Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

Become a Subscriber!

Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!

Read more...

The advantages of a nitro finish.

What's Hot
1246

Comments

  • GassageGassage Frets: 30826
    edited September 2017

    In fairness, the Tokai LS-128 Poly Les Pauls- the one below the top of the range- if I'd not been told it was poly I'd never have guessed. Incredible finish on those things.

    Would it be fair to suggest that poly was tarnished (no pun) through the palette knife applied finishes of 70's Fender? Things have moved on.

    *An Official Foo-Approved guitarist since Sept 2023.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • lonestar said:
    Hmmmm. I don't think I should get involved here (even though I'm currently spraying over 40 bodies and a dozen necks in nitro as well as 3 refinishes). But I will happily agree with @ICBM as to what fender call "nitro". I just stripped this Custom Shop Strat.

    Apparently that's Dakota Red "nitro". Looks more like polyurethane to me (must be a lot of plasticiser in it!)

     https://i.imgur.com/pz2Itqp.jpg
    just as a matter of interest - was that on a new shiny NOS finish or an aged relic finish - I understand the relic finish is thinner and led to believe some different 'make up' within the nitro
    Yes - that pic is fascinating, not what I imagined "nitro" would be like at all, especially as it's supposed to seep into the wood (I think).  What colour/finish is going on instead?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • GoldenEraGuitarsGoldenEraGuitars Frets: 8820
    tFB Trader
    crunchman said:
    lonestar said:
    If you prefer a thick and protective surface then polyurethane is your answer. If you want a finish that is thinner than a strand of human hair, expands, contracts and wears with you then nitro is perfect. 
    That's interesting. I hadn't realised just how thin a nitro finish is compared to a polyurethane one. Another question though. Why can't a polyurethane finish also be made thinner?

    Thanks!
    Non-nitro finishes don't have to be be thick.  You have things like the PRS V12 finish which is meant to be very thin.  That was only introduced in 2010 so no-one knows what it will look like 20 years down the line though.
    Essentially, if it's polyurethane it's still a solid case around the wood. Is that PRS finish poly or nitro?

    I spray the clear coat based on the customers spec. I can assure you 99% of them go for a thin clear coat as they want it to wear quicker. Without doing a long winded scientific analysis of poly vs nitro I'm unable to comment on the acoustic quality.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ESBlondeESBlonde Frets: 3576
    Some of the modern nitro finishes have so much plasticiser in them they are thick and globby, they might sound worse than a hard thick cured poly finish!. Nitro cures veeerrryyy sssllloooowwwwlllyyy and can be reactivated with a drop fill or fresh blowover coat.
    There is some suggestion that properly applied thin nitro helps the guitar breath at the cost of a nice durable shine. Poly is quick and easy (therefore cheap) to apply and gives a fast durable shiny finish. One of the reasons nitro is used far less is the health and safety aspect of using and applying it as well as the cost of storage for curing.

    Anyway we have the options to buy either so always play the guitar you think you want and assess it's suitability for you on it's playability first.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    edited September 2017
    lonestar said:
    Heres a nitro ash strat...

    You can see and FEEL the grain. You don't get that with a plastic finish.
    Yes you do. It's purely to do with the thickness of the finish and whether it has any kind of grain filler.

    This is my old Matsumoku-made Aria, which has a very thin (what looks like) polyurethane finish with no undercoat or filler. (Factory original.)


    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 2reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 11413
    lonestar said:
    crunchman said:
    lonestar said:
    If you prefer a thick and protective surface then polyurethane is your answer. If you want a finish that is thinner than a strand of human hair, expands, contracts and wears with you then nitro is perfect. 
    That's interesting. I hadn't realised just how thin a nitro finish is compared to a polyurethane one. Another question though. Why can't a polyurethane finish also be made thinner?

    Thanks!
    Non-nitro finishes don't have to be be thick.  You have things like the PRS V12 finish which is meant to be very thin.  That was only introduced in 2010 so no-one knows what it will look like 20 years down the line though.
    Essentially, if it's polyurethane it's still a solid case around the wood. Is that PRS finish poly or nitro?

    I spray the clear coat based on the customers spec. I can assure you 99% of them go for a thin clear coat as they want it to wear quicker. Without doing a long winded scientific analysis of poly vs nitro I'm unable to comment on the acoustic quality.
    I'm not sure what the PRS V12 finish is made from.  This is what PRS claim about it on their website:

    In 2010, PRS Guitars introduced its new V12 finish. This finish was developed over 12 years, and it is intended as a midpoint between nitro and acrylic with a classic feel all its own. V12 is extremely thin to allow the guitar to resonate, but it is still incredibly durable with no risk of reacting to leather or guitar stands in a negative way.

    I just Googled and found a thread on TGP where some people are saying it's very hard, and can chip and flake off.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • GoldenEraGuitarsGoldenEraGuitars Frets: 8820
    tFB Trader
    ICBM said:
    lonestar said:
    Heres a nitro ash strat...

    You can see and FEEL the grain. You don't get that with a plastic finish.
    Yes you do. It's purely to do with the thickness of the finish and whether it has any kind of grain filler.

    This is my old Matsumoku-made Aria, which has a very thin polyester finish with no undercoat or filler. (Factory original.)

    Ah, I was led to believe through "research" that polyester wasn't as thick as polyurethane but reacted the same as polyurethane because it was a plastic based clear coat. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    Actually having looked at it, I think it's polyurethane :). Edited my post to reflect ;) that!

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • I have to say that I slightly doubted the argument stating that a thinner finish sounds better, until I bought a PRS Vela this year in a satin finish.  Went to the shop expecting to come away with the normal finish version, but A/B'd it with the Satin one they had and could easily hear the difference; the satin came home with me instead. This was despite having no real interest in the supposedly 'inferior' (i.e. cheaper) satin finish when I set out to buy it in the first place. 
    I have a Les Paul Studio that's only a 2016 so still has that lovely smell to it, and I'd have to agree that one also feels way more organic and desirable somehow than, say, my strat in its modern poly finish, despite the strat costing lots more.   
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • GoldenEraGuitarsGoldenEraGuitars Frets: 8820
    tFB Trader
    ICBM said:
    Actually having looked at it, I think it's polyurethane :). Edited my post to reflect ;) that!
    Weyhey polyurethane scores a point in a nitro thread :smiley: 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • KalimnaKalimna Frets: 1534

    Just to chime in again with regards to Gassage and a connection one feels with a guitar/amp/etc. I absolutely agree, there is intense psychology at work here, and the best surrogate example I can think of would be drinking wine. I love wine, and almost always drink it from a thin-walled fine glass. If I were to put that wine into a china mug (and I do have some goblets from a pottery on Skye), I am convinced it tastes different. The wine is *exactly* the same, but what do I prefer drinking from?

    Anyway, a thin finish can only enhance the aesthetic of an instrument, but horses for courses.


    Adam

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    lonestar said:
    ICBM said:
    Actually having looked at it, I think it's polyurethane :). Edited my post to reflect ;) that!
    Weyhey polyurethane scores a point in a nitro thread :smiley: 
    I think mostly it reinforces the point that it's really the thickness of the finish that matters, more than what it's made of - this finish is very thin, 'tactile' and takes damage very easily (which is not a good thing, in my book!) - but it definitely doesn't wear as smoothly as nitro. It hasn't checked, and it feels slightly 'waxy' rather than the usual glassy Japanese finishes which are what people mean when they describe polyester or polyurethane as 'plastic'.

    The guitar is also very resonant, and I've always assumed the thin finish was a factor in that.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • DanielsguitarsDanielsguitars Frets: 3261
    tFB Trader
    I don't care about if it's tonally better, I've no idea and don't plan on spraying any poly finishes ever to find out

    What I do like is the look and feel, it's also thin and the best looking faded bursts are in nitro imo
    It ages lovely just like nickel hardware

    Obviously no plasticizers in the nitro so it checks nicely if you want it


    www.danielsguitars.co.uk
    (formerly customkits)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Three-ColourSunburstThree-ColourSunburst Frets: 1139
    edited September 2017
    Kalimna said:

    Just to chime in again with regards to Gassage and a connection one feels with a guitar/amp/etc. I absolutely agree, there is intense psychology at work here, and the best surrogate example I can think of would be drinking wine. I love wine, and almost always drink it from a thin-walled fine glass. If I were to put that wine into a china mug (and I do have some goblets from a pottery on Skye), I am convinced it tastes different. The wine is *exactly* the same, but what do I prefer drinking from?

    Adam

    Agreed. Be it Strads vs modern instruments, t**e w**d or wine, the psychology is often more important than any physical differences that might or might not exist.

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-decision-tree/201207/cheap-and-expensive-wine-taste-the-same-in-blind-taste-tests


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • To me it feels better than poly and also it smells great.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • NelsonPNelsonP Frets: 3347
    edited September 2017
    Kalimna said:

    Just to chime in again with regards to Gassage and a connection one feels with a guitar/amp/etc. I absolutely agree, there is intense psychology at work here, and the best surrogate example I can think of would be drinking wine. I love wine, and almost always drink it from a thin-walled fine glass. If I were to put that wine into a china mug (and I do have some goblets from a pottery on Skye), I am convinced it tastes different. The wine is *exactly* the same, but what do I prefer drinking from?

    Adam

    Agreed. Be it Strads vs modern instruments, t**e w**d or wine, the psychology is often more important than any physical differences that might or might not exist.

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-decision-tree/201207/cheap-and-expensive-wine-taste-the-same-in-blind-taste-tests


    This stuff is interesting.

    If I give you two identical glasses of wine from the same bottle, but tell you one is from a £50 bottle and the other is from a £5 bottle, there is a strong chance that you will prefer the one that I've labelled as expensive, even though it is the same wine (!)

    The implication is that how much you like something is driven by not only the product, but also the expectations that are created by the 'positioning' of that product (these are created through your experiences, marketing etc).

    So if you take a Fender strat, remove the Fender logo and put a Squier logo on it, then most people will prefer the 'Fender' one, despite the fact that it is an identical guitar.

    Same applies to your expectations of nitro vs poly
    Or for mahogony vs alder
    etc....

    The other implication of this is that simply paying more for something (e.g. wine) does actually increase your enjoyment of it.
    Which is bad news for the more thrifty amongst us.




    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • NelsonP said:
    Kalimna said:

    Just to chime in again with regards to Gassage and a connection one feels with a guitar/amp/etc. I absolutely agree, there is intense psychology at work here, and the best surrogate example I can think of would be drinking wine. I love wine, and almost always drink it from a thin-walled fine glass. If I were to put that wine into a china mug (and I do have some goblets from a pottery on Skye), I am convinced it tastes different. The wine is *exactly* the same, but what do I prefer drinking from?

    Adam

    Agreed. Be it Strads vs modern instruments, t**e w**d or wine, the psychology is often more important than any physical differences that might or might not exist.

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-decision-tree/201207/cheap-and-expensive-wine-taste-the-same-in-blind-taste-tests


    This stuff is interesting.

    If I give you two identical glasses of wine from the same bottle, but tell you one is from a £50 bottle and the other is from a £5 bottle, there is a strong chance that you will prefer the one that I've labelled as expensive, even though it is the same wine (!)

    The implication is that how much you like something is driven by not only the product, but also the expectations that are created by the 'positioning' of that product (these are created through your experiences, marketing etc).

    So if you take a Fender strat, remove the Fender logo and put a Squier logo on it, then most people will prefer the 'Fender' one, despite the fact that it is an identical guitar.

    Same applies to your expectations of nitro vs poly
    Or for mahogony vs alder
    etc....

    The other implication of this is that simply paying more for something (e.g. wine) does actually increase your enjoyment of it.
    Which is bad news for the more thrifty amongst us.




    How about when it works the other way around, though?
    I actually WANTED to like the PRS in standard poly finish (more money) and expected to, but preferred the cheaper satin finished version as it simply sounded much better in a direct comparison. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • NelsonPNelsonP Frets: 3347
    edited September 2017
    Price often has a big influence but its not the only thing that matters. Its about the sum of your expectations.

    It's quite possible that the satin finish gave you a different set of expectations (e.g. raw, more natural, vintage etc) which you prefer. Or maybe it just had better pickups in it ;-)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • WhitecatWhitecat Frets: 5378
    crunchman said:
    I'm not sure what the PRS V12 finish is made from.  This is what PRS claim about it on their website:

    In 2010, PRS Guitars introduced its new V12 finish. This finish was developed over 12 years, and it is intended as a midpoint between nitro and acrylic with a classic feel all its own. V12 is extremely thin to allow the guitar to resonate, but it is still incredibly durable with no risk of reacting to leather or guitar stands in a negative way.

    I just Googled and found a thread on TGP where some people are saying it's very hard, and can chip and flake off.
    Early V12 guitars also show some delamination problems... every now & again one pops up on TGP or the PRS Facebook group(s) that's coming off. To be fair to PRS, they will sort it under warranty every time, but if you bought the guitar secondhand they won't touch it without you having to pay for a refin.

    I really like it, actually, in terms of the perceived thinness of it anyway, and I haven't had any issues myself (although I did have to send back an S2 guitar for a similar delam problem, but those aren't V12, they are essentially the original poly formulation PRS was using way back when).

    Only BilT seems to be able to achieve an equally thin polyurethane finish that I've seen so far. Fender is certainly nowhere near it...
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 11413
    Whitecat said:
    crunchman said:
    I'm not sure what the PRS V12 finish is made from.  This is what PRS claim about it on their website:

    In 2010, PRS Guitars introduced its new V12 finish. This finish was developed over 12 years, and it is intended as a midpoint between nitro and acrylic with a classic feel all its own. V12 is extremely thin to allow the guitar to resonate, but it is still incredibly durable with no risk of reacting to leather or guitar stands in a negative way.

    I just Googled and found a thread on TGP where some people are saying it's very hard, and can chip and flake off.
    Early V12 guitars also show some delamination problems... every now & again one pops up on TGP or the PRS Facebook group(s) that's coming off. To be fair to PRS, they will sort it under warranty every time, but if you bought the guitar secondhand they won't touch it without you having to pay for a refin.

    I really like it, actually, in terms of the perceived thinness of it anyway, and I haven't had any issues myself (although I did have to send back an S2 guitar for a similar delam problem, but those aren't V12, they are essentially the original poly formulation PRS was using way back when).

    Only BilT seems to be able to achieve an equally thin polyurethane finish that I've seen so far. Fender is certainly nowhere near it...
    Does anyone know if that was because of specific issues with early ones, or if I buy one now will I get problems 5 years down the line?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.