|
|
Joined:
December 2009
Posts: 143
Location: Ontario Canada | Thanks to everyone for the responses, I think I'll keep playing my 1615 (1979 vintage)with the crack and avoid any possible hassles with the cross border paperwork from Canada. Although I have no experience myself on this issue, I am just going with the reports I have heard from friends who have dealt with other manufacturers.
Jim. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2008
Posts: 1119
Location: Michigan | Photoshop does a great job taking care of surface cracks. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7247
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | "aren't we assuming what the effects would be if that top was refinished."
Exactly... why mess with it? There "could" be minimal difference, but more likely as the finish is adhered to the top, the top thickness changes, the finish thickness changes, the type (chemical makeup of the finish) is different... I just would not risk it unless there was something physical wrong with the guitar.
As you mention.. the wood opened up... to the point where the vibration and other factors caused the finish to crack. The finish isn't particularly plyable.. although it is somewhat... so a new finish will restrict the top.
And don't get me wrong... my Pacemaker sounds great... as long as the other one isn't in the room.. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2009
Posts: 143
Location: Ontario Canada | Originally posted by Mr. Ovation:
"aren't we assuming what the effects would be if that top was refinished."
Exactly... why mess with it? There "could" be minimal difference, but more likely as the finish is adhered to the top, the top thickness changes, the finish thickness changes, the type (chemical makeup of the finish) is different... I just would not risk it unless there was something physical wrong with the guitar.
As you mention.. the wood opened up... to the point where the vibration and other factors caused the finish to crack. The finish isn't particularly plyable.. although it is somewhat... so a new finish will restrict the top.
And don't get me wrong... my Pacemaker sounds great... as long as the other one isn't in the room.. Thank you Miles for setting my mind at ease. Mine sounds great and there isn't another one around so it is the champion of all the twelve string tone contraptions. :)
Jim. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 1137
Location: Germany, where delicious wine is growing (Rheinh) | Hi,
a very interesting thread!
I own two 1615-4.
One made in 1978 without any cracks in the top, only some little scratches, in very good shape.
The second one made in 1981, bought with a broken headstock and a heavy crack in it's top, from the bridge to the end in the middle of the top, very cheap.
I've repaired it's headstock and strung it with the same strings whitch are on the other one.
It sounds so great and clear, much better as the other one in good shape.
So I never get the idea to repair the top crack.
But I can't say something about the sound of the guitars before they are mine.
Bernie |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2006
Posts: 2120
Location: Chicago | I'm persuaded by what Beal and Miles (and others) have to say: the top of my 1117 is OK cosmetically, the cracks have NOT "gone through" the wood etc. Judging from my last session, the axe sounds GREAT. It ain't broke, I won't fix it! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15680
Location: SoCal | Looks like I'm in a minority here. Interesting since every guitar I had worked on came back not only looking better but sounding better as well.... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 1673
Location: SoCal |  |
|
| |
Refinishing an OLD Top
