Why do Yairi guitars not hold value?

[henryp]

Originally Posted by MBE

The photo isn't showing up for me. Is it Bob Weir or Ani DiFranco?

Bob Weir & Jerry Garcia

[dannyg1]

Here's my take -
In the late 60's, the acoustic guitar explosion was picking up again and the major Japanese brands, Terada, Yairi and Nippon/Yamaha began selling my in the US. The Japanese were a significant threat to the established US makers because they were the first country of master woodworkers and esoteric metalcraft to begin a foothold here.

Their best guitars, though copies of Martin and Gibson's, were as good or better than the real thing, in both build and materials, a first for a foreign competitor, and a concerted campaign got started in the US to undermine them. The major slights hurled still linger: They done know how to season wood so their necks warp. They're all laminate, which was a lie, even for many of the mid level models. They've perfected an'art' of lamination, where the wood 'appears' to be solid. They're all finished in polyester, another lie, at least for the S Yairi and Tama guitars I own. And on.

They also were victims of their American distribution and advertising network, who couched terms that made it hard to tell whether the woods were solid or the finish was lacquer.

Since their reputations were attacked from the very beginning, they never we're able to completely refute them and ultimately, never were able to build the quality legacy necessary to build used market values that last and all because they scared the pants off of the American makers (who had to weather a bad storm to make it through the 70's precisely because the Japenese instruments were their equal, at a better price).

[rct]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

Here's my take -
In the late 60's, the acoustic guitar explosion was picking up again and the major Japanese brands, Terada, Yairi and Nippon/Yamaha began selling my in the US. The Japanese were a significant threat to the established US makers because they were the first country of master woodworkers and esoteric metalcraft to begin a foothold here.

Their best guitars, though copies of Martin and Gibson's, were as good or better than the real thing, in both build and materials, a first for a foreign competitor, and a concerted campaign got started in the US to undermine them. The major slights hurled still linger: They done know how to season wood so their necks warp. They're all laminate, which was a lie, even for many of the mid level models. They've perfected an'art' of lamination, where the wood 'appears' to be solid. They're all finished in polyester, another lie, at least for the S Yairi and Tama guitars I own. And on.

They also were victims of their American distribution and advertising network, who couched terms that made it hard to tell whether the woods were solid or the finish was lacquer.

Since their reputations were attacked from the very beginning, they never we're able to completely refute them and ultimately, never were able to build the quality legacy necessary to build used market values that last and all because they scared the pants off of the American makers (who had to weather a bad storm to make it through the 70's precisely because the Japenese instruments were their equal, at a better price).

That's one way to look at it.

To be fair, the other way many looked at it, especially where I grew up guitar, was hey, if they are so good, how come they do nothing but copy Martin? Same goes for Tokai and Ibanez and a few others regarding electrics. All copies, nothing original to see here. I didn't know anyone that would have rather used a copy than the original, and to this day the folks I run around with are the same for the most part.

Those companies have that heritage, we have that memory. I suppose the young folks will help keep them going for a good long time now.

rct

[dannyg1]

Originally Posted by rct

That's one way to look at it.

To be fair, the other way many looked at it, especially where I grew up guitar, was hey, if they are so good, how come they do nothing but copy Martin? Same goes for Tokai and Ibanez and a few others regarding electrics. All copies, nothing original to see here. I didn't know anyone that would have rather used a copy than the original, and to this day the folks I run around with are the same for the most part.

Those companies have that heritage, we have that memory. I suppose the young folks will help keep them going for a good long time now.

rct

I'd answer that by asking: Is it not a fact that the Japenese guitars of the 70's scared the pants off of the American mainstay builders? We all know that in the business world at the very least, US companies do dastardly things to protect their interests. I, for one, am sure that this is as good a breakdown of what actually happened as you'll find. The whole current guitar industry is a confirmation of it. China couldn't ever have gained the foothold they've got now if it weren't for their Japanese forerunners and , once again, the same slights are applied.
All guitars are copies of the same lineage, going back to Italian, Spanish and German master builders. There's also the factor of mass-saleable acceptance.

Finally, the Japanese did then and have now, made their own, inspired mark on guitar design and innovation in guitar building. Their best luthiers are our best luthiers too. That's a fact very few deny now.

[rct]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

I'd answer that by asking: Is it not a fact that the Japenese guitars of the 70's scared the pants off of the American mainstay builders? We all know that in the business world at the very least, US companies do dastardly things to protect their interests. I, for one, am sure that this is as good a breakdown of what actually happened as you'll find. The whole current guitar industry is a confirmation of it. China couldn't ever have gained the foothold they've got now if it weren't for their Japanese forerunners and , once again, the same slights are applied.
All guitars are copies of the same lineage, going back to Italian, Spanish and German master builders. There's also the factor of mass-saleable acceptance.

Finally, the Japanese did then and have now, made their own, inspired mark on guitar design and innovation in guitar building. Their best luthiers are our best luthiers too. That's a fact very few deny now.

I'd answer with a resounding I don't know, I'm just a guitar player. I'm answering from a player's point of view. I suppose they were terrified, most of the literature about Leo Fender, for one company, had him not really concerned at all, and in fact it took a lot of prodding mostly from Forest White to do anything legal about copies, the very small, very quiet "lawsuit" that everyone likes to use to sell copies from back then.

rct

[dannyg1]

Most Fender players know about 'pre-CBS' Fenders. The gaping market share the Japanese companies took redifined the business model and made American companies rush down the price hill to compete and for their corporate lives.

It wasn't because they were just less expensive, it was because they were less expensive and just as good.

[henryp]

Originally Posted by steveyam

The fact remains, they don't do enough advertising and PR to become 'mainstream' in the field of acoustic guitars. The kiss of death.

If it's the kiss of death they've been necking (no pun) for decades. I bought my Alvarez-Yairi in the mid 1970s. Paid $500.00 I think.

[rct]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

Most Fender players know about 'pre-CBS' Fenders. The gaping market share the Japanese companies took redifined the business model and made American companies rush down the price hill to compete and for their corporate lives.

It wasn't because they were just less expensive, it was because they were less expensive and just as good.

Pre-CBS Fenders quite literally had nothing to do with copies, they are only from before Leo sold it. CBS Fenders had quite literally nothing to do with copies, they were attempts by Forest and I believe George still there trying to achieve cost cutting targets that others above them wanted. Columbia knew nothing about American guitars, they knew even less about copies.

Perhaps where you came from, and where you were playing the guitar in the 70's and 80's there was a "gaping market share" taken by the Japanese companies. Where I grew up guitar, southern NJ, Philly suburbs, up and down the east coast from NYC down to DC, nobody I knew and ran into in this business wanted to use a copy. I say "nobody". I should say that of 100 touring, recording, playing guitar players, 99 didn't ever use copies and one occasionally did.

I did occasionally see a Takamine. I am relating my experience, not arguing.

rct

[dannyg1]

Pre-CBS isn't about copies. I brought it up because the market had drastically changed and Fender, whom you brought up, didn't survive the shift. Big guitar companies here bought factories in Japan, China, Indonesia, Vietnam and Mexico in their attempt to compete within the new guitar world order.

And plenty of major players at the time were using Terada/Ibanez, Yamaha/Nippon guitars.
Santana for one.

And finally, you are arguing your point and I'm arguing mine. That's how humans converse and There's no shame in it.

[rct]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

Pre-CBS isn't about copies. I brought it up because the market had drastically changed and Fender, whom you brought up, didn't survive the shift. Big guitar companies here bought factories in Japan, China, Indonesia, Vietnam and Mexico in their attempt to compete within the new guitar world order.

And plenty of major players at the time were using Terada/Ibanez, Yamaha/Nippon guitars.
Santana for one.

And finally, you are arguing your point and I'm arguing mine. That's how humans converse and There's no shame in it.

You do know that Fender was sold because Leo was a seriously hardcore hypochondriac and thought he only had a year or two left with Phyllis, right? It had nothing at all to do with the business.

The new guitar world order(good one!) was much later, in fact, after CBS for Fender in particular.

I don't know how Martin looked at Takamine and some others that were copying them.

rct

[MrErikJ]

Alvarez-Yairi are great instruments but has several things going against it that impact their demand/resale value:

1. Foreign made: Despite being a small shop of luthiers, there is (for some) a negative connotation associated with foreign production of instruments. The primary Alvarez brand is a mid-price brand that's made in China and while I think their quality is excellent, that "mid-price, foreign made" perception goes to their high-end brand as well.

2. Contemporary Designs: Alvarez has your standard Martin-esque body shapes, but tends to have a different approach to their design, voicing, and aesthetics. They, to me, have a bit of an "alt-folk" feel to them, especially as it was popularized in the 90s. The Martin and Gibson crowd may not be particularly moved by their bridge design but maybe a Taylor fan would be. Maybe. Their modern designs aren't terribly "Martin" or "Gibson" and we prefer sounds we can reference. Their choice of woods was, for a long time, also unconventional when compared to the classics. They also have the most-popular Baritone model around I'm pretty sure, which I think confirms their "nontraditional" emphasis

3. Endorsements/Reference: We tend to value a brand of instrument in relation to how we can reference it. Did we see Clapton with one? Did we hear it on a Dylan record? That's largely how we value instrument tones, we seek what we recognize, and there aren't too many famous pictures of James Taylor picking an Alvarez-Yairi on Top of the Pops. They have long-time endorsers, sure, but they're very much "working" musicians and not legends. Monte Montgomery, Ani Difranco, and Bob Weir have long played Yairis, but they're not on the same level as some of the musicians you'll see on the big threes artists page. Perhaps that road traveling "working musician" is their bread and butter and they should own that in their marketing, but they don't seem to be trying to. Which leads me to...

4. Marketing: Alvarez & Alvarez-Yairi are awful at marketing and seem genuinely discombobulated. Their site is a UX nightmare and their social media is updated about once a month and it's always just a picture of a headstock with some dumb caption. They don't know how to sell their product and every time they stumble onto something good (like their video series w/Acoustic Labs) they don't keep the content up. It's weird too, they produced high-quality promotional videos of their products for YouTube and you can tell that they are genuinely very proud of their instruments. They know they're good and at an accessible price. Yairi is the best value "high-end" brand you can buy off the shelf. But, they don't seem to put marketing dollars towards exposure and that is definitely hurting them. They also don't seem to know "who" they're selling to. Is it working musicians? Collectors? Amateurs? I don't know and I don't think they do either, but they do know they're a good value. Sadly, that's a product quality/feature and not a marketing strategy.

I'll also throw in some other thoughts, but they're less evidence based than the other points. I recall, years ago, I actually perceived Alvarez & Alvarez-Yairi as a "high-end" brand. Keep in mind, I was playing a Samick and an Ibanez, but they seemed light years beyond the other brands in the store. Their catalog was gorgeous, they had tons of models in each price range. They had all these neat dreads and folk shapes with combinations of spruce/cedar and mahogany/ovangkol/rosewood...they were just "different." I bought my first all-solid classical from them and still have it. A few years later they were sold and under new ownership. A few years beyond that, I needed an acoustic-electric and rather than carve up my Guild, I bought an Alvarez "Professional Series" dread with their Sys-preamp and pickup (a well-regarded system) as I knew it would be solid. The guitar sucked. I was so turned off that I sold the guitar and just figured their good days were over.

They sold back to St. Louis music a few years back and last year I saw a Masterworks MD65 on-sale on Musiciansfriend and picked it up for a song. When it arrived, the first strum had me awe struck. The cedar top on african mahogany (khaya) body produced a beautifully sparkly and sensitive dreadnought with more overtones than a standard spruce/mahogany dread. My friends loved it and my buddy, who has an old-Mossman, complimented how "Light and responsive" it was. Their quality seems back to spec, but how long does it take to regain confidence for a brand that had a rough spell?

Yairi's are good deals, but I think Alvarez has to win back some trust. I also think they need to fix their product line (has become much narrower) and hire someone who isn't 60 to do their marketing. Or just hire SOMEBODY to do their marketing. If you told me that a guy in distribution does it in his spare time, I'd believe you.

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by PorkPieGuy

I've never played a Yairi. I always associate the name with Alvarez, and I can't stand the sound of Alvarez guitars.

I'd like to play a Yairi though.

There is Alvarez and then there is Alvarez Yairi. While they both have Alvarez in the name the Yairi models, particularly the older ones are outstanding instruments. My daughter currently has my old DY-77 (1974) which I purchased used in 1980. It's designed like a HD-28 and sounds every bit as good. When I was shopping back in '80 I had $1000 cash in my pocket and was ready to plunk down the full amount for an acoustic. I was almost ready to pull the trigger on a Martin when the shop keeper came out with the DY-77. I had both guitars in the practice room and there was no contest and I went home with the Alvarez Yairi.

In terms of value, it's got to be marketing.






I'm not sure what the next guitar resembles. Any thoughts?

[RP]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

Here's my take -
In the late 60's, the acoustic guitar explosion was picking up again and the major Japanese brands, Terada, Yairi and Nippon/Yamaha began selling my in the US. The Japanese were a significant threat to the established US makers because they were the first country of master woodworkers and esoteric metalcraft to begin a foothold here.

Their best guitars, though copies of Martin and Gibson's, were as good or better than the real thing, in both build and materials, a first for a foreign competitor, and a concerted campaign got started in the US to undermine them. The major slights hurled still linger: They done know how to season wood so their necks warp. They're all laminate, which was a lie, even for many of the mid level models. They've perfected an'art' of lamination, where the wood 'appears' to be solid. They're all finished in polyester, another lie, at least for the S Yairi and Tama guitars I own. And on.

They also were victims of their American distribution and advertising network, who couched terms that made it hard to tell whether the woods were solid or the finish was lacquer.

Since their reputations were attacked from the very beginning, they never we're able to completely refute them and ultimately, never were able to build the quality legacy necessary to build used market values that last and all because they scared the pants off of the American makers (who had to weather a bad storm to make it through the 70's precisely because the Japenese instruments were their equal, at a better price).

I think that Japanese manufacturing was just starting to turn the corner in the late 60s from a reputation where "Made in Japan" was synonymous with poorly made and don't really think that Martin (and Gibson) was worried at that time. They were too busy trying to keep up with supply for the demands of the acoustic folk craze themselves, and as a result 70s Martins don't garner the reputation of guitars from other periods. Can't really say why Yairi never grew in stature with the ever improving reputation of Japanese made goods, be they guitars, cameras, cars or motorcycles...

[Charmed Life Picks]

A lot of great comments in here RE marketing etc. Actually, I LIKE the way Yairi goes to market. In my mind they are essentially a boutique/handmade shop with quality as their ultimate goal. I don't think they WANT to be big, but to build the best dang guitar they can for the money. We've all seen tons of companies, and not just in music, try to expand and grow and lose what made them unique and special to begin with.

Anyway, that's my two cents,
scott memmer

[Antonio Salieri]

I gave this thread a quick read, so I don't know if number one has been mentioned.

1. Some folks are put off by the fact that some Yairi models have laminated sides and sometimes laminated backs. 2. They're not cheap new. The thinking is buy an ASW USA guitar for the same money. 3. The association with Alvarez.

We overpaid for a used WY1, but at least we supported a small independent guitar store (Guitar Tex in San Antonio, the owner and staff are great folks). It fits my wife's fingerstyle playing perfectly, and is her main guitar at the religious school where she teaches and the church.