refinish? or putting different parts on the guitar?

[monothepost]

i am not very experienced to guitars actually. just wonder if a refinished vintage guitar made any difference to the original sound? i think its quite important to a player.

second question, if putting different years of parts onto a vintage guitar, how would it sounds like? would it lower the value?

thanks

[fever606]

I'll cover these topics seperately.. First, value: basically, the less original a guitar is the less "valuable" it is. Obviously, a high-quality refinish will impact value less than if you rattle-can the thing in your shed. Similarly, if you replace say a dead pot or switch with a newer part - or one of similar vintage - will decrease the value less than slapping EMGs and a Floyd Rose in.

Now, affecting the sound? Well... that's more subjective. Of course if you swap out a 500k pot for a 250k or 1Meg, that's going to change the sound of the guitar. As would refinishing a '59 Jazzmaster with a thick layer of poly versus the old nitrocellulose finish. But replacing parts with like components, or refinishing in a manner equivalent to the original manufacture, is going to impact the sound less.

[rot gut]

Save all your original parts, that way if you sell it you can just swap them out.

[Mike]

Interestingly enough, if the guitar is a Fender made after 1963-- nitro finish or not-- it has a poly finish.

When our GAS screams "NITRO," us guitarists tend to conveniently forget.

But, it is true.

[KaosCill8r]

I say replace what NEEDS to be replaced and leave the rest alone. Guitars with most of the finish worn off do sound better. Look at John Lennon's Casino. The guitar companies only put a finish on there to protect the bare timber from being stained with blood, sweat, beer and other blemishes. But even they know they sound much better without it.