re-laquer or not relaquer? thats the question...

so i have got 72 telecaster-almost fretless, set it up with 11ws but its very hard to band , making it almost painful to play. the neck is graet - exept frets. decided a refret- my tech guy asked me what whoul i prefer- to relaquer the neck or not? i kinda dont want to re laquer it, but can someone tell me what to do? is it so bad not to re laquer?
thanks
dan

I would not Re-lacquer....should be less expensive also.

have you seen examples of the guy's fretwork?

just curious as I'd personally be keen to keep it as much as-is
as possible, and just have frets replaced, crowned & leveled.

if I were you, that is.

Have you seen any pictures of non lacquered maple fingerboards? To me they look bad/dirty after very little use.

I would definitely have the FB lacquered myself.

Tony ........... other than the added cost why would you not have the fingerboard refinished. Seems like a perfect time to do it with all frets removed.

I wouldnt lacquer the entire neck, but I might the fretboard.

the guy is my personal luthier for 2 years . for my opinion is the best in my area, and he is very trustful- he told me that in his workshop there isnt the abilty to give me a good refinsh. and sent for a one that do that. after that i understood that i just want to replace to frets and leave the original. today i talked wih him and he told me that it will be only visual issue, with no sound or playabilty isuues. is that right?

Tony ........... other than the added cost why would you not have the fingerboard refinished. Seems like a perfect time to do it with all frets removed.

Jack mainly cause it's a 72, and I'm kinda a sucker for old lookin stuff, and the feel of a funky well played in neck....and plus where he's located I wouldn't have a lot of faith in the refinishing process....Dats all......:wink:

Guess I missed the '72 part ........... assumed it was just a guitar that needed frets.