Official Luthiers Forum!

Whomever did this.... I wish I could make out your signature (but that appears to maybe be a forgery too) because we would need to have a discussion about appropriate projects for you to practice on until you gained a slight bit of skill. This re-top of an otherwise decent vintage guitar is an abomination! The fact it was sold for good money by a shop to an unsuspecting buyer is also disheartening but that is a different issue with different people than the one at hand this week.

This appears to be a top kit from SM and was obviously assembled by someone who could not even recognize the legs of the X were in the wrong positions. There are many other issues but this one has me aggravated as it is a thing that should not be! Rant over. Enjoy the pics.

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

Hey if it was good enough for Gibson then it's good enough for them

My guess is that someone reached in and made those lower tone bars scalloped. But who knows.

Robust...

Most of us repair guys have seen worse halfassery.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Yea, but not typically on $2K+ guitars..... between purchase and me he could have had the holy grail.

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

Oh yeah there’s words...
“ hey we’re not building a piano here!”

_________________
My memory is so good, sometimes I remember things that never happened.

Just curious, but what was the customer's complaint that lead to the top removal and revealing this mess?

Guitar was sent in for some finish work.... Really. The client knew it had been re-topped and the rest of the guitar over sprayed.I believe they thought all the extra finish was killing the tone.

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

welcome to the world of repair Trust me I have seen much worse and I am working on one now. The used 1/4 in paneling in a 39 martin 000-28. I have been working for 3 weeks to get that out.
you never know how bad it can be. enjoy the battle.

_________________
John Hall
blues creek guitars
Authorized CF Martin Repair
Co President of ASIA
You Don't know what you don't know until you know it

What is so baffling is that it is not as though information on how to achieve a reasonably favorable outcome is not readily available to anyone with access to the web. It's as though some builders and repair people make a conscious decision to avoid doing their homework in favor of depending on a series of statistically improbable, highly favorable events to rescue both instrument and reputation. What is not in doubt is that these instruments will end up on someone else's bench to have the results of that unwarranted optimism seen to.

_________________
For the times they are a changin'

- Bob Dylan

"Most of us repair guys have seen worse halfassery."

"Yea, but not typically on $2K+ guitars..... between purchase and me he could have had the holy grail."

"Just curious, but what was the customer's complaint that lead to the top removal and revealing this mess?"

"Guitar was sent in for some finish work.... Really. The client knew it had been re-topped and the rest of the guitar over sprayed.I believe they thought all the extra finish was killing the tone."

It sounds like your customer knew what he was getting - a retopped guitar that didn't sound good (assuming he listened with his ears instead of his eyes). Although the bracing is a bit heavy and sloppy I've seen guitars with equally bad work that sounded good. The original construction on some of the old Stella guitars had similar glue globs around the bracing. If nothing else the retop kept some otherwise decent "guitar parts" from going in the trash.
I think the discussion that needs to be had is when does "a decent vintage guitar" cease to be, and rather become a collection of guitar parts. I'm not saying guitars shouldn't be retopped if necessary, but should they still be considered "vintage" when such a major part has been replaced? Should they still even be considered the work of the original maker?The extreme case was the person who found parts of an old Martin in the trash, but felt as long as he had the original neck block with the stamped serial number he could build a guitar around it and call it a Martin.

When I saw this post I thought
“Please please please don’t be something I made” haha
Whew


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is wrong with the legs of the X position other than the terrible joint?

My favorite was an OM from a “custom builder” brought in for a pickup. The bridge pin holes completely missed the bridge plate and the high and low E holes went right through he X brace!

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

I thought that was done on purpose to improve the bass response

I'm just glad it wasn't mine:)

The joint is terrible because it is inverted, the legs of the X should be on opposite sides. This causes the angle of the cross joint to to be the wrong direction. Notice how the notch splays in an angle counter to the angle of the x.

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

Instrument was purchased online, not played in person at purchase. Client understood it had been re-topped and new there was a potential for problems. The price appeared to be fair (if the work had been proper). The work was not the most hideous from the outside and even the finish that was the original complaint aside from being overly tinted wasn't that bad. I think the fact that it is BZRW helped save the tone enough to make it acceptable. There were also some filler spots on the back that looked old and bad so it was decided to pull the neck and bridge and completely refinish rather than just try and tone down the top. There was ahead break repair that was burred under brown lacquer he wanted looked at as it concerned him after having the guitar a few months.

After receiving it I gave a quick look over I noticed immediately it had deficient neck angle and more bridge rotation than should have. This was puzzling as I could see the top was thicker than typical at the sound hole. loosening and tensioning the strings and you could watch the top collapse in front of the bridge as string tension came up.....

He had owned the guitar longer than his 1 week return window before he ever even sent it to me and did contact the shop who sold it but to no avail..... He decided he could not sell it as it was even if all issues were fully disclosed, he still wants a vintage BRZW guitar from this maker so decided to bite the bullet and just do it.

To address the originality thing... I make a third of my business on restoration. So when I take a broken guitar with some missing bits and bring back as close to possible to original have I saved and preserved history or created a forgery? And restoration is just that.

They are only original once. And the market does reflect that. A vintage Les Paul will loose up to half it's value when you change pickups.....

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

"They are only original once. And the market does reflect that"

Well said!
If your client paid what a retopped guitar should bring - which should be based on sound and playability and the quality of the work (which is hard to evaluate with an online sale) then he shouldn't complain. Buying anything online is a "can of worms" if you don't know the seller, so you have to accept the possibility you will be disappointed.
Many of the old violins I have had have repairman's labels affixed next to the maker's label. I don't see that much in the guitar world.

From what I understand every Stradivarius has been completely rebuilt but you still get a cool $mil for one.