-
Just putting this out there to see what people think: Yesterday I played a 2013 Epi Sorrento reissue that had had a pro setup. Great guitar - I've never played an original vintage one, but this guitar appeared to be a faithful recreation in terms of specs. I played it and really dug it, and would consider getting one, except for one thing - I'm not into poly finishes. So in an ideal world, I thought to myself wouldn't it be great if all these cool reissues that have been released lately (D'Angelico, Guild, Epiphone, Gretsch) had an option where you could order a nitro version for a higher price. I'd gladly pay more for some of these guitars if that was a possiblity. If this Epi I played yesterday was in nitro it would have been a seriously good axe. What say y'all?
-
03-03-2014 04:03 AM
-
I think if Epiphones were too good, that'd be an issue for Gibson.
poly can be done better than a lot of companies do, too. It doesn't have to look like the guitar is encased in plastic.
As for nitro...it's gorgeous, when done right. But it's also some pretty nasty stuff that I wouldn't be surprised if it was essentially outlawed in my lifetime. Companies might be better off looking at some new options and testing those on their cheaper guitars... (look what Bob Taylors doing for example--find a Koa series Taylor and tell me if that finish gives anything up to nitro.
-
Found this about the Taylor's:
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Taylor’s ultraviolet-cured finish is the thinnest and most durable available today. In the mid-’90s, Taylor moved away from using traditional nitrocellulose lacquer finish and developed a polyester finish formula that offers many benefits: It’s more durable and less susceptible to “cold-checking,” the spiderweb-like microfissures that result from exposure to dramatic temperature swings; a thinner coverage can be applied, which allows the wood to resonate more freely; it’s clearer than lacquer and won’t yellow over time like lacquer will; and it’s easier to work with when doing spot repairs. It’s also much more environmentally friendly, which earned Taylor several official commendations and helped raise the environmental standards for the guitar industry as a whole.
To shorten the curing time of the finish — which had been upwards of 10 days with lacquer — Taylor’s tooling team built its own ultraviolet ovens, which drastically reduced the curing process to about 60 seconds.
Another innovation — a combined robotic/electrostatic spray system — dramatically reduced the material waste of the finish-spraying process and made it easier to achieve a beautifully even, glassy coverage on a guitar body.
I remember reading somewhere that Nitro has environmental issues but that's as far as I know on the matter - interested who can chime in on that to enlighten me. That said, it's not the looks I'm concerned with, rather the fact that you are sealing the guitar's wood in a glassy plastic tomb - it's the acoustics. I've read on other forums, such as Djangobooks, where people laboriously sanded off the poly finish on their guitars and were amazed at how much better they sounded. Problem is that poly is very difficult to remove and you run the risk of sanding too far and wrecking your instrument.
Good point about Gibson being concerned if their budget line gets too good.
An alternative to poly that behaved more like nitro in terms of aging would be great. I realise manufacturers and retailers like poly because it protects the guitar's finish, keeping it looking glossy and new - not to mention the obvious of it being faster and cheaper to mass-produce. But since these retro reproduction models have come so close to the originals, it's a shame to permanently stop any chance of them aging nicely over time in terms of the sound opening up. Otherwise they feel to me a bit like well-made toys without the mojo of being a 'real musical instrument' that hits you when you play an original US made nitro axe.
Last edited by 3625; 03-03-2014 at 05:43 AM.
-
Oh, and my OP was about poly-urethane, and I noticed the Taylor guitars are finished in polyester - so if someone (PTChris?) can provide an explanation on the acoustic virtues/disadvantages of both types of 'poly's' and the way that they age that would be good.
-
Originally Posted by 3625
Same to me with the Elitist Casino. I will not buy a guitar with this strange glassy poly feeling... .
-
>>> so if someone (PTChris?) can provide an explanation on the acoustic virtues/disadvantages of both types of 'poly's' and the way that they age that would be good.
Har-har. A potential snarky jackass subject if there ever was one. We can hope not.
In my opinion (so not an explanation):
- Wood is dead. It does not breathe or eat. It is even dead in the tree, where the thin cambium layer under the bark is the only living part.
- Nitrocellulose, Acrylic, Polyurethane, Polyester, and the many formulas with combinations of these and other components (alkyd, polymerized oils, bug-remains, etc.) all can be applied to provide an effective protective coating that does not "kill tone", as they say.
- Many of these finishes are used in the most cost-effective way possible, and this can often mean a very thick coating (many Asian finishes), or a very soft finish (the Gibson goo), or other manifestation that many players do not like.
- But in my view this is a matter of specific formulation and application and not a fundamental flaw in any of the basic resin technologies at all.
- So, "I hate Poly." Does not make sense to me. And the way-silly add-ons like "I hate poly because it doesn't let the wood breathe (or eat, or play with the other wood at daycare)" is just derived drivel.
- Some finishes and products are easy to control and apply as thin as you may want. Others are tricky.
- So, getting a thin, lively nitrocellulose finish is relatively easy even for a very small shop environment. (I do not mean "alive". I mean light in weight, very flexible, and with limited hysteresis, to allow the dead wood to vibrate very freely.)
- Getting a thin, lively finish with many formulas of more modern resins can be a challenge.
- But it certainly can be done, as demonstrated by Taylor and some Japanese manufacturers. (There are others, I am sure.)
************************
On the Epi Sorrento recent version: This is a great value in a thinline hollowbody. It can be had for ~$520 brand new, not as a "factory second". I have a Tele that is great for taking absolutely anywhere with no fear of damage. But when I saw the Sorrento (I did not notice it for quite a while.), I calculated (a.k.a. "guessed") the likely real price to a volume dealer and offered $519 to a large, non GC dealer. It is not fine luthiery, but after some minor work (fixed the dopey-narrow nut spacing mostly) I have another battle axe guitar that can go anywhere, anytime.
But the finish is rather normal for a large scale, low cost Asia manufacturer. I definitely can see someone being bothered by this.
ChrisLast edited by PTChristopher2; 03-03-2014 at 09:15 AM. Reason: spelling
-
>>> virtues/disadvantages of both types of 'poly's' and the way that they age that would be good.
Oh, forgot about the aging.
Most modern finishes will reach a stable state in between 1 minute (UV cure) and 1 year (modern nitrocellulose lacquers, although most have fully sunk-back rather sooner than a year).
Some will notably yellow over a longer period of time, many years often depending on exposure to light.
But the experience of very gradual (years) aging, drying, hardening, checking, "mojo"-ing as one may notice on old nitrocellulose finishes is not on offer from any manufacturer that I know of.
All in my opinion, and hoping for limited TGP jackass flow in the thread.
-
That all makes sense, and is as usual an entertaining as well as edifying read.
Perhaps what gets overlooked sometimes is that nitro ( or 'nitro') finishes seem to look nicer as they get older ( as well as checking and eventually falling off…)
What happened to those water-based finishes that promised the best of both worlds? or was promising a case of ''promising"?
oops, just missed that second PTC post
-
Hi Franz,
>>> What happened to those water-based finishes that promised the best of both worlds? or was promising a case of ''promising"?
In my opinion, water based finishes continue to improve significantly.
I am not at all a finish-industry expert, so maybe someone who is can comment?
But from what I have seen and used (in non-luthiery custom work), there are some great water-based finishes that provide a clear, durable, and potentially thin and hard-enough finish for guitars. But they are quick drying, slow curing finishes with possible "burn-in" issues for multiple coats. This makes them pretty tricky for guitar use.
There is also some noticeable clarity shortfall in dark transparent colors.
But I've got to admit it's getting better (you know,... all the time), and I expect that there will be some increased use of water based finishes as time goes along.
I have not tried KTM-9 (water-based clear), so all of my comments could be washed away if this stuff worked as well as some suggest.
I really like Trans-Tint dyes, so the idea of KTM-9 and its clear compatibility with alcohol-based metal dyes sounds promising.
There is a young luthier in Manchester, NH who has used KTM-9 a fair amount so next time I hear from him, I'll check it out.
But all of this has limited bearing on manufacturers if there are even minor production issues with a product.
My opinion.
Chris
-
Good stuff Chris - but to clarify and put you on the spot a bit, would you be willing to offer your opinion as to whether the best quality 'poly' finishes out there (realising that's a loaded term due to specific formulations etc.) are equal in acoustic quality to the best nitro finishes?
Say, Taylor vs. Collings for example?
The real downer about these cheap thick poly finishes you find on many Asian guitars is that they're almost impossible to remove - so you get one of these axes and you can mod it all you want (new pups etc.), but you can't change the fact that they sealed it in a thick coat of indestructable poly that is inhibiting the acoustic properties of the instrument. There's the rub.
Do Eastman do nitro and no poly? I looked at the spec sheet for the 371 on their website and couldn't see an answer.
-
As far as I am aware, Eastman's use Nitro. Both guitars I've had from them have been Nitro finished. Originally Posted by 3625
-
As far as nitro goes, this has been a discussion with the Guild guitars that are made in Korea. My understanding is that countries like Korea prohibit the use of nitrocellulose lacquer due to toxicity.
Here is an interesting article on nitrocellulose lacquer...
http://www.ebay.com/gds/Myths-about-...4635258/g.html
-
>>> would you be willing to offer your opinion as to whether the best quality 'poly' finishes out there (realising that's a loaded term due to specific formulations etc.) are equal in acoustic quality to the best nitro finishes?
Opinion? Me? Here?
In my opinion, one can certainly achieve as good an acoustic finish with polyurethane or polyester based finishes as with nitrocellulose.
By "good" I mean a finish that:
- Protects the wood from oil, sweat, and modest abrasion.
- Limits the inhibition of vibrations through the mass of the finish (keep it light), the thickness and stiffness of the finish (keep it thin and springy), and the hysteresis - internal friction - of the finish (keep it non-gooey).
- Provides a smooth, non-sticky feel to the back of the neck. This one can of course mean different things to different people. I like it it be absolutely non-sticky myself - which is only one opinion.
So there are polyurethane and polyester finishes (with a host of potential minor components in there) that work great in this regard. There are even polymerized oil finishes like Birchwood-Casey "Tru-Oil" that are great in my view.
Likewise for Behlen/Mohawk and Cardinal lacquers. Probably Seagrave is great too, I have just not used it.
And there is the Gibson nitrocellulose formula that fails to some extent on two factors in my opinion.
There must be a primarily acrylic formula out there that would also hit on all cylinders.
In my opinion.
ChrisLast edited by PTChristopher2; 03-03-2014 at 09:48 AM. Reason: spelling
-
>>> Do Eastman do nitro and no poly?
The only Eastman I have (partially) re-finished was nitrocellulose lacquer over a base of spirit varnish. The finish was notably more brittle than most modern lacquers, but one could argue that this is a benefit if favoring hardness over some resiliency.
I suppose Eastman could change finishes at any time. They may well have stopped with the varnish sealer.
Chris
-
Nitrocellouse does make a good explosive, even a small rocket launcher.
Simple ingredients.
1.) Nitric acid
2.) Sulfuric acid
3.) Cotton balls (Mostly cellulose)
-
Presumably we all know a difference between what one "read/saw/heard somewhere", vs. the actual situation in use.
Around 1980 I had an actual seemingly-spontaneous fire (smoldering smoke really) in a pile of wood dust while making a short run of chambered solidbodies.
Since then I am conscious of possible trouble from piles of anything laying around.
A few years ago I gathered up significant dry-powder nitrocellulose lacquer overspray and tried to get it to burn. It would not burn unless I kept a hot flame on it continuously. It would not maintain "thermal runaway" as wood might.
I have not actually filled my underwear with nitrocellulose lacquer overspray and had firecrackers thrown at me, but on a drunken 4th of July party bet it could be on the table as a safe possibility.
In my opinion, the lacquer on [some of] our guitars is not describable as explosive in its dry state.
Chris
-
Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Yes, you're correct, but facts do conflict with having a bit of fun.
There's no evidence of a nitrocellulose guitar exploding, but there's evidence of nitrocellulose billard balls exploding.
-
>>> Yes, you're correct, but facts do conflict with having a bit of fun.
I see your point.
And of course liquid lacquer in a container is explosive, but not particularly due to the nitrocellulose component.
As for facts and panic, I do remember being on the M25 (probably South Mimms) filling up the tank around the time when I first actually paid $100 for a tank of gasoline - so maybe around 1999/2000. Anyway, my phone rings so I answer it. The person next to me started yelling and all but demanded the SAS to rappel down and stop me from endangering the commonweal.
I suppose at the time this was an understandable concern and a common mis-association of the phone with common static electricity and gasoline fumes.
Still it was dopey of me to be on the stupid phone when handling the fuel,...
And who names a place "South Mimms" anyway?
Chris
-
I would much rather see builders exploring other alternatives to nitro. Some of them are quite good and not nearly as toxic as nitro. Nitro ships as HazMat. It's heavily regulated, banned outright in a lot of places and requires a fairly complex ventilation and fire control system in others (and that system requires multiple inspections in most jurisdictions prior to use). It's awkward to deal with, damages easily during various stages of finishing and has little or no tangible benefit other than fulfilling romantic notions of tradition. Its one true benefit is that it is repairable but I believe that is far outweighed by the negatives.
Last edited by Jim Soloway; 03-03-2014 at 11:26 AM.
-
It would be quite cheering if there was a 'New South Mimms" somewhere over your side Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
-
from what I understand, modern nitro contains catalysts and curing agents which make it much less like the nitro of old so I'm not sure there is an advantage with nitro. I do believe that the thinner finishes contribute to tone and I've played enough relic'd strats to believe that the lighter finish makes the guitars more resonant but I've yet to play a relic'd (new) archtop.
I have a couple ibanez archtops finished in poly that sound amazing and I have a few nitro guitars that sound amazing. I think as long as the finish isn't super thick it doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference. I will say that the ibanez guitars' necks feel really good. So do the nitro necks on my other archtops but whenever I play a new gibson the necks seem a tad sticky which I don't like. Moral of the story is that poorly done nitro - and if gibson can't do it , who can?!? - is worse than nicely done poly.
Regarding breathing, I think that's chat-forum hype but as I stated, I do believe that the thinner finishes allow the wood to vibrate more freely.
-
>>> would be quite cheering if there was a 'New South Mimms" somewhere over your side
I think we missed that one. No "New Old Sodbury" either.
-
There's a rumour ( and I'd really like it to be true) that in the late 50s, when Selmer first started importing Strats to the UK, all the red ones ( and most sold here were red, sold as ''flamingo pink" ) were in fact re=sprayed in red polyester by the importers before sale. Originally Posted by jzucker
from what I understand, modern nitro contains catalysts and curing agents which make it much less like the nitro of old so I'm not sure there is an advantage with nitro. I do believe that the thinner finishes contribute to tone and I've played enough relic'd strats to believe that the lighter finish makes the guitars more resonant but I've yet to play a relic'd (new) archtop.
.
I can vouch for the fact that the red ones twanged just as seductively as the S/bs, and the odd white one.
-
My apprentice years were spent with cellulose paints and lacquers. We were on site spray painting some metal work but this day it was pissing down with rain. We were all gathered in the site store trying to keep warm and dry (typical summers day in old blighty). In comes our works manager and spys our foreman sitting on a bunch of paint and thinners tins smoking a fag (cigarette)! After much ranting and safety awareness lecturing from this manager the foreman stands up, pours some degreasing solution onto the wooden floor, takes a big draw on his fag and throws it onto the liquid only for it to get soaked and extinguished.
Cellulose is highly flammable but the degreasing solution isn't, but this guy didn't know his arse from his elbow. Always be sure of what you are using.
Isocyanate 2 pack paints are incredibly hazardous to health and I have asthma as a result. Be aware that they are also used in water based lacquers. Basically anything that needs a 'hardner' solution to help it dry is dangerous.
Polyester is easy to get right, the apprentice can schlep it on and then take the rest of the week to sand it back to a reasonably flat finish for polishing.
Cellulose is easy to use but difficult to become expert at.
Either finish is great for guitars, the poly stuff is obviously harder wearing. you can do some really cool stuff with cellulose though....
Thick black base coat, scratched, gold flash coat sanded off but gold remains in scratches. Black coat sunburst effect to edges then 6 coats of clear lacquer.
Last thing on cellulose. You get the mad red eye stare from using it. Not just for the irritation to your mucus membranes but that it blows your effing 'ead off mayt...... Woof!
-
>>> it blows your effing 'ead off mayt...... Woof!
Hey Roy, I knew there was a scientific explanation for your overall condition.
I am generally careful about humidity and blushing with NCL, in addition to lots of ventilation and of course a good respirator. It gets somewhat humid-tropical in the NE US in the summer, so you need to take some care.
Do you have trouble with blushing there? (I mean lacquer blushing, not you blushing when Prunella Panter-Downs saunters by in her best rags.)
Chris
Reply With Quote
Gibson L-5 or L-7 acoustic archtop
Today, 05:10 AM in For Sale