Why Doesn't Warmoth Use Nitrocellulose for Finishes?
- Thread starter shaps6
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,009
All the reasons stated above are correct. Paint is to guitar manufacturer what cheese is to a taco truck: one of the most expensive and volatile ingredients. It takes a lot of work and research to find the paint that is: 1)safe, 2)cheap, 3)fast, 4)beautiful, 5)durable.
And, in my humble and completely personal opinion, nitro is way overrated. It's become an over-hyped and lazy marketing buzz word. Like hide glue. I've completely moved beyond caring about having things "the way Leo did it". But that's just me.
Not calling the OP lazy or anything. It's just interesting to me that people demand the latest and greatest technology in so many things, but are completely married to a 70 year old design when it comes to guitars.
And, in my humble and completely personal opinion, nitro is way overrated. It's become an over-hyped and lazy marketing buzz word. Like hide glue. I've completely moved beyond caring about having things "the way Leo did it". But that's just me.
Not calling the OP lazy or anything. It's just interesting to me that people demand the latest and greatest technology in so many things, but are completely married to a 70 year old design when it comes to guitars.
- Messages
- 3,009
shaps6 said:
No can do. If I told you, we would find ourselves sitting next to each other in the back of a windowless white van, bound, gagged, and bouncing down an unmarked logging road deep into the woods. :help:
It would be nice to meet you though.
shaps6
Junior Member
- Messages
- 36
double A said:shaps6 said:
No can do. If I told you, we would find ourselves sitting next to each other in the back of a windowless white van, bound, gagged, and bouncing down an unmarked logging road deep into the woods. :help:
It would be nice to meet you though.
I'd be more into it if it were the A-Team van
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
Finishing with nitrocellulose lacquer is a LOT of work, which takes time, which costs money. If you wanted a finish like the poly you currently get from Warmoth for $225 but in lacquer, it would likely cost you $600 or more. Catalyzed Poly, on the other hand, you shoot it and you're done. It cures very quickly, but you still have to wait for it to harden enough to buff. But, overall, the actual working time is trivial compared to lacquer.
The problem with catalyzed poly is that due to toxicity and tack time, you need a more elaborate spray booth than something like lacquer requires. But, a formal paint shop will have that so it's not really an issue. It's also more expensive, but even if you triple your finishing material cost by using it, the labor savings are so dramatic that that's not an issue, either. Another problem with poly is in a production situation, it's essentially unrepairable. If you screw it up, you have to strip it and start over. But, a production shop will have a professional finisher who doesn't make stupid mistakes, so that's not an issue, either.
So, in the final analysis, using poly is a no-brainer. Especially when you consider that there's no benefit to lacquer for the end user.
The problem with catalyzed poly is that due to toxicity and tack time, you need a more elaborate spray booth than something like lacquer requires. But, a formal paint shop will have that so it's not really an issue. It's also more expensive, but even if you triple your finishing material cost by using it, the labor savings are so dramatic that that's not an issue, either. Another problem with poly is in a production situation, it's essentially unrepairable. If you screw it up, you have to strip it and start over. But, a production shop will have a professional finisher who doesn't make stupid mistakes, so that's not an issue, either.
So, in the final analysis, using poly is a no-brainer. Especially when you consider that there's no benefit to lacquer for the end user.
shaps6
Junior Member
- Messages
- 36
Cagey said:
Right. I still try to check myself whenever I see "nitro" finish. I spent so long being told that it's the gold standard of finishes. To be honest, I'm still not exactly sure why that would affect the sound of a guitar differently than poly. Especially because a guitar's electronics are really doing most of the work, no?
Cagey
Mythical Status
- Messages
- 24,425
If you're finishing acoustic guitars, it's important that you don't add any weight or other damping material to the wood, since that's what's amplifying the sound. On an electric, you don't have that problem. The sound is produced by amplifying the interference a vibrating steel string makes in a magnetic field. The physical things about the instrument that affect it are the mounting points of the strings and their stability.
AirCap
Hero Member
- Messages
- 1,003
Because lacquer flexes with the wood - it vibrates with the wood.
Poly does not flex - it does not vibrate - it constricts.
No. The sound of an electric guitar is determined by the acoustic sound of the assembled woods and hardware. If that guitar has a dead spot between 500 and 800 HZ, no pickups or electronics will add it back in. Pickups enhance and filter what's there - but cannot fundamentally change the sound of the guitar.
TonyFlyingSquirrel
Master Member
- Messages
- 4,434
After working there, you'd be hard pressed to find better quality, and more visually appealing finishes for the $$$ elsewhere in the Git-Biz.
Carvin & PRS are the only other ones that are remotely in the same category as far as quality, but you'll pay more $$$ for them.
In my opinion, as a parts manufacturer, this positions Warmoth proportionally higher in the game as it is far more accessible to the consumer financially, and with greater choices.
Carvin & PRS are the only other ones that are remotely in the same category as far as quality, but you'll pay more $$$ for them.
In my opinion, as a parts manufacturer, this positions Warmoth proportionally higher in the game as it is far more accessible to the consumer financially, and with greater choices.
shaps6
Junior Member
- Messages
- 36
AirCap said:
so when people say that the two types of finishes aren't that different in terms of tone?
i mean, i'm not convinced that i can hear a difference, but maybe there's something there that i'm hearing in my guitars that are nitro-finished that i'm just not consciously aware of
- Messages
- 3,009
IMO, this is the old "theory vs practice" thing. Can you hear the difference in paint types, in a quantifiable, reproducible way? For the sake of argument, let's say you can. The next question becomes: does it have a greater or lesser effect on the tone than body wood, neck woods, pickups, bridge, nut, scale length, fret material, or electronics?
And the final question: can you hear the difference when the drums kick in?
And the final question: can you hear the difference when the drums kick in?
TonyFlyingSquirrel
Master Member
- Messages
- 4,434
The testing methods to prove such a tone theory are not even in play.
You'd first have to start with two unfinished bodies that have identical construction and components, and then the testing methods would have to be able to objectively discern if they sound identical. I would imagine some type of spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope, or an equivalent.
Before moving past this stage, you would have to achieve the result that these two instruments sound identical with a very narrow margin of tolerance.
Only when this determination is achieved, scientifically, not subjectively through the ears of a listener, can you proceed to paint them both differently, then re-test using the same testing standards.
The thing is, no two pieces of wood sound identical, no two pickups sound identical, and no two capacitors/pots sound identical.
Nitro is just part of the "what would Leo do?" motif, and most of what he did a manufacturer was to facilitate efficient/profitable manufacturing processes.
This has matured into a cork-sniffery exclusive to musicians.
You'd first have to start with two unfinished bodies that have identical construction and components, and then the testing methods would have to be able to objectively discern if they sound identical. I would imagine some type of spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope, or an equivalent.
Before moving past this stage, you would have to achieve the result that these two instruments sound identical with a very narrow margin of tolerance.
Only when this determination is achieved, scientifically, not subjectively through the ears of a listener, can you proceed to paint them both differently, then re-test using the same testing standards.
The thing is, no two pieces of wood sound identical, no two pickups sound identical, and no two capacitors/pots sound identical.
Nitro is just part of the "what would Leo do?" motif, and most of what he did a manufacturer was to facilitate efficient/profitable manufacturing processes.
This has matured into a cork-sniffery exclusive to musicians.
- Messages
- 3,009
Agreed. The demand for components and manufacturing processes that match "the way Leo did it" revolves around the idea that vintage guitars sound superior to new ones, which I believe is a false premise.
I absolutely believe the best playing and sounding electric guitars ever built are being built right now.
I absolutely believe the best playing and sounding electric guitars ever built are being built right now.
Similar threads
