Refinishing a Stringmaster D8

Roy McKinney · Post by **Roy McKinney** » 4 Mar 2006 1:07 pm

Who does refinishing of old Fender Stringmaster? Who do you recommend? Would you keep the original color or go with a better sounding black one?
Boy, I didn't mean to start a war over this. But my stringmaster has good legs, everything is tight and all of the crome is excellent in my openion with the exception of one bridge cover which has been bent. The pickups have been rewound by Jason, but I need to replace some of the caps to finish off the electrical part of it.It has a lot of cig. burns and deep gouges where some previous owner picked the dickens out of the neck and not the strings. This steel will not be setting in the closet and it will get played. I appreciate all of the comments on this thread, but I am still looking for a good referal for refinishing it. Thanks![This message was edited by Roy McKinney on 05 March 2006 at 02:52 PM.]

Ron Victoria · Post by **Ron Victoria** » 4 Mar 2006 6:01 pm

Last year I tried to get a basket case on Ebay but lost out. My plan was to buy the cellulous paint and have the autobody shop spray it. I intended to go with black as it looks pretty cool. Maybe I will still find one in the future. I would only use a Stringmaster already stripped of it's original finish.

Ron[This message was edited by Ron Victoria on 05 March 2006 at 07:43 AM.]

Michael Lee Allen · Post by **Michael Lee Allen** » 4 Mar 2006 6:46 pm

REMOVED

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 4 Mar 2006 7:05 pm

Just my opinion... but I would never strip an original finish from a stringmaster, regardless of how scratched or dinged it might be. Fresh new paint looks nice, but it cuts the value of the guitar in half.

Okay, let the flames begin!

Rick Alexander · Post by **Rick Alexander** » 4 Mar 2006 7:43 pm

Doug, I totally agree with you. Some Stringmasters show the miles more than others, that's their character.

Loni Specter · Post by **Loni Specter** » 4 Mar 2006 9:19 pm

This is a real problem for many of us, refinish or not. Thank goodness I hate new guitars just because I don't want to have to worry about putting that first ding on them. I much prefer the chipped, crazed patina of a well loved guitar or steel.
Unfortunately not everyone shares my passion for purity. So when a company like Fender or Gibson stops making new versions of our faves, we all suffer. I have one close friend who will not own a guitar in less than Mint- condition. I've sold him 3 Les Pauls, 2 Telecaster Customs and a Strat or two over the years. He is a clean freak and he doesn't like nicked up instruments. Same with his women, cars, and cloths.
I gues if that's your personality, there's nothing you can do about it and no amount of logic and reasoning will make that person like to play a beat up axe.
But you better darn well refinish it a stock color!

Harry Sheppard · Post by **Harry Sheppard** » 4 Mar 2006 11:00 pm

Doug,

I would agree with you if you were planning to refinish a nice Martin, Gibson or a Fender solidbody guitar but I have seen this is really not as important on a Stringmaster or many steel guitars. I have had MANY Stringmasters in all kinds of condition and found it almost impossible to get rid of the ones that look beat up and are in poor condition. Everyone wants nice clean, original guitars. I will admit that some of the worst looking guitars sound the best because they were played but they are still very hard to resell.

Who buys Stringmasters? I doubt that regular high dollar guitar collectors have many Stringmasters in their collections and if they do, they are all original and in excellent condition. Steel guitar players buy Stringmasters and they usually do not want to pay much for them. That is why a 1950's Strat is $30,000+ and a 1950's D8 Stringmaster is around $1200.00 if it is clean. Much less if it is in poor condition. Although I have never refinished a Stringmaster and would not recommend doing so, I bet a well refinished guitar would sell for the about same price or more and be easier to sell than an ugly guitar with a beat up finish. The key is to do it right. I believe in originallity but these guitars are never going to have the same value to high end collectors as a vintage strat or tele.

Nick Reed · Post by **Nick Reed** » 5 Mar 2006 12:11 am

Before

After

[This message was edited by Nick Reed on 08 March 2006 at 06:32 AM.]

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 5 Mar 2006 12:44 am

I agree that no steel guitar ever made will reach the astronomical highs of the ‘50s Strats, Les Pauls, and Martins. But the Stringmasters are increasing in value every year, and we’ve recently seen a couple of clean ones sell for around $2000, even if it was a result of a bidding war. I’ll bet that in our lifetime we’ll see that price double. If that happens, originality will become more important. Buyers will start nitpicking and looking for ways to get the price down.

In the past few years I have bought and sold several Fender non-pedal steel guitars, and I have found that the ones in fair to good condition sell for slightly less than the nice ones, but not for much less. I’m amazed at the spike in prices of All 50’s & 60’s Fender gear in the past couple of years.

It seems to me that if a vintage guitar is in good working condition, with all original parts, but with rough cosmetics, there is no need to refinish it. An old guitar is what it is. I say live with it, love it, play it. My personal “player guitars” are pretty worn out, while a couple of mint gems sit in their cases in the closet. That pretty much says it all.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 5 Mar 2006 1:24 am

If you need Nitro-cellulose in ORIGINAL colours, try http://shop.store.yahoo.com/reranchstore/fencuscol.html

Would re-finishing change the value of this ?

BTW..what is it's value ?

Michael Johnstone · Post by **Michael Johnstone** » 5 Mar 2006 2:24 am

Sometimes a guitar gets past the point of "vintage" and into the realm of "thrashed" and then it's time to call my buddy Pat Wilkins http://www.wilkinsguitars.com/
He refinished a 56 T-8 Stringmaster of mine a couple years ago in "Bananaburst" and he even faded the edges here and there to the point where it really looks like an old guitar. -MJ-

Andy Volk · Post by **Andy Volk** » 5 Mar 2006 4:04 am

Here's another option .... http://home.flash.net/~guitars

In an ideal world, an original finish in great condition is desireable but personally, I'd rather have a profesionally refinished Stringmaster than a totally beat, looks-like-a-truck-ran-over-it guitar. I've never bought into the romantic notion that a vintage guitar has earned every cigarette burn and ding honestly and should be left alone. I say, finish it in avacado if that's what you like as long as you understand the world will view its value differently than an originl finish.

Fender used automotive paints and sprayed them in a factory. Somewhere along the line the notion of the value of original finishes got transfered from the world of antiques. It makes more sense to me in that world than ours.

Cartwright Thompson · Post by **Cartwright Thompson** » 5 Mar 2006 4:26 am

I'm with you Doug. All I can say to the refinishers of all but the completely trashed/previously modified guitars is, you'll be sorry....
If you must do it, have a pro do it and use nitro applied as thinly as possible. It makes a difference, poly sucks tone.[This message was edited by Cartwright Thompson on 05 March 2006 at 04:29 AM.]

Erv Niehaus · Post by **Erv Niehaus** » 5 Mar 2006 7:12 am

I have refinished three Stringmasters to date. I will not play a beat up guitar. The above site to ReRanch is the place to go. They have the same nitrocellulose lacquer that was originally used on the Fenders. I used Fender blonde along with their tinted clear coat to get my Stringmasters back to their original glory.
If someone would like to post some pictures for me, I will show you the results.
Erv

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 5 Mar 2006 10:23 am

It all depends on whether you think of steel and electric guitars more like old cars, or like old acoustic guitars and violins. Of course a truly "mint" old car or guitar that doesn't need refinishing is highly valuable. However, if you get an old beatup '32 Ford, nobody thinks twice about giving it a new paint job, whether you restore it to stock, or mod it into a hot rod. Beat up old instruments have their charm. But many players really enjoy refinishing and refurbishing the old Sho-Buds. I don't see why the same can't be true of old Stringmasters. I just got a beat up old '55 Stringmaster D8. I think it is cool, and have no plans to refinish it. So I have no problem if a player wants to play an old instrument with character. But likewise, I think it is really cool when someone does a spectacular restoration job on a steel or electric guitar. It turns it into a show piece. If you collect the instrument to play and enjoy looking at, I think anything goes. The idea that old steels and electric guitars should be kept in their original beatup condition just for the collector's and resale value seems piggishly materialistic to me, and far removed from the original purpose of the instrument, which is to make music and look good doing it.

Nick Reed · Post by **Nick Reed** » 5 Mar 2006 10:56 am

We had Linda's Stringmaster refinished because it looked extremely rough. Since it now looks good cosmeticly, she enjoys the guitar much more than when it was ugly. To me, thats the important part. She's very proud of her Fender Stringmaster because it looks brand new.

NR [This message was edited by Nick Reed on 10 March 2006 at 06:49 AM.]

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 5 Mar 2006 12:25 pm

Nick, I know that you want your stringmaster to look nice, and I understand that. I guess it’s just a personal preference, but I would actually prefer to play an all original guitar, even with a scratched and beat up finish. That’s just me I guess. As long as the guitar works well… the electronics, tuners, etc, I have no problem with “cosmetics”. I like to see some wear on a guitar, especially if I put the wear on it.

I believe that Fender non-pedal steels will be highly sought-after in future years. All Fender products of the ‘50s and ’60s are going way up in value every year… even the steel guitars!

I’m sure that Stringmasters will be selling for $4000 within our lifetime. When that happens, originality will be become very important, and anything non-original will cut into the value. 50% of a big number is… a big number! Sorry to be so cold and hard about it, but that’s how the vintage guitar market works. So I always advise people not to refinish an old instrument, especially anything Fender, Gibson, or Rickenbacher. Okay, I’m putting on my flame-retardant suit now!

Rick Collins · Post by **Rick Collins** » 5 Mar 2006 1:27 pm

There seems to be a huge difference between the players of solid body Fender electrics, old acoustic instruments, and steel guitar players. One sees only a few thrashed electrics and acoustics; but scores of thrashed steel guitars.

Harry Sheppard · Post by **Harry Sheppard** » 5 Mar 2006 1:45 pm

Doug,

I agree with you 100% about keeping it original and someday originality will be very important as these guitars keep going up in price. But look at the responces to this thread. It looks to me like the majority of the players responding to this thread really do not care if the finish is original as long as it looks good and is playable. That was my point. Some players like clean, original guitars, some like not so clean, original guitars and some just like it to look good and original finish does not matter.

As these guitars go up in value, the nice, clean all original guitars are going to be sitting in the closet (as you stated) because normal play wear will devalue the instrument. It will be sad to see but as you know, that is exactly what has happened to the vintage guitar market. When this happens, players will not want to pay the premium for a guitar they can not play. The collectors wanting an investment will. Players will buy the guitars with a poor finish, dings, pitted chrome and other normal wear and tear and I really think with the small steel guitar market, there will as many players wanting a nicely refinished guitar as there are players wanting the "Relic" look. Of course there will always be exceptions. I also like the played look and would shy away from a refinished guitar but that is only my own opinion. If I buy to resell, I would only buy an all original guitar in excellent condition. If I buy to play, I look for the lowest price. [This message was edited by Harry Sheppard on 05 March 2006 at 02:08 PM.]

Brett Habben · Post by **Brett Habben** » 5 Mar 2006 2:02 pm

How about this compromise. If you absolutely have to have a _____ colored stringmaster, buy one that's already been refinished. As I see it, since it's no longer a virgin anyway, you can do no more harm to it by repainting it ______. And then sell the 'chipped, faded, ugly' one to somebody seeking originality. And the next generation of steel players will have one more original stringmaster to argue over refinishing (it never ends). But more than likely they will appreciate being given the option.

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 5 Mar 2006 3:20 pm

It seems like most Stringmaster finishes show at least some dings and bare wood, more so than other non-pedal guitars. Is it something about the finish itself? or the design of the instrument? or maybe it’s from the bar dropped onto the guitar? I don’t think I’ve ever seen an original Stringmaster finish without a couple of tiny bare spots. That’s especially true with the Walnut finishes. My Walnut T-8 is exceptionally clean and unplayed, but there are couple of tiny dings showing in the finish. I guess it makes sense that any bare spots will show up more on a painted surface than on a stained surface. [This message was edited by Doug Beaumier on 05 March 2006 at 09:05 PM.]

Keith Cordell · Post by **Keith Cordell** » 6 Mar 2006 5:13 am

When I look at an old steel with dings and finish damage, I love to speculate on what steeler made each mark, what technique someone had that made pick marks or heavy wear spots on it; dings and such are the character of the instrument. To take that away just makes it a reissue- value instrument, with all its history scraped off.

James Quackenbush · Post by **James Quackenbush** » 6 Mar 2006 6:04 am

I guess it all boils down to how we all define the word "value" .....Some of us like the older beat up "where had this instrument been " situation.....Other's look at the same instrument, and say " I don't even want to touch that beat up thing" ....
That's what makes us all different ....Whatever inspires you to play the instrument, and makes it a better experience for YOU, is the right thing to do .. I had a 55 Les Paul Jr. that had it's tuner buttons ROTTING off ...You had to be SOOOO carefull when tuning it so the buttons didn't crumble in your fingers !!...If I changed them out for a good usable set of new ones, the monitary value of the instrument would drop .... So , to say that an instrument was worth more money because it was unplayable and had bad original tuners did not cut it for me ...I was also affraid to bring it around because of the fragile nature and the value of the instrument .... I SOLD IT !! and have NEVER been happier !!....I bought 2 other guitars that serve my purpose MUCH better , and I have used them 100 times more than I ever used my 55 LP Jr. .... So I ask you guys , which instruments had more value ? ......It's all a personal thing I guess.... Me ??.....If I can't enjoy playing it , I don't need to own it !!......Jim

Mark Vinbury · Post by **Mark Vinbury** » 6 Mar 2006 6:23 am

I'm with Doug and Keith. Keep the finish original.
Refinished guitars are always suspect in my book What kind of hacking,splits,holes,and other body alterations are under that Bondo and glossy paint?
Get it up and running mechanicaly and enjoy the visual history.

James Quackenbush · Post by **James Quackenbush** » 6 Mar 2006 6:57 am

I guess it all boils down to how we all define the word "value" .....Some of us like the older beat up "where had this instrument been " situation.....Other's look at the same instrument, and say " I don't even want to touch that beat up thing" ....
That's what makes us all different ....Whatever inspires you to play the instrument, and makes it a better experience for YOU, is the right thing to do .. I had a 55 Les Paul Jr. that had it's tuner buttons ROTTING off ...You had to be SOOOO carefull when tuning it so the buttons didn't crumble in your fingers !!...If I changed them out for a good usable set of new ones, the monitary value of the instrument would drop .... So , to say that an instrument was worth more money because it was unplayable and had bad original tuners did not cut it for me ...I was also affraid to bring it around because of the fragile nature and the value of the instrument .... I SOLD IT !! and have NEVER been happier !!....I bought 2 other guitars that serve my purpose MUCH better , and I have used them 100 times more than I ever used my 55 LP Jr. .... So I ask you guys , which instruments had more value ? ......It's all a personal thing I guess.... Me ??.....If I can't enjoy playing it , I don't need to own it !!......Jim