Topic: Anyone care about nitro?

There seems to often be a lot of arguments over what finish is on guitars.
Most saying Nitro is best, but does anyone here feel they can hear a difference in tone depending on the finish on the guitar?
I think it would be far too minor to hear.
The only reason I prefer nitro is due to the way it wears. It doesn't chip like other harder finishes. That being said though, Gibson nitro finishes are hardely that these days. The finish on my les paul isn't all that thin (though it does have finish checks)

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

So many of these newer Les Pauls feel and sound like they are covered in a layer of thick plastic - the guitar needs to breathe...the tone becomes a lot more 'woodier' and airy.
I would never do it, but sometimes I feel like stripping mine down to the 'Mick Ronson'...I bet it would really sing...I just feel like it's being held back a bit.

This doesn't apply to all...never mind all the customs and historics...

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

Yeh, I tried a traditional not that long ago and hated it. I love my classic though, the finish isn't too thick. Seems its thicker on the back than on the front too.
I have thought of completely refinishing mine.
Black top with a light brown back is incredible looking...I'm tempted!

http://greatdaneband.com/Images/Musical … Wine/2.jpg
perty!

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

I personally prefer a nitro finish because of how it wears but I doubt any guitar sounds better because of it. As for the finish on Gibsons, I read it recently that their formula changed around 2005.

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

I think the formula has been changing for a while. It's got more plasticizer in it.
Even Fender do daft things with the nitro finishes on their highway one range. They have a base layer of urethane I believe.

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

Most likely the changes in coatings have been due to environmental vapor pollution restrictions. Here in the US, most volatile solvents have been banned or their use is prohibitively costly due to the fume capture required.
Rick

Free download from Vienna! http://mbsy.co/bNLR
Lots of unique videos of Joe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwd5vL8fXTw
Buy Joe's merchandise here. http://www.jbonamassa.com/affiliates/id … hp?id=1381

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

Twenty years...you think you'll have guitars made out of wood.

Moon rock! That's the way forward...  roll

8 (edited by XKnight 2010-12-05 23:26:55)

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

I like the feel of Nitro and the way it wears, but as far as tone I don't think it matters too much what type of finish it is as long as it's applied thinly.

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

I 100% fully believe in nitro finishes.  The thinner the better.  It allows the wood to breathe, and although it may not be apparent on a brand new guitar, after 10 years or so, pick up a gunked up, 2 inch thick urethane coated guitar vs a nitro finish.  The agin process IMHO is the advantage of nitro which allows the guitar to breathe and dry up better over time.

Amp: Firebird Musical Amplifiers
Guitars: 2x 1962 LPs , 02 FB VII, 76 Electra Omega, 64 SG Special, 63 LP Jr, 73 LPC
Effects: Van Weelden ROD

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

My dad is a woodworker hobbist for 50 years. When I mentioned nitro, he spit his beer out and asked me what kind of history books I was reading, cause he hasn't talked about nitro in decades.

His opinion is that if you wanted a guitar to "last" you're not going to want nitro on it, you'd want "a good polyurethane." That proves if you want a relic guitar, nitro is a good choice. Keep in mind my dad is not an instrument builder, so he spoke nothing of "better tone" or crap like that. I just got the impression that if nitro was "all that and a bag of chips" for wood finishing, it would be relavent in circles other than guitar ones.

I think its main allure comes from vintage spec.

I must say when I built my strats, I ordered spray cans of nitro from StewMac because it had the colors I wanted. But the sanding sealer from Lowe's was not nitro. So did I ruin the tonal "effect?"

- Nic from Detroit... posting on JB's Forum since 6-2-2006
Ask me about my handwound Great Lakes Guitar Pickups
Since 2010, Bonamassa fans have taken advantage of my JB friend discount = my cost + shipping. cool

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

See I could see how for woodwork nitro would be seen as a bad thing in many cases. As it cracks, wears down, etc.
But for a guitar, the cracks and the wear look great...as opposed to the chipped paint look.

Tonally, I don't think I'd hear much of a (or any) difference.

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

macg1 wrote:

I 100% fully believe in nitro finishes.  The thinner the better.  It allows the wood to breathe, and although it may not be apparent on a brand new guitar, after 10 years or so, pick up a gunked up, 2 inch thick urethane coated guitar vs a nitro finish.  The agin process IMHO is the advantage of nitro which allows the guitar to breathe and dry up better over time.

Wood has lungs? That plank of wood is freaking dead! It ain't growing no more! It absorbs and what it absorbs is moisture. How is moisture beneficial to tone? Any guitar with a so called "nitro" finish will most likely have a poly undercoat. How do you know it's actually a nitrocellulose finish on your guitar? And please post a link to a picture of a guitar that has a 2 inches of poly covering it. I'd love to see it. Were you around when the sales pitch was "Thick Skin", not "thin skin"?

Guess it all depends upon what sales bull$hit you wish to believe.

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

I don't think he was being literal in his description.  Wood only absorbs moisture if it's dryer than the environment it's in.  It will dry (release moisture) too.  I guess that could be what was meant by breathing.  Does Nitro allow that to occur more so than poly?  Probably.  Is that a good thing, I have no idea......



Spider wrote:
macg1 wrote:

I 100% fully believe in nitro finishes.  The thinner the better.  It allows the wood to breathe, and although it may not be apparent on a brand new guitar, after 10 years or so, pick up a gunked up, 2 inch thick urethane coated guitar vs a nitro finish.  The agin process IMHO is the advantage of nitro which allows the guitar to breathe and dry up better over time.

Wood has lungs? That plank of wood is freaking dead! It ain't growing no more! It absorbs and what it absorbs is moisture. How is moisture beneficial to tone? Any guitar with a so called "nitro" finish will most likely have a poly undercoat. How do you know it's actually a nitrocellulose finish on your guitar? And please post a link to a picture of a guitar that has a 2 inches of poly covering it. I'd love to see it. Were you around when the sales pitch was "Thick Skin", not "thin skin"?

Guess it all depends upon what sales bull$hit you wish to believe.

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

Spider wrote:
macg1 wrote:

I 100% fully believe in nitro finishes.  The thinner the better.  It allows the wood to breathe, and although it may not be apparent on a brand new guitar, after 10 years or so, pick up a gunked up, 2 inch thick urethane coated guitar vs a nitro finish.  The agin process IMHO is the advantage of nitro which allows the guitar to breathe and dry up better over time.

Wood has lungs? That plank of wood is freaking dead! It ain't growing no more! It absorbs and what it absorbs is moisture. How is moisture beneficial to tone? Any guitar with a so called "nitro" finish will most likely have a poly undercoat. How do you know it's actually a nitrocellulose finish on your guitar? And please post a link to a picture of a guitar that has a 2 inches of poly covering it. I'd love to see it. Were you around when the sales pitch was "Thick Skin", not "thin skin"?

Guess it all depends upon what sales bull$hit you wish to believe.

Spider, I must say that I 100% disagree with you, and that it does make a difference.  Sure that if you mix finishes, like poly under nitro you negate the effect, but the truth of the matter is that wood does breathe.  Why do you think vintage guitars sound better than new ones?  Build quality and aging of the wood.  Ask any violin player and see what they prefer (new vs old and why).  The nitro finish allows for a better, time-dependent aging of the instrument so it can release more moisture than trap it.  Now, the reason nitro was "banished" by law is because of environmental concerns and that is why gibson, PRS, and other companies which still use nitro, must pay an upfront yearly "fine" in order to use it.  The tone characteristics of a 1959 LP Standard have 100% to do with the building techniques, and the aging of the wood.  Also the wood should not be soaking any moisture, especially mahogany, so my advice is not to store your guitars in a filled bath tub.  I have a feeling this could turn into a long back and forth in what we believe, but my experience, and this includes even the the very thin finishes on Eric Johnson model strats, just make the guitar sound better.  There is a lengthy interview with Paul Reed Smith on youtube;  just do a search for it where he discusses several things, from choice of woods, how to cut, how to dry, and how finishes on guitars 100% affect the tone.  Now, does that mean that all guitars that have a half inch thick poly coating will sound bad?  no... hell even the old lucite guitars sound cool, but if you coat wood in plastic, suddenly you get the tonal characteristics of plastic and not the wood.

Amp: Firebird Musical Amplifiers
Guitars: 2x 1962 LPs , 02 FB VII, 76 Electra Omega, 64 SG Special, 63 LP Jr, 73 LPC
Effects: Van Weelden ROD

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

xcorporate wrote:

I don't think he was being literal in his description.  Wood only absorbs moisture if it's dryer than the environment it's in.  It will dry (release moisture) too.  I guess that could be what was meant by breathing.  Does Nitro allow that to occur more so than poly?  Probably.  Is that a good thing, I have no idea......



Spider wrote:
macg1 wrote:

I 100% fully believe in nitro finishes.  The thinner the better.  It allows the wood to breathe, and although it may not be apparent on a brand new guitar, after 10 years or so, pick up a gunked up, 2 inch thick urethane coated guitar vs a nitro finish.  The agin process IMHO is the advantage of nitro which allows the guitar to breathe and dry up better over time.

Wood has lungs? That plank of wood is freaking dead! It ain't growing no more! It absorbs and what it absorbs is moisture. How is moisture beneficial to tone? Any guitar with a so called "nitro" finish will most likely have a poly undercoat. How do you know it's actually a nitrocellulose finish on your guitar? And please post a link to a picture of a guitar that has a 2 inches of poly covering it. I'd love to see it. Were you around when the sales pitch was "Thick Skin", not "thin skin"?

Guess it all depends upon what sales bull$hit you wish to believe.

Yes xcorporate, that is exactly what I meant and that is what happens.

Amp: Firebird Musical Amplifiers
Guitars: 2x 1962 LPs , 02 FB VII, 76 Electra Omega, 64 SG Special, 63 LP Jr, 73 LPC
Effects: Van Weelden ROD

16 (edited by NPB_EST.1979 2010-12-06 14:37:24)

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

If you took all the finish off of an asian made guitar, and resprayed in nitro, would it sound better? Or does it go back to the old adage: "you can't polish a turd?" (I know many asian makes can be good, I'm talking about generally overseas guitars with tons of lacquer on them.)

Old guitars vs. new guitars.... the older guitars allowed the finish to "set" and get harder, and sometimes thinner because the guitar is broken in... that I agree with. I'd always prefer a used guitar to a new one of the same everything if I was planning on playing it.

- Nic from Detroit... posting on JB's Forum since 6-2-2006
Ask me about my handwound Great Lakes Guitar Pickups
Since 2010, Bonamassa fans have taken advantage of my JB friend discount = my cost + shipping. cool

17 (edited by macg1 2010-12-06 17:57:28)

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

NPB_EST.1979 wrote:

If you took all the finish off of an asian made guitar, and resprayed in nitro, would it sound better? Or does it go back to the old adage: "you can't polish a turd?" (I know many asian makes can be good, I'm talking about generally overseas guitars with tons of lacquer on them.)

Old guitars vs. new guitars.... the older guitars allowed the finish to "set" and get harder, and sometimes thinner because the guitar is broken in... that I agree with. I'd always prefer a used guitar to a new one of the same everything if I was planning on playing it.

of course you cannot polish a turd.  garbage in, garbage out. nitro will not make a cheap particle board-made guit sound better. it starts with the wood, and then all of the things that go on top of it.  if you cover great wood with an inch thick layer of urethane (exaggerating for hyperbole), you are not playing the wood.

Amp: Firebird Musical Amplifiers
Guitars: 2x 1962 LPs , 02 FB VII, 76 Electra Omega, 64 SG Special, 63 LP Jr, 73 LPC
Effects: Van Weelden ROD

Re: Anyone care about nitro?

PEOPLE! You CAN polish a turd!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rax27_ZIVM

But you can't make a crap guitar sound good by changing the finish! haha

Also, I removed the finish on my mexican strat...counted at least 9 pieces of wood making up that body! It's insane!