It depends. Solid tops, I think solid back makes sense. On a sparkle top, I think wood back would look odd.
According to my inner aesthete (whose name, coincidentally, is Mr. Les), squabbling over such details as finishes, scraped bindings, birds, neck binding preference or other nonessentials is strictly for parvenus.
“One quietly demonstrates one’s good taste,” he says, “in one’s own possessions, and refrains from expressing criticism of other individuals’ aesthetic choices.”
“Perhaps a raised eyebrow,” he allowed.
Because people buy them.I didn't mean the poll to sound overly critical, but I see that it would given my initial comment. Just interested in why I see dealers posting new guitars with solid color backs.
I didn't mean the poll to sound overly critical, but I see that it would given my initial comment. Just interested in why I see dealers posting new guitars with solid color backs.
Because people buy them.
This should be obvious but Casi1 likes wood.
Therefore she likes to see wood.
She prefers no paint covering the wood that she sees.
The question though is would they 'prefer' it if the backs were more translucent. If you want a Ford GT in the UK you have NO choice as to whether its a Left or Right hand drive. In other words, they have no choice if they want a Ford GT. If ALL the 'Blue' Ford GT's had a 'blue' interior and you really want a Blue car but you prefer a Black interior, do you walk away? Do you buy it anyway even if its not your preference?
You have a choice of not buying the Black Gold guitar or put up with the wrap
One of my BG 594s.
There is almost always an exception to every rule....