67 Martin D-18 mods

[Peter Laine]

I just read the discussion on the bttf ES-335 mod and I have a related question.

 I recently did a repair on a 67' D-18 Martin, it was in very bad shape,  had been used as a beach guitar here in Trinidad for most of it's life apparently, very poor finish.   the lacquer had aged and chalked and would scrape off with an accidental fingernail touch, it needed frets, a neck reset, action was painfully high,and  where someone previously had shaved down the bridge and saddle, a new bridge and saddle, it also had a broken brace.   it came to me without a case. none the less the box was very light and it seemed to have a nice tone, the owner wanted a playable guitar.   We felt the intrinsic value twas low, he was totally unconcerned with keeping it original. 

    I did the neck reset, and frets and fixed the brace, when I looked at the bridge I could see a small line ( 1.5mm) of  bare wood and a lacquer ridge all the way around ,as if it had shrunk ,or had been replaced with a smaller, I built a new bridge and incorporated a thicker saddle to intonate, made the bridge a small amount larger and changed the shape to something I found pleasing.   After a discrete test I sprayed a lite pass of lacquer thinner which seemed to consolidate the finish.   It played beautifully,  tone, wonderful, and the action very low as requested, I was happy and so was the owner.

      As word got around I was roundly criticized for " F***ing up a classic guitar.  Did I do violence to an heirloom piece? is every old guitar a collectors item? is a d- 18 considered a collectors item?

[Frank Ford]

To me it sounds more like you've fixed up a sick old guitar so it can keep on doing its job - good on you!

[Peter Laine]

First I'd like to say, a million  thanks, were it not for your very generous website, I would not be building and repairing guitars,  your sharing of your knowledge and techniques ( after 40 years of my ham handed thumping) pointed me in the right direction, and opened a world of knowledge .

The modified bridge is what caused the outrage here in Trinidad, I said I reshaped it to what I found pleasing and some thought I meant a tweak here & there, you endorsed this repair sight unseen so I thought I'd best show a photo, just in case I was operating under false  pretenses.

  For what it's worth this has caused me to think about this a bit and I do believe I was a bit cavalier in changing the design, I have no problem arguing a thicker saddle, I try to intonate to 0 cents if I can, but the shape of the bridge....if I had the job to do over again I would keep the martin shape

[Eric Steven Johansen]

So long as the new bridge was attached with hide glue your "bit of flair" can be easily undone some time in the future. From a personal standpoint, I like the design, and as has been stated previously, you saved the guitar for now.

[Eric Steven Johansen]

I can't see what you did wrong. The alterations you made were all within vintage tolerance and, if done correctly, can be undone in the future. Best of all you brought a great guitar back to life and preserved it for future generations.

[Paul Verticchio]

Peter,

You just had two incredibly well-respected and talented experts tell you the truth. You not only did "good" but you essentially made what sounds like driftwood waiting to wash ashore into a playable instrument.

I'm sure a well known biblical figure had his critics too when he made Lazarus arise from the dead. Ignore your critics.

IMO, a '67 D-18 is a a serviceable utility instrument. They're nothing special to write home about. Now, if it were a '37...those are the truly valuable & desirable ones.

Rest easy, our friend. We have your back :)

[Mark Pollock]

It is too easy to forget that these guitars were made to be played, not invested in like Hummel figurines or other crap like that. If someone is playing and enjoying that guitar now, and it is enjoyable, and the owner is happy, then you have done your job. Some people just can't help but run their mouths because they would have done things differently, even if that is not what the owner wanted. 

[David Collins]

Please don't take this the wrong way, as I know nothing of and am not doubting the quality of your work, but it's really hard to say whether criticisms are justified or not without seeing the work. 

A '67 D-18 is not quite a priceless heirloom, but although function still trumps strict preservation it is still a valuable vintage guitar from a transitional era. Yes it deserves to be kept in service, but I think they also deserve some care be given to mindful preservation as well. 

Assuming the neck set and brace repair were done clean and of good professional quality, and the finish work was kept minimally invasive for what was necessary to preserve the instrument, my only hesitations would be regarding the bridge. I assume that in saying you "made the bridge a small amount larger", this means no larger than the 1.5mm enlarged footprint on the top required? If so, this seems like it should be fine. And when making a new bridge I rarely find need to enlarge the saddle to get good intonation, but if we're talking still 1/8" width or less then I'd see no justification for strong criticisms.

As to the "changed the shape to something I found pleasing" part though, depending on how exactly you changed it I could see some potential for fair criticism here. If it's clean work that fits within the original footprint and looks suitably appropriate to the original design then criticisms may be unwarranted, but it's hard to say without knowing more details. I for one do like to keep with the original aesthetic so much as I can within the restraints of still meeting goals of ideal function.

If we're talking minor aesthetic refinements such as sharpness of lines and minor contour changes, that's one thing. If the changes amount to making it look like an Ovation bridge with no defined wings and a 1/4" saddle, then that could be something else. 

Perhaps the work is perfectly suitable for the instrument and the critics are simply single minded conservationists with unrealistic views of balancing functional restoration against vintage preservation. Or maybe you went a bit farther in dismissing priorities of suitable vintage preservation, stepping beyond functional restoration and in to undue customization of a moderately valuable vintage instrument. If you're truly wondering if you did the right things or not to this guitar though, all I could say is maybe, maybe not. Your description of your approach sounds fair and reasonable, but it's just hard to offer much real opinion without knowing more about the work. 

[Ned Knepp]

It sounds to me like the people that may be bashing you simply don't know anything about repairing old instruments. What would they have done that was less invasive than what you did?  So your bridge looks different. IF this guitar manages to survive long enough to truly become collectible it will, a) probably be because  of what you did now and  b) worth having the bridge swapped for something shaped more like the original.  In the mean time you just saved a guitar that may not have survived long without you. Good Job!

[Russell Vance]

Hello All,

It's interesting stuff:    my 1950 something or another Record hand-plane is a valuable instrument (tool) but when it came to me I pitched the cracked handle and the old dodgy blade and carved a new one that fit my hand and put in a laminated Japanese Blade along with giving it a fair amount of attention on the flat plate to get it squared up. It's now a useful and much appreciated tool.

Unless I'm fixing up the last Unicorn on earth I don't quite share the connection with collectors that collectors have with their stuff. 

Instruments were once made to be played until they are so done that they were retired gracefully or restored.   Unfortunately we have spawned a couple of generations of kids and players who think that the 250,000th Mexican Strat is going to be valuable one day or that their 2013 hollow-wood, plastic board, almost a Les Paul will someday turn into a 59 Burst replete with PAF's and Jimmy Page's locks of hair.  Ain't going to happen.  

Sure, look after whats historically important or valuable if lost - but I gotta say protecting a relatively common 335 was a tough one to deal with, particularly when the owner has a legitimate right to do whatever he want to do - we are not cutting up the Hope Diamond here and , similarly if there were only one mating pair of D-18s left in the world I might get excited but somebody out there knows how many there are and its probably a lot.

Rescue and resuscitation is a far better option than burial or entombment under a bed:  - so I think.

Rusty.

[Kerry Krishna]

 Peter, if anyone  has anything to say to your face about this, send them to this exact thread. You turned an unplayable axe at the end of it's life, into something that will be around another 40 years. Tell the ass-----  to get over themselves.

 Your reputation certainly is not suffering here. 

[michael carne]

Just wish you were based near me.Excellent work!