish could be similarly stripped by someone who's after a restoration job, and anyone looking for a pristine original MM isn't buying that one anyway.
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:59 pm
by Zack
the '61 would be sweet clear coated with a black guard, hows it look under the guard anyway?