Peter Tsiorba made an interesting comment about battered old guitars during a recent conversation about guitar restorations and repairs when he pointed out that battered old guitars are more apt to be exceptionally good guitars than are old guitars that are excellent physical condition. Exceptionally good guitars are more apt to sell quickly when they are offered for sale whereas guitars that are not so good are more apt to remain in dealer inventories and go unused for long periods of time. Furthermore, most owners of fine guitars own more than one and they are apt to regularly play the best one. Guitars that are played are far more apt to be damaged than guitars that remain in their cases, so it is the best ones that tend to become the most battered over time.

Even so, guitars buyers, especially if they are beginners, often put much more weight on physical appearance than sound quality when judging the values of guitars. That was true for me when I bought my first guitars years ago, but not any more. I appreciate nice-looking guitars as much as anyone else, but the "bottom-line" for me is sound quality. If a guitar doesn't sound great, I won't want to play it, regardless of how it great it might look. Like most of you, I generally play at home and rarely play for anyone who might be impressed by a flashy-looking guitar, but even if (and even, especially if) I was a public performer, I would hope to impress listeners with my music, not with a flashy guitar. Anyone can walk on stage with a flashy guitar, but only exceptionally good players can impress audiences with music played on their guitars.

The fact that guitar buyers tend to value appearance so highly creates opportunities for those of us who would rather play great-sounding guitars with some "battle-scars" than great-looking guitars that don't sound so great. I know from traveling around Spain extensively years ago that most of the guitars played by the great Gitano players were badly battered. Maybe some of those players couldn't afford anything better, but it also is likely that when they found a terrific guitar they kept playing it year after year because it sounded so great.

Of course, an expert guitar maker like Peter can make great sounding, but battle-scared guitars also look great or at least much better. Some types of damage cannot be totally eliminated without major reconstruction, but many of the typical dings, scrapes and scratches that almost all of the best guitars accumulate over time can be minimized, if not totally eliminated, in the hands of an expert restorer. Some of the best values on the used guitar market may be beat-up old guitars that most players don't want. Peter is currently finishing a new guitar for me, so I probably won't be looking for another guitar to add to my collection for a while, but if I was, I would look for a great-sounding, but beat-up old guitar at a terrific price. Then if I was bothered by the "battle-scars," I would send it to Peter.

-Bob

Another important point is how is the action on the old battered guitar? I have seen several over the years on ebay go reasonable because of cracks, etc., but was always afraid to bid on them, because of possible action problems. The cost of resurfacing the fingerboard and re-fretting can be costly as can an entire refinish job. I wish i had known of Peter several years ago as i would have kept my Diaz instead of selling it for a paltry price. All it needed was to be re French polished and a larger golpeador (rasqueadoador) installed.

davinort wrote:On the other hand, poor physical condition is no guarantee of quality. It may be that a battered guitar was, is, and will be a junk guitar; the Paracho tourist trade thrives on selling these junkers.

That is an important point. I didn't mean to imply that all old beat-up guitars are good buys, only that a great-sounding old beat-up guitar might be. A guitar that doesn't sound great isn't a good buy regardless of its condition.

Manos Lentas wrote:Another important point is how is the action on the old battered guitar? I have seen several over the years on ebay go reasonable because of cracks, etc., but was always afraid to bid on them, because of possible action problems.

A warped neck or structural damage might be good reasons to not purchase a great-sounding guitar unless the price is exceptionally low. However, fixing problems like that may or may not be as costly as someone might think. I would ask Peter for a quote. Only a small percentage of guitars have truly great sound. Sound quality is determined mostly by characteristics of the box. It might well be worth the cost of fixing a warped neck or even completely replacing the neck of a guitar known to have outstanding sound. I wouldn't buy a guitar like that without knowing at least approximately what repair would cost, but I also wouldn't rule it out just because of a problem that can be fixed.

I played a lot of guitars during years of international travel. I was usually disappointed. Truly outstanding guitars are rare, regardless of price. Well known guitar makers usually save their best guitars for performing artists, because they want to be able to advertise that well known players use them. One way to get a guitar of that caliber is to buy it after a performing artist has battered it by heavy use and then have someone like Peter repair the damage. The total cost could be less than the cost of a new run-of-the-mill guitar, the physical condition could be almost as good as new after refurbishment, and the sound quality could be better than most ordinary players ever experience in one of their guitars.

-Bob

davinort wrote:My '83 Brandt classical looks like it was dragged half-a-mile down a country road behind a gravel truck, but it served me well for many years.

Incidentally, David and I met for the first time yesterday. He is an accomplished classical player. I didn't see his '83 Brandt classical, but I saw and played a new flamenco guitar he just bought and listened to him play several classical compositions beautifully on my guitars.

-Bob

Bob wrote: One way to get a guitar of that [excellent] caliber is to buy it after a performing artist has battered it by heavy use and then have someone like Peter repair the damage. The total cost could be less than the cost of a new run-of-the-mill guitar, the physical condition could be almost as good as new after refurbishment, and the sound quality could be better than most ordinary players ever experience in one of their guitars.

-Bob

Bob, I appreciate the thought. I am certainly open to restoration and repair work--from minor to in-depth. In theory, the scenario you are describing sounds attractive. Performing musician breaks-in the guitar, batters it somewhat, and sells it. The lucky new owner fixes [hopefully] few problems, and ends up with a superb guitar. In practice, I think the scenario is somewhat uncommon. If an accomplished musician is using a guitar to the point of getting it battered, he or she must have a strong attachment to that instrument. And, would probably spend the money needed to keep it in good playable condition.

Your point, however, is well taken. An excellent guitar, even if heavily used, certainly makes a good candidate for restoration. If anyone comes across one, contact me, I'd be happy to evaluate the situation.

I think Nigel's post a few months back is a good example of what is possible. Recently a friend visited Sevilla and found a great sounding old Bernal in need of some repairs and a Moron size golpeador. He bought it very reasonable. While it is possible to find as good or better sounding and playing guitars with labels from the big names in the same need of repair, the prices are sometimes as much 10 times greater. Perhaps the key is looking for that battered guitar from a lesser respected maker.
lutherie-f5/a-hard-worked-valeriano-bernal-blanca-t314.html

Manos Lentas wrote:I wish i had known of Peter several years ago as i would have kept my Diaz instead of selling it for a paltry price. All it needed was to be re French polished and a larger golpeador (rasqueadoador) installed.

Was that a Francisco Manuel Diaz or a Fidencio Díaz guitar?

Lucas

It was Francisco's son Victor Manuel Diaz of Granada. Great guitar just had a bad FP job that flaked off just by touching it with your nail. Great tone excellent action, but too small a golpeador and owned before me by a modern rumba latin player that had dents all over the top. I mean everywhere. Guy must have thought it was a drum, however the FP job didn't adhere good and just rubbing a rag on it would peel off some finish where there was damage. Also there is a Rafael Diaz, I think Francisco brother.

Here is another example of a bargain guitar needing work.
lutherie-f5/neck-and-sides-cracked-t413.html