Sunken Finish Pile On

[jonnyhturbo]

I didntknow that this was a good thing? I noticed it on my 2012 AV after six months. I was dissappointed because i thought that the ideal would be a smooth glass like finish over the face of the body front and back.

 

[Mike Duncan]

It's a good thing. Just go with it. It's the oneness of wood and finish.

 

[John Beef]

I tried to get a better shot while I was restringing last night, still, it just doesn't show in the photos the way it does in person. I really dig it.

 

[soundbee]

hmmm.... I just got my first PRS - Custom 24 '12 w/ the v12 finish. I'm really digging the glass like vibe. It's gonna be hard to accept a "sinker" (don't mean to drag in another thread) - but I'm sure I could get used to it. But seriously, does anyone know if the v12 is supposed to resist this?

 

[László]

hmmm.... I just got my first PRS - Custom 24 '12 w/ the v12 finish. I'm really digging the glass like vibe. It's gonna be hard to accept a "sinker" (don't mean to drag in another thread) - but I'm sure I could get used to it. But seriously, does anyone know if the v12 is supposed to resist this?

I like the "unsunk" look, too. Having had many PRSes over the years, I can say that in most cases, the finishes don't sink into the wood appreciably. Luck of the draw seems to be involved. In fact, I've never had a solid body PRS finish sink (18 guitars). Maybe it's just the environment, i.e., storage temp, humidity, etc., that causes the problem.

However, I'm told that the acoustics all sink because of the way they're finished. Mine is definitely a sinker, which I'll admit bothers me a little.

 

[]-[@n$0Ma☩!©]

Luck of the draw seems to be involved.

I find it to be an "era" issue, not an environmental issue.

The early PRS guitars show a lot of grain. The newer ones show a LOT less - if any at all. To be clear, I'm drawing a distinction between grain and the wave in texture from the flame/quilt.

For same back-story, this conversation started out on the old forums as a way for those of us with older guitars to have some fun. The guys with newer guitars were forced to endure their perfect finishes. It's a joke. A gag. A "neener neener" with no value whatsoever. It's simply something more to talk about.

If you are taking the thread seriously, reconsider.

Though, it does have the added benefit of teaching people about changes in the finish throughout the years. And, I DO love opaque tops that show flame.

 

[soundbee]

No worries - I'm happy either way. I've found a guitar that feels and sounds like "home" - that's what floats my boat. I'm just wondering what to expect in the future. A glassy finish is great and all, but sometimes I just feel like I want to baby it a bit (not that I'd ever do this sort of thing ... "don't throw that guitar up in the air onstage and hope to catch it"). On the other hand, I do enjoy the look of some of those old well loved nitro Les Paul finishes with the cracks and all. I seem to remember seeing some goldtop PRS's with that aged look from people's pics. Of course you can now get a relic'd version - I like this for only the fact that it takes the pain of your first nick out of the equation. Still I'll enjoy the glassy niceness until I unintentionally mess it up.

http://www.theguitarsanctuary.com/Custom-Aged-PRS-DGT-Goldtop-with-Moon-Inlays-p/prs-12183906.htm

 

[László]

I find it to be an "era" issue, not an environmental issue.

The early PRS guitars show a lot of grain. The newer ones show a LOT less - if any at all. To be clear, I'm drawing a distinction between grain and the wave in texture from the flame/quilt.

For same back-story, this conversation started out on the old forums as a way for those of us with older guitars to have some fun. The guys with newer guitars were forced to endure their perfect finishes. It's a joke. A gag. A "neener neener" with no value whatsoever. It's simply something more to talk about.

Hans! Hello. I was buying PRSes in 1991, mine didn't sink! Luck of the draw!

I was active on the early forums - going back to what, the late 90s, with the old PRS Forum that morphed into TGP. I remember the finish discussions! And some were heated. It wasn't all sunglasses and Neener-jobs.

And finish sink is still happening, especially with Nitro finishes. It's all part of the deal.

 

[]-[@n$0Ma☩!©]

Hans! Hello. I was buying PRSes in 1991, mine didn't sink! Luck of the draw!

Hiya Les!

I don't have any PRS guitars with finish sinking into the pores from 1989 on. Never had an '88 (maybe I should do something about that). For the benefit of our collective knowledge, of course.

I do have guitars (even new ones) where I can see the ripple of the flame or quilt.

I remember the finish discussions! And some were heated. It wasn't all sunglasses and Neener-jobs.

What can I say, some people like to lock horns.

And finish sink is still happening, especially with Nitro finishes. It's all part of the deal.

Are you talking about finish sinking into the pores or ripple from the flame/quilt?

 

[László]

Are you talking about finish sinking into the pores or ripple from the flame/quilt?

I'm talking about the finish sinking into the pores. And ripple. Which, by the way, I think have different causes.

No question that the sinking into the pores depends on the piece of wood, how it's been prepped for finishing with fillers, type of finish, etc. You no doubt saw the run of satin finished guitars a few years back where little or no filler was used, and the poly finish stuck to and sunk into the pores of the mahogany like nobody's business. Of course, that was by design, but it does make clear the importance of the various steps taken to fill the wood pores.

So the finish isn't simply sinking with time; as the wood itself continues to age, perhaps they open up a little, and/or fillers shrink a little with time, or are absorbed a bit by the wood, who knows.

On the other hand, having the flame ripple is not due to lack of fillers, or the finish sinking in; even a poly finish isn't thick enough to simply sit on top of the wood and not ripple if the wood is rippled underneath when new. What happens there, I think, is that the wood underneath is aging, and the wood that was sanded flat is simply changing a little with time, becoming rippled itself, with the various parts of the grain doing what they do in nature. The finish comes along for the ride.

And yes, my Tonare came right out of the factory with a bit o' the old nitro finish sink. I'm told that it's absolutely normal for the finishes on these babies to sink right into the wood. My guess is that for tone reasons, they go light on the filler (if they use any at all).

 

[]-[@n$0Ma☩!©]

I'm talking about the finish sinking into the pores. And ripple. Which, by the way, I think have different causes.

Agreed.

No question that the sinking into the pores depends on the piece of wood, how it's been prepped for finishing with fillers, type of finish, etc. You no doubt saw the run of satin finished guitars a few years back where little or no filler was used, and the poly finish stuck to and sunk into the pores of the mahogany like nobody's business. Of course, that was by design, but it does make clear the importance of the various steps taken to fill the wood pores.

I had one of those. An Artist Singlecut. The flamed mahogany neck still haunts me. It was magnificent.

So the finish isn't simply sinking with time; as the wood itself continues to age, perhaps they open up a little, and/or fillers shrink a little with time, or are absorbed a bit by the wood, who knows.

Paul knows.

I'll see if I can dig up the year when PRS started filling the pores on the electrics. I'm going out on a limb here but my guess is that it was around 1988. Of course, I would expect that there are guitars in today's line-up or from PS, as you've already noted, that do not receive the filling of pores - by design.

On the other hand, having the flame ripple is not due to lack of fillers...

Of that, I am certain.

...or the finish sinking in; even a poly finish isn't thick enough to simply sit on top of the wood and not ripple if the wood is rippled underneath when new. What happens there, I think, is that the wood underneath is aging, and the wood that was sanded flat is simply changing a little with time, becoming rippled itself, with the various parts of the grain doing what they do in nature. The finish comes along for the ride.

Interesting theory. I've heard several. Some from within the factory and some outside. I suppose I could dig into the details of each and we could weigh through them with a fine tooth comb but I've lost my verve for that level of detail.

And yes, my Tonare came right out of the factory with a bit o' the old nitro finish sink. I'm told that it's absolutely normal for the finishes on these babies to sink right into the wood. My guess is that for tone reasons, they go light on the filler (if they use any at all).

Makes sense to me. If I were ordering a PS acoustic, I would want the wood as close to natural as possible.

 

[László]

Very interesting about no fillers before 1988 or so. That's cool info, Hans!

As I said, I was a little surprised when I noticed that slight sink on the then-new Tonare, but I quickly stopped worrying about it when I played it. What a great sound! I've since been looking at websites for other high-end acoustic builders, out of curiosity more than anything else, and I think that to a degree, these things run in trends with guitar makers. For a while, everything had to be shiny, with a slick and hard surface. Then a more natural look came into vogue. And this was back in the 1960s!

Right now, we seem to be in an era of appreciation of the natural qualities of the woods, and having a very slick surface is less important than having the wood do its thing. There are some very high end makers who are using French polishing, who aren't filling the wood, etc. To some, these things enhance the hand-made look, though in my estimation, they look a little too much like they belong at the Ann Arbor Art Fair, if you know what I mean...

Still, it's all interesting.

 

[]-[@n$0Ma☩!©]

Very interesting about no fillers before 1988 or so. That's cool info, Hans!

Turns out it wasn't pore fillers. The early guitars did not have a base coat (like the new guitars), they only used an acrylic urythane top coat. As such, the finish would sink into grain a lot more than models that do have a base coat; which was added around 1990.

This is not, as we both know (but for the benefit of others), tied to flame/quilt showing in the glare. The lack of base coat only made the grain show more.

As I said, I was a little surprised when I noticed that slight sink on the then-new Tonare, but I quickly stopped worrying about it when I played it. What a great sound! I've since been looking at websites for other high-end acoustic builders, out of curiosity more than anything else, and I think that to a degree, these things run in trends with guitar makers. For a while, everything had to be shiny, with a slick and hard surface. Then a more natural look came into vogue. And this was back in the 1960s!

I agree. PRS guitars have been "dipped in glass" for years but I, too, think the trend ebbs and flows toward super finished appearances and raw wood appearances.

Right now, we seem to be in an era of appreciation of the natural qualities of the woods, and having a very slick surface is less important than having the wood do its thing. There are some very high end makers who are using French polishing, who aren't filling the wood, etc. To some, these things enhance the hand-made look, though in my estimation, they look a little too much like they belong at the Ann Arbor Art Fair, if you know what I mean...

I do know what you mean. And trying to please everyone has got to be a pain in the rear when tastes on this issue are so varied.

Still, it's all interesting.

Sure beats reading the news.

 

[vchizzle]

Back from the dead like a zombie
I just noticed my '96 CU22's finish has sunk a bit. I pick this guitar up daily, it's my "wall guitar" that hangs above my desk. My 1st PRS ever. Today I had an abnormal amount if time with her and 1st noticed it on the black back of mahogany. Then on a couple spots on the top. I'll try to get some pics but not sure if I can capture it or not.

It's never been something I necessarily hoped would happen, but I'm really excited it is/has! This is the guitar that is most special to me in my collection.

 

[Boogeyman]

I dont guess I even know what yall are talking about? I read the thread but cant tell from the pics where "sinking" has happened. I dont thin either of mine are sinking...if they are I guess it doesn't bother me LOL