impact of repairs on pricing of vintage instruments

[kokotele]

I'm curious how repairs to vintage Guilds affects their values. On the really high-value vintage guitars, like Gibsons, Martins, and Fenders, anything that makes a guitar anything but 100% original can have an enormous impact. But how about on these Guilds where it might only be worth $800-900 in great condition?

I have in mind my '81 D40, which has some blemishes to the clear coat on the back. It looks like it spent a long time in a case on top of a strap that reacted with the nitro and caused a rash. If I repair the clear coat, is the guitar going to be worth more because it doesn't have a visible issue, or does the repair devalue the guitar because it's no longer original?

If it were a Fender, Guild, or Martin, the answer would be simple: a damaged/worn original finish is worth more than one that's been refinished.

 

[adorshki]

If it were a Fender, Guild, or Martin, the answer would be simple: a damaged/worn original finish is worth more than one that's been refinished.

That's a pretty good rule of thumb that seems to be universal among collectible items.
In the case of a Guild I think it's going to depend on the eventual purchaser. A repair probably won't "devalue" the D40 too badly since Guilds in general aren't valued by the broad market the way other makes are, as you point out.
If you intend to keep it, I'd say go ahead and fix it, if it's important to you aesthetically. If you think you may sell it at some point, it's a crap shoot whether you'll recover the cost or enhance the value.
If it was me in that situation, I'd keep it as is on the chance that if the brand's value finally becomes recognized you're better off with an original finish. Let the eventual buyer decide what they want to do. Giving them the choice is inherently more valuable than presenting something which can never be "original" again.
When I look at collectible stuff like cars, I want it as original as possible. I don't want to have to fix someone else's modifications. That's always gonna have guaranteed hidden costs.

 

[GardMan]

In general, I don't think I would consider buying a refinished guitar... or one that had substantial repairs to the finish (perhaps if done by the factory). On the other hand, a few small drop fills don't bother me... nor do a few small dings and scratches. My original D-35 has a spot the size of a silver dollar on the neck where outgassing from the (original Guild) case neck support softened the finish... to the extent that I rubbed it down to bare wood. It's been like that for 37 years. I do dislike severe finish checking... tho' I live with it on my D-55 (a few checks doesn't bother me... just the "spider web" effect I dislike).

As for other repairs... a well done neck reset would have a positive effect, tho' not to recoup the entire cost of the reset. A well-done cleated and glued crack is a positive compared to an unrepaired crack (regardless if the seller thinks it has no effect on structure or tone).

Then again, I don't consider my Guilds collectors items... their worth doesn't come from their age or make, it comes from their tone and the enjoyment I get from playing them (as poorly as I do).

Just my $0.02.
dave

 

[AlohaJoe]

Being from the Southwest, I love your handle and avatar! :lol:

Both comments above are right on I think... as a percentage of value the same is generally true of vintage Guilds as any other brand, although Guilds seem to be more often priced as good instruments than collectibles. I'd rather see damage unrepaired than covered up or botched. If it's unrepaired, I can decide who repairs it and how. Well done repairs shouldn't hurt the value much... I guess it depends on WHY you're buying.

To me, a musical instrument is more about playability and tone. Pretty sure doesn't hurt, but I've heard the sound of some fine vintage instruments ruined by a refinish.

 

[Taylor Martin Guild]

I see it this way.
I will not pay as much for a guitar that needs repairs, or one that has had repairs, as I will for a near mint guitar.
That just makes sense doesn't it.
Even 30's and 40's Martins are all over the place in value , depending on the shape that the guitar is in.

For me, it would be at least a 25% lower price on a guitar that needs or has has cracks repaired.
For a Guild that needs a neck re-set, I would subtract $500.00 from the price of a near mint Guild of the same model and vintage.
If it needed cracks repaired and a neck re-set, I would pass all together.

Or you could let someone else buy it, repair it and then buy it from them at their loss.

 

[adorshki]

To me, a musical instrument is more about playability and tone. Pretty sure doesn't hurt, but I've heard the sound of some fine vintage instruments ruined by a refinish.

That's a point I forgot to address. It's why I'll forego refinishing the top of my D25 which has a few dings. Don't want to start all over again with new lacquer or worse, never get back what it has now.
Backs & sides aren't nearly as critical but now that you mention it, it may be problematic to try to refinish just the back in order to fix those blemishes the OP mentioned. But stilll worth looking into for his own reasons.

 

[kokotele]

The finish repair on the back would be a pretty simple job for me. I have an HVLP setup and am experienced with working with lacquer, so it wouldn't be hard to make it disappear. When I get a chance I'll post a picture.

In most cases I don't mind dings and checking. In fact, I kind of like them and always feel nervous when I have something too shiny and new. I don't mind wear that comes from the normal process of playing a guitar. They help tell the story of an instrument. But more severe blemishes are from abuse or neglect, and that doesn't sit so well with me.

 

[GuildsSing]

The finish repair on the back would be a pretty simple job for me. I have an HVLP setup and am experienced with working with lacquer, so it wouldn't be hard to make it disappear. When I get a chance I'll post a picture.

In most cases I don't mind dings and checking. In fact, I kind of like them and always feel nervous when I have something too shiny and new. I don't mind wear that comes from the normal process of playing a guitar. They help tell the story of an instrument. But more severe blemishes are from abuse or neglect, and that doesn't sit so well with me.

I have used something I like in the past to diminish blemishes and scratches. It is Menzerna #16 Polishing Paste. It is not strong or coarse enough to remove them totally, which is a good thing to me. I apply it by hand. A luthier recommended it to me after he toured the Martin factory and saw they used it. I used it on my D-35 to reduce the appearance of scratches on the back. Wasn't buckle rash. The previous owner would put 20 guitar picks (or?) in the case and throw the guitar in on top. It may not be the product for you though. It does make the guitar shiny, although some of this goes away with normal use. Also, it might not work with your blemish. You have an almost 30 year old guitar and if me, I would keep the finish original. Just me though. :wink: Best of luck.

Dan

 

[adorshki]

The finish repair on the back would be a pretty simple job for me. I have an HVLP setup and am experienced with working with lacquer, so it wouldn't be hard to make it disappear.

Nice to know. I thought I'd read about it being difficult to blend new and old areas. Maybe also the difficulty of refinishing to the edges of the tops or sides, but I couldn't remember for sure.
Appreciate your posts regarding luthier/repair techniques by the way. Please keep 'em coming!