Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Building ugly guitars
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=25866		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  enalnitram [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:53 am ]
Post subject:  Building ugly guitars
Have you ever had a client ask you to build an ugly guitar? What did you do?
Author:  Edward Taylor [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Describe ugly..
Author:  wbergman [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I used to live a block from the origianl Dean guitar factory in Chicago. I think the staff was Dean and one buddy. They built custom guitars for rockers. I would think any of these guitars could be ugly, but they sold the name for millions.
Author:  enalnitram [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Edward Taylor wrote:
Describe ugly..


an all mahogany OM guitar, stained really dark brown (almost black), all over. satin finish. white plastic binding. no rosette. no heel cap. ebony bridge, fingerboard and faceplate. and these tuners: http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Tuners/Guit ... =3&xsr=123
Author:  Steve Davis [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Black knobs aswell?
Yikes it sure does sound a bit of a plain jane
charge them more for the pain!
Author:  Edward Taylor [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Sounds kinda cool to me, except the no rosette part, which I have never been much for in most instances.
Its all a matter of opinion. Customer comes first anyway right?
Author:  Laurent Brondel [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
enalnitram wrote:
Edward Taylor wrote:
Describe ugly..

an all mahogany OM guitar, stained really dark brown (almost black), all over. satin finish. white plastic binding. no rosette. no heel cap. ebony bridge, fingerboard and faceplate. and these tuners: http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Tuners/Guit ... =3&xsr=123

Sounds appealing to me, except for the binding and heel cap -I'd use tortoise celluloid-, and a 1 ring rosette. actually I just finished an all-koa guitar very similar to that.
Tastes vary…
Author:  Steve Kinnaird [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Just tell them beauty is standard.
Ugly is an upcharge.

Steve
Author:  Laurent Brondel [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Steve Kinnaird wrote:
Just tell them beauty is standard.
Ugly is an upcharge.

Steve

Steve, we must have posted at the same time: this is hilarious!
Author:  SteveCourtright [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Laurent Brondel wrote:
Steve Kinnaird wrote:
Just tell them beauty is standard.
Ugly is an upcharge.

Steve

Steve, we must have posted at the same time: this is hilarious!


Seconded! Brilliant.
Author:  Darryl Young [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
You might want to inform the purpose of a sound hole rosette and binding......it's not purely cosmetic.
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
If I wouldn't be proud to have my name on the headstock, I won't build it. It's a no-brainer for me.
Author:  Rick Davis [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I agree with Howard. And it's not just appearance -- there should be a reasonable "fit" between builder and player about tone, expectations, and even vocabulary. I've done decoration that I didn't like, just as I've made guitars with tonal properties very different from my personal preferences. As long as I felt that the result reflected my best craftsmanship, all is good.

But -- I've turned down commissions when it became clear that what I do and what the customer wanted were just too different. The classic is, of course, when the customer says, "It's all about the sound, that's all that matters. Now let's talk about the inlays and rosette!" And many of my most successful instruments were those I made for players whose style and taste -- and even ways of communicating -- were closest to mine. I suspect that when I really like a player, I unconsciously put a little more into the guitar.
Author:  Randolph [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Is the owner as ugly as the guitar? If he is you probably shouldn't charge him any more. The match is too good. There is an artform and a synergy happening. We have to respect this. If, however, he is not this ugly and still wants this guitar then we are no longer in Kansas. Something is very wrong. He probably needs finishing school at the very least and you need to charge more. Does this help? idunno

Seriously, though, I think Rick makes a great point. If you are too far outside your own comfort zone the instrument will suffer. Of course, finances figure here, I'm sure. One has to weigh all considerations. You also might (with discretion) be able to work with his taste a little bit and make some headway on aesthetics. Good luck. [:Y:]
Author:  Loren Schulte [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Lack of rosette notwithstanding, this could be a very subtly elegant guitar. Look at Santa Cruz's new "1929" models and maybe take a few cues from them. Maybe try suggesting mahogany bindings instead of plastic...
Author:  Loren Schulte [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Lack of rosette notwithstanding, this could be a very subtly elegant guitar. Look at Santa Cruz's new "1929" models and maybe take a few cues from them. Maybe try suggesting mahogany bindings instead of plastic...
Author:  Mike Dotson [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I'm building an all-walnut resonator for a guy right now, and he's talking about purpleheart for the fretboard and binding. Personally I think that's gonna be fugly as heck, but he's the customer and it'll be his guitar. I try to steer them in a way I find aesthetically pleasing but I build the ones I love the same way I build the ones I don't love....as much.

PS, I'm with you Loren, I love 'olde skool' guitars.
Author:  Loren Schulte [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
... I love 'olde skool' guitars
I know you do, Mike.

For God's sake, talk him out of the purpleheart or at least pre-oxidize it!
Author:  george wilson [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I've had people ask for crazy inlays,ugly headstocks,etc.. I won't put my name in a guitar I don't design. I must say no,politely. People who ask for dumb stuff usually haven't the esthetic sense or the training to make such requests.

If you give in,your name is in that guitar forever,and it might make YOU look bad!
Author:  letseatpaste [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I think it sounds kind of cool if you change the binding to black and do at least a simple rosette, even just a single black line. Even better with a slotted headstock. I've got a couple old 30's or 40's parlor guitars like that and I like the look.

Most people are terrible at explaining things. You might try to get him to explain what he's shooting for overall instead of spec'ing all the individual details, get the big picture. Then you can work with him and steer him in the right direction and make him think it's his idea. If he tells you he wants it to look like a fudgesicle, then you can maybe decline. But maybe he's seen some old timey guitar and wants something similar.
Author:  Timcacca [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and if you can build what a person wants and stick to your standards, thats the mark of a good craftsman.

Tim
Author:  Hesh [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 6:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Martin my friend I am usually not very thrilled to even talk about doing commission work for exactly this reason. If I had to continue to build a guitar that I thought was butt ugly I would refund the deposit and burn the thing...

Not wanting to have your name on an ugly Betty is a smart play.

I talk to a lot of builders in the course of a week and it always amazes me that it seems that newer builders and this includes me seem to be magnets for the one-offs and odd-ball commission requests.... People want us to build the 9 strings, no sound hole, what ever.... that they envision and since we are newer builders they want it for free too..... gaah :D

So when ever I hear of a weird request I always wonder who has turned them down before they got to me....
Author:  mateo4x4 [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
I agree, you should get into the client's head a little and find out what they want, not just what parts they want used. It could be that their parts list is either finance driven, or they just don't have any idea that they can get so much more from a good builder...without much pain or money. Educate the client about their options and understand their wants/needs. I'm betting they just don't know what you can do for them.



I am always game for trying new things but make it VERY clear that they are paying an amateur's price for an amateur's work. I will wax poetic with them about how wonderful the work is on the higher end instruments (i.e. most everyone else's but mine...laughing6-hehe ). I try to keep them thinking in perspective...the true craftsmen(women) may charge a ton, but you totally get what you pay for!

That said, I have also found that doing high expectation builds tend to mess with my chi too much and the quality and workmanship goes down hill from there. They always sound great, but the finish may have issue, etc. Maybe some day I'll even like one enough to post pics! laughing6-hehe
Author:  James A. [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
That doesn't sound ugly, but I agree, got to use a different binding.
Author:  Jon L. Nixon [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Building ugly guitars
Billy and Dusty's fake fur covered Explorers meet my criteria for ugly. I remember when I first saw those pictures I wondered how Gibson could sign off on such a thing.

forums.gibson.com/ default.aspx?g=posts&t=6232
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/