Build Thread: Kraut Modified Dreadnought

[cokezero]

What's interesting to me is that guitar makers have not chimed in latter portion of this thread. Though this site is really fun to see the builds and their progress, in the end, it's a business deal between 2 parties with much money involved. In any type of business deal, you need a clear understanding what is involved, thus I have a question for Ray (since he responded) and if possible, other guitar makers and their thought:

1. Ray stated, "I stand by all my guitars". What does this mean? That sounds like a guarantee statement to me. He doesn't say that on his site, but he stated here. As a business man, I don't take the statement lightly, as I'm sure he/others don't. It's a lot of money for both parties involved and I'm sure clarification would be in the best interest for all.

[mikealpine]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

Mike,

The back and sides most definitely do contribute to the guitar's overall sound, particularly to the overtones and tonal coloration. A builder can compensate only so much for the contributions that the back and sides make or don't make.

- Glenn

Glenn,

Indeed that had been my impression, but I will try to find the various posts that got me thinking that the top and the builder were most of the equation. My build will be using Carpathian over Malaysian Blackwood, and ideally the builder will be building a lush, rich sounding, sustaining "sweet cannon" of a guitar for me. The choice stemmed from hearing a Sinker over MB dread that was very close to what I want to achieve. It'll be in his hands and hopefully we'll have a winner. A little scared now, though!

Thanks,
Mike

[jperryrocks]

I'm not an official expert in wood qualities and how much they matter.

But if I had to take a stab in the dark, going with an ebony back and sides was a bit risky.

Ebony can make a superb guitar. But it's not Indian or Brazilian. So therein may lie some of the problem with tonal expectations.

[peteom]

Originally Posted by Tone Gopher

Given that you are in the Bay Area, have you considered have Ervin take a look at it?

Great idea.

[JonBarclay]

Originally Posted by Tone Gopher

Given that you are in the Bay Area, have you considered have Ervin take a look at it?

I would leave involving another luthier until much later in the process...

This has been an arrangement between luthier & customer, involving a longterm business relationship, a lot of hard skilled work, and a big investment of time, money, expectation, anticipation. Juston absolutely has the right to anticipate a world class guitar at the end of the process, just as Ray must very much want & aim towards a satisfied player, and anticipate a happy response.

What I mean is, a lot is invested by BOTH parties involved, and I would feel insulted if a third party was consulted without having a chance to remedy the problem myself.

Hoping Juston & Ray have the opportunity to do that (agreed, that should be conducted in private!). My best wishes to both of them.

Jon

[JoeCharter]

When a difficult situation comes up, I always like to look at extreme situations to better understand what's at stake.

On one end of the spectrum, we have the "bad" luthier -- the guy who delivers a guitar with two missing tuners and the wrong top wood, and refuses to fix it.

On the other end, we have the "good" luthier -- the guy who will build you unlimited replacement guitars until you're "totally satisfied".

Hopefully, we will find most professional luthiers somewhere between those two poles. They all "stand by their guitars" and will all "do their very best" to satisfy the customer.

Where to draw the line is a much more delicate matter.

[justonwo]

I think it is worth making some clarifications at this point. First of all, I have already pursued private resolution of the issues with the guitar. I am not viewing my posts as a means of achieving any form of resolution with Ray. As I mentioned several posts ago Ray did, in fact, agree to examine the guitar. However, as I also mentioned, the interactions throughout the process were so shrouded in negativity that I simply did not wish to proceed any further.

At this point, I think some historical context is important and instructive. I became aware last fall, mostly through this forum, of two customers of Ray's who had become (in my estimation) extremely disgruntled by their experience after receiving their Kraut guitar. In one of those cases, the experience appeared to me to have been so negative that I reached out to that customer (after some defensiveness from me on Ray's behalf and misunderstandings with these customers) to understand what this customer had been through. Bear in mind, this is (I believe) nearly a year after this customer had taken receipt of their guitar. After hearing this customer's story, I felt the customer had not received the type of care that I believe is commensurate with a guitar in the price category we are talking about.

So I reached out to Ray, explained how the situation looked from my perspective, and strongly suggested that Ray make the situation right with this customer. In my opinion, the relationship had been allowed to languish to such an extent that there was little hope of resolution without some third party intervention. Because I felt it was important for Ray's reputation (and I genuinely wanted to help Ray), because I empathized with the customer, and because I wanted Ray to demonstrate that he really DOES "stand behind his guitars," I played the role of arbitrator between Ray and his customer. After quite a bit of prodding and pleading on my part, Ray finally did contact his customer and make good on his promises. In truth, I wanted the interaction to end well because I hoped that I would receive that same kind of service if (god forbid) I should ever have a problem with my Kraut.

It also doesn't take much digging on the forum to find a previous Kraut endorsee who has since decided to move on. In my world, a single data point is an aberration. Two data points can infer a trend. Three data points (which is where we are today, from my standpoint) make a trend fairly unambiguous.

So in the context of this history, and my personal involvement in conflict resolution on Ray's behalf, when my own story started down a very negative road, I decided that I simply wasn't prepared to endure the same drawn-out battles that it appeared to me others had endured. In the final cost-benefit, I did not have the confidence that my guitar could be altered to achieve the sound goals I had laid out. And I did not see the point of pursuing a new build (if that was ever going to be offered) if the first build had gone so awry. Most importantly, however, I wasn't willing to suffer through a bunch of emotional turmoil in the name of improving the sound of a guitar.

Also, to be clear, there is simply no question about the quality of the guitar (the finish cracks and chip in the headstock notwithstanding). It is a marvel of woodworking and artistry. I would not impeach Ray's ability to produce a guitar of the very highest quality. Nor is the "quality" of the sound at issue. As Billy Boy mentioned, there probably are players out there who would find the sound very pleasing, indeed. The issue is simply that the guitar missed - by a very wide margin - the sound I had painstakingly described in a several page design document to Ray, where both overtones and sustain were prominently featured as important criteria. Much of the design of the guitar, by the way, was described in terms RELATIVE to the EIR/Euro dreadnought I played at HGF. So Ray had the advantage of building a guitar with a reference point that was known very well to him. I requested MORE overtones and sustain than I heard on the HGF guitar.

But the big "miss" on the tone of the guitar was only half the equation. The other half was 1) the historical context of previous customers' interactions with Ray (from my perspective, anyway) and 2) the rapid devolution (my opinion, of course) of my interactions with Ray after I expressed some concerns about the tone of the guitar. To be sure, as detailed over the many, many posts in this thread, Ray went above and beyond to make sure the experience was a positive one during the build process. I enjoyed working with him very much. In my opinion, things took a dramatic turn in the opposite direction after receipt of the guitar.

Was ebony a questionable choice? I don't know. I had specified a very particular sound with Ray relative to another instrument he knew and let him decide on the proper tools to achieve that sound. It seems to me that nearly every guitar build is something of an experiment, with a certain amount of uncontrollable variability in the end product. It seems to me that even the most experienced luthier can have a "big miss" as a result, which is why it seems sensible for everyone involved to have a reasonable return policy as a safety valve.

To be clear, my "ask" of Ray at this point is precisely nothing. I don't want a modified guitar. I don't want a replacement guitar. I will pay for the repair to the damaged headstock and simply figure out some other contingency down the road. I believe this will be the least time consuming and least stressful path for me.

Unfortunately, I had also placed a deposit on an OM with Ray. From a practical standpoint, the total time investment in that guitar amounted to a couple of hours reviewing wood in person with Ray (a very fun and experience, and a generous gesture from Ray, indeed). I had not had any meaningful discussions of tone or design with Ray because I was waiting to hear the dreadnought. In recent weeks and after losing my confidence in the ability to get a predictable end result, I offered to pay Ray for the time he HAD spent and asked for the balance of my deposit as a pragmatic recognition that it made little sense for either of us to pursue yet another build. To my dismay, it appears I will be losing that $1500 deposit in full. Certainly, the deposit is unambiguously listed as "non-refundable," though I had hoped to make a successful appeal based on the extenuating circumstances.

To sum up: there is no doubt this is a guitar of the highest quality. Ray's woodworking skills are beyond reproach. And I am sure there is someone out there who would find the tone inspirational. The problem is that the guitar missed MY sound objectives by in a significant way, and in ways that I think most listeners can objectively agree on. Overtone and sustain are not such abstract concepts that 10 different listeners are going to have wildly different interpretations of what they hear. But, ultimately and most importantly, it's the stress and emotion that I believe would be required to reach the stated endpoint that caused me to decide to move on. So I did.

[steveh]

A prior customer of Ray's sold his build slot when circumstances prevented him from progressing with the guitar, and regained his deposit that way - I know because it was advertised on this forum and I know the chap who bought the slot. Is that an option for you?

Cheers,
Steve

[mikealpine]

Pragmatic, indeed, but sad non the less. And, at least from a reader's perspective, a fair and balanced summation of events. Always hope to hear of truly positive experiences with every commissioned build. I have always maintained, in any business interaction, that the initial problem is rarely the actual problem; it is the response to the problem that often is where everything breaks down.

Hopefully you will find someone who will appreciate the guitar and enjoy the sound, and find another builder who you are a better fit with.

Wishing you all the best,
Mike

[justonwo]

Originally Posted by steveh

A prior customer of Ray's sold his build slot when circumstances prevented him from progressing with the guitar, and regained his deposit that way - I know because it was advertised on this forum and I know the chap who bought the slot. Is that an option for you?

Cheers,
Steve

No. I asked. I had actually purchased a friend's deposit for the OM slot, so I was aware of the precedent. I had also seen another build slot for Ray posted in the Classifies. Ray would not extend that option to me. He asserted he had already spent $1500 worth of time on the guitar. I did not spend any significant time with Ray on that OM other than the in-person wood review. I offered to pay him for that time, but that option was not acceptable either.

[Bords]

Sorry to hear your story, I guess these are the stories that rarely make it to the internet. I think you did a nice job handling this whole thing, and sharing your story really should inform potential custom guitar orderers to get specifics on return policies (eg, can I return the guitar if it doesn't meet my specified needs?). It also reminds me that at the end of the day, we as handmade guitar buyers are really at the mercy of the builder, with respect to build times, return policy, etc. Kind of a dark thought but true. I've been fortunate to have mostly good experiences both ordering personal guitars and facilitating orders for clients, but I've been on the dark side a few times and basically felt powerless, realizing I had little to no documentation to back up any claims should I have taken things to the next level.

The flip side of this dark thought is that of the "problem" customer (not you based on your account of events), who would no doubt be a complete time suck for a builder with a very liberal return policy. An open "return it no questions asks" puts all the risk on the builder, none on the buyer, and leaves the door open for buyers remorse returns, fickle customers, etc. They are out there believe me.

It really comes down to a "what does good look like" approach with returns as opposed to a perfect return policy.

Sorry again for the bad outcome of your order. Little consolation I know, but you should feel like you added some value to this forum by giving us all some things to consider for "the next one".

[Tone Gopher]

Originally Posted by justonwo

No. I asked. I had actually purchased a friend's deposit for the OM slot, so I was aware of the precedent. I had also seen another build slot for Ray posted in the Classifies. Ray would not extend that option to me. He asserted he had already spent $1500 worth of time on the guitar. I did not spend any significant time with Ray on that OM other than the in-person wood review. I offered to pay him for that time, but that option was not acceptable either.

That, in a single word, sucks...

This renews my appreciation for Nick Kukich, Franklin Guitars, for reconnecting with me after a decade or so to make good on a deposit that I had made with him. We fell out of touch for many years and I renewed contact through this forum. Every time I play my koa jumbo, I am filled with gratitude at having such a fine guitar.

I'm sorry for your experience, justonwo.

I wish all the best to you and yours.

[JoeCharter]

I read a return policy on a luthier website recently that stated that a highly customized instrument could be returned to the luthier, who would then reimburse the original purchaser upon selling the instrument to the new owner.

I can't remember which luthier it was but I remember thinking it was a decent deal for both parties.

[jperryrocks]

I can see both sides of the coin.

But just from the pictures alone, Ray's level of workmanship and attention to detail is simply phenomenal. You have to put him in the top 5% of luthiers on that alone. In all my years of being obsessed with guitars just from a visual and creative standpoint, Rays guitars are that "next level" of artistry, IMO.

As far as business practices, if its your company, then you set the rules. But I do think having to cough up $1500 for a non refundable place in line is a bit much. I think in that way, Ray should be a little more consumer friendly. But once again, if you know the policies and rules going in, then you have to abide by them. Harsh as they may seem.

Sometimes a guitar just "comes together", even though it's voiced and tuned as much as possible to fit a client.

But going back to the wood, I would personally never have spent $8000 on a ebony guitar had I never played one by the builder. I'd take a risk on Indian, madagascar or Brazilian. Maybe some other top luthiers can chime in on ebony and what it's limitations are. I've always subscribed to the philosophy that the majority of the tone comes from the top...but the back and sides "color" the guitar in other ways. But I guess that's where a luthier has to step in and use his expertise in guiding a client.

It ain't easy being a luthier these days. Trying to figure out the "overtones" of what people want. But I guess if your in that class of special luthiers schooled by somogyi, the standards are really high.

Just like the price of the guitars.

[KolayaGuitars]

I have to say this is quite saddening to me...for both parties concerned. It's a little curious to me that Ebony was chosen for an "overtone rich" guitar as I'd always been under the impression that it created less overtone content than rosewoods. Perhaps it was a really great set of Ebony, rang with bell like sustain we'll say...whatever the case, Ray really thought he could pull it off, or all of the hours to build such a wonderful instrument would not have been spent (not to mention your sizable monetary investment). As a builder, I understand that there definitely are limitations on what we can do. All we CAN do is make the best choices with the information at hand and wait for the results. No respectable luthier (which Ray most certainly appears to be) would take advantage of a customer or this sacred art of instrument making.

Sadly, tonal outcome is sort of the risk taken when commissioning a guitar or any other instrument for that matter, since the actual guitar in question can not be played before purchase. I've spent hours up at Elderly playing guitar after guitar. Guitars by the same maker- one I'll love, one I won't care for. Tone isn't exactly a moving target, subjective as it may be, but the quiver of tricks to consistently hit the target can be quite variable.

Juston, I hope you don't feel like I'm shaking my finger at you. I am not. Just trying to give a luthier's perspective, i guess. I wish you the best.

Brad