Etherial Guitars
- Thread starter jkiernanguitar
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
*the scene from Team America where Gary doesn't stop vomiting*
To each their own though. It's a bummer these are still so suspect in quality.
To each their own though. It's a bummer these are still so suspect in quality.
Lorcan Ward
7slinger
At least it will sound a lot better than having a middle and neck pickup.
Fred the Shred
Shrederick
I don't mean this as a blanket statement regarding all his designs. For example, I see functional issues on your guitar, but nothing that would render it useless or unplayable at first glance - sometimes, it's absolutely fine to have suboptimal (within reason) functional aspects here and there to be able to implement a purely aesthetic feature. However, stuff, like the absurd wavy frets is, factually, an impediment to proper playing to an absolutely unacceptable degree. Other aberrations seen here showcase that sometimes it's as if basic tenets of guitar functionality and design aren't a thing at all, and they will impact core aspects like actual playability, structural integrity, or the ability to perform the most basic adjustments.
He had this pseudo-superstrat thing (which I think noYan's is based on IIRC) that looked fine, everything was adequately placed and proportionate, so if anything would be an issue, it would be a construction issue, not a fundamental flaw of the design itself, for example (and apparently there was plenty of the "construction issue" bit doing the rounds, but I digress). Others however, would be colossal fuck-ups on the most basic levels of design, and in this day and age, with all the learning tools available, that is just a case of head-up-the-arsitis and willful ignorance.
I won't lie. I actually burst into laughter upon seeing this thing. Oh, so much stuff that can (and will most likely) go wrong with the concepts.
He had this pseudo-superstrat thing (which I think noYan's is based on IIRC) that looked fine, everything was adequately placed and proportionate, so if anything would be an issue, it would be a construction issue, not a fundamental flaw of the design itself, for example (and apparently there was plenty of the "construction issue" bit doing the rounds, but I digress). Others however, would be colossal fuck-ups on the most basic levels of design, and in this day and age, with all the learning tools available, that is just a case of head-up-the-arsitis and willful ignorance.
I won't lie. I actually burst into laughter upon seeing this thing. Oh, so much stuff that can (and will most likely) go wrong with the concepts.
diagrammatiks
Well-Known Member
Honestly it's 2020. Making a mostly functional guitar isn't the gold medal. 3 Indonesian children and a cnc machine can perfectly functioning guitar.
Tsathoggua
SS.org Regular
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2019
- Messages
- 25
- Reaction score
- 35
Reminds me of this instrument:
I actually like how this one looks. But this person really didn't understand the ergonomic aspects behind the Oni fanfrets. I mean, there's multiple places you can read up on what the thought process behind those were, and it had very little to do with aesthetics.At least it will sound a lot better than having a middle and neck pickup.
How is the weight on these, by the way?
prlgmnr
...that kind of idea
you're under arrest
Therein-lies the issue, IMO. Not jumping on the train that all guitars should be inaccessibly expensive, and there are ton of cheap guitars that play 100% perfectly with little to no flaws, but $2000 for how outside of the box the features/materials are on these is unsustainably cheap Which is probably why they can only employ three people and why the QC is shoddy. It's hard to QC something and repair/toss a guitar when you're working in those kinds of profit margins. Doubly when almost every build is custom.
spudmunkey
Well-Known Member
Thank you for verbalizing what I've been thinking the whole time since reading this batch of posts.
Mathemagician
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2014
- Messages
- 5,645
- Reaction score
- 5,515
I like your point. Basically that the number of unusual to off the wall features combined with predominantly hand-made manufacturing makes it so that there is no room for error or to correct a mistake so results in a “you get what you get” due to it being so cheap.
On top of whatever ego/attitude the builder has.
On top of whatever ego/attitude the builder has.
More or less. Woodworkers have an infinite number of workarounds to cover-up mistakes (solid or stain to cover filler from dings, binding to hide gaps in glued surfaces, etc), aluminum and carbon fiber hide NOTHING and are infinitely harder to work, along with their own mountain of idiosyncrasies (like epoxy layup for the cf, slotting a hard surface like aluminum for frets with small bits prone to breaking). The margin for error is razor thin, if not non-existent.
As an entrepreneur, if someone pitched me on joining this company I'd say you have to raise your price at least another $1000 or compromise on your features to deliver. You can't fuck up an aluminum fretboard with banana frets and 'fix it', it's gotta go in the trash and you're out the materials, decent wear on your machines and a lot of time.
I can totally see having a stinky attitude if you're likely paying yourself starvation wages because you're building stuff with outrageous specs for the price. I don't mean any of that as a defense of the company or the builder, if anything it's the opposite, but I get where all of this is coming from.
Etherial would be much better served raising the price, lowering the target numbers and tooling/focusing on features they can definitely deliver on.
Deegatron
Well-Known Member
I disagree on this point.
If you take away the bizarre and absurd features on these guitars and force Ethereal to focus on "core competency" (ie: putting out a proper solid instrument first and foremost) you're left with a company that has a bad reputation for poor build standards and QC, that no longer offers any of the unique features that attracted his customer base in the first place.
Sales would dry up all together and the company would fold.
The only way forward for this company would be to drastically increase prices ( I'm talking about the $10K per instrument range) and properly deliver on the quirky features that he offers on top of a flawless instrument.
Due to the aforementioned poor reputation for quality and QC I would not expect any customers to be willing to shell out $10K for an ethereal guitar. for that reason I believe this company is already sunk... it's just a matter of time before his capital runs out and builds start stalling and the builder disappears/files for bankruptcy.
His builds are 100% not my cup of tea but it's a shame as they were certainly unique design and construction wise... and I think the industry needs a little more of that....
I actually think we're in mostly or full agreement here. The signature stuff would need to stay, so the use of aluminum and carbon fiber, the futuristic shapes and techy looking graphics, etc.
I just remember a build somebody posted on here and the graphic work was specific to that build, so it was done by hand (which caused it to look sloppy close up) and I can't remember if it was painted on or inlayed but either way, it was more work than necessary for a poorer result than acceptable.
I'd toss out the "one off" in-house graphic thing overnight. If someone wants a unique graphic, upcharge and send it to someone that knows what they're doing (which happens in every other industry and in a lot of guitar shops). Graphics in general stay but screenprint them or vinyl them so that they're flawless and repeatable every time.
Fanned frets can stay, banana frets... eh, idk, maybe they're a signature of the brand at this point but doing banana frets in an aluminum board when you can't do the basic stuff seems unnecessarily cumbersome. At this point, machining fanned frets is almost as easy as doing straight frets, less places to fuck up and more ways of covering mistakes seamlessly vs. banana frets. I know Oni does banana frets but I have to imagine machining them in wood is infinite times easier and even if you fuck up, you probably have another 4 or 5 blanks you resawed off that same bulk to draw from.
I haven't checked out this brand in at least a year, so maybe their process has changed but they previously seemed like they were changing up their specifics so much from build to build that it was nearly impossible to tool things in a reliable, standardized way. It was like each build was starting from scratch. And if you're a guy like Ken Parker building a half dozen acoustics a year for $30,000+ a piece, you can take that kinda time and retool your shop for every piece you build but you cannot do that for $2000 a piece and materials that beat the shit out of your tools, cost more per piece than their wood equivalent and leave zero room for error.
EDIT: I also agree on pushing the industry, which is why I give guys like Etherial and Claas more leeway than they probably deserve. Yeah, as far as what I want as a consumer, I'll take a simpler better build guitar over a barely functional art piece but as an observer, I think an Etherial with some flaws that need to be overcome moves the needle a lot more than a $3000 immaculate telecaster copy with a faux roadworn finish.
Deegatron
Well-Known Member
Ahhhhhhhhh THANK YOU!!!!
WHY IS THAT GARBAGE SOOO FREAKING POPULAR!?!?!?!?!?!?! AHHHHH IT LITTERALLY KILLS ME!
prlgmnr
...that kind of idea
Perhaps for the same reason that, generally, cars have four wheels and go, for the most part, where you want them to; to the vast detriment of visionary marques who craft one-off masterpieces with 2 wheels on the opposing corners, a steam driven piston on one of the remaining corners and leave the last corner unoccupied, with a chassis made out of granite and a special camelid-wool-lined bucket seat that perfectly tessellates the human arse.
Fred the Shred
Shrederick
Yeah, I mentioned that earlier here - it's absolutely impossible to maintain any operational margin, let alone grow the company, if you price your stuff too low. It also makes the margins so slim you basically can't afford to hold on to a build to rectify issues or subcontract a specialized company to do some oddball requests you are ill equipped to do yourself, so it's a bit of a "shoot from the hip" approach to a very complicated, low tolerance choice of mats and styles.
Everything I've gleaned from this company over the years, harking back to when they were just doing goofy wooden guitars with straight (ish) frets and tribal inlays, is their quality ethos is: "eh, good enough".
I just don't think they really care to put the effort into making a guitar free of defects. Especially when people are still paying money for their current output.
I just don't think they really care to put the effort into making a guitar free of defects. Especially when people are still paying money for their current output.
