Kiesel --- Never Again!

[MetalHead40]

Keisel wants the prestige of being a 'custom shop' without putting the effort into the customer service required of such a title. Let's be honest, they either want you to use the online builder, do one quick phone call, or order a completed guitar. They're not set up, nor do they want, prolonged discussions or back and forth interactions about specs or player expectations.

Seems an accurate assessment, and how I'd perceive their attitude.

I contemplated that build for a year and called in several times over that time period to ask quick questions, and every salesguy I talked with seemed short, uninterested, and portrayed an attitude that made me feel like all they really cared about was my cc#.

 

[Seventhwave]

They tried to get me to bite on a custom serial # to commemorate their anniversary and celebrate their new factory if I was willing to forfeit any return policy

unreal. but not surprised

 

[Science_Penguin]

Threads like this confuse me...

I've never understood the need to defend, of all things, a guitar manufacturer, since, at the end of the day, they're just a company. They sell products, people buy them, and occasionally some screw-ups happen. And it happens with certain companies more often than others, which I think consumers should be made aware of so they can decide for themselves weather the risks are worth it.

What's there to gain from defending Kiesel? Hell, let's not even delve into specifics- what's there to gain from defending Gibson, Fender, Ibanez, Schecter, ANY guitar maker?

Is the worry that they'll lose money? If they're not making solid products or constantly screwing up customer service, maybe they ought to lose some profit- it might force them to start taking that sort of thing more seriously.
What do you gain if they make money? What do you lose if they lose money? Nothing, unless you're a shareholder. Really, it's more to your benefit as a consumer if companies are called into question on their policies more often, so they can start correcting them.

Is it a matter of pride? Do you feel the need to defend the companies you support with your money? You shouldn't. People bash Gibson all the time, and I know their QC hasn't been the best over the past few years, but if I should happen to find me a good Explorer in a shop, nothing's going to stop me from buying it. And, if someone who has a seething hatred for Gibson tells me I'm a fool for doing it, well... f... 'em! I got what I wanted.

Did you go on-record in the past saying a company's great, and you feel negative feedback from other people challenges that? Is the fear that you'll have to admit to yourself you might have given glowing recommendation to a company that has sub-par policies? You clearly had a good experience with the product(s) you bought from the company, someone else might not have. Both of those stories are perfectly valid and reflect either positively or negatively on the company- as they should! Both types of stories will help consumers who may be considering buying certain products get a feel for how consistently good or bad a company is.

I'm sorry for the rant, I just can't wrap my head around why this thread has gone on for seventeen bloody pages...

 

[Vletrmx]

Threads like this confuse me...

I've never understood the need to defend, of all things, a guitar manufacturer, since, at the end of the day, they're just a company. They sell products, people buy them, and occasionally some screw-ups happen. And it happens with certain companies more often than others, which I think consumers should be made aware of so they can decide for themselves weather the risks are worth it.

What's there to gain from defending Kiesel? Hell, let's not even delve into specifics- what's there to gain from defending Gibson, Fender, Ibanez, Schecter, ANY guitar maker?

I think that kind of mentality exists outside of guitars too. For any given product or technology, there's a group of people who will latch on to it religiously. They all probably have their own reasons to hold such a strong connection to something, but a lot of the time I feel it's expressed as blind elitism.

Try going to any forum that's dedicated to a specific product and you'll find a contingency of people who will defend their choices to the death and are unwilling to think rationally about things that exist outside that bubble. It's often entertaining too, since it leads to things like forum wars between competing products.

 

[Rawkmann]

Threads like this confuse me...

I've never understood the need to defend, of all things, a guitar manufacturer, since, at the end of the day, they're just a company. They sell products, people buy them, and occasionally some screw-ups happen. And it happens with certain companies more often than others, which I think consumers should be made aware of so they can decide for themselves weather the risks are worth it.

What's there to gain from defending Kiesel? Hell, let's not even delve into specifics- what's there to gain from defending Gibson, Fender, Ibanez, Schecter, ANY guitar maker?

Is the worry that they'll lose money? If they're not making solid products or constantly screwing up customer service, maybe they ought to lose some profit- it might force them to start taking that sort of thing more seriously.
What do you gain if they make money? What do you lose if they lose money? Nothing, unless you're a shareholder. Really, it's more to your benefit as a consumer if companies are called into question on their policies more often, so they can start correcting them.

Is it a matter of pride? Do you feel the need to defend the companies you support with your money? You shouldn't. People bash Gibson all the time, and I know their QC hasn't been the best over the past few years, but if I should happen to find me a good Explorer in a shop, nothing's going to stop me from buying it. And, if someone who has a seething hatred for Gibson tells me I'm a fool for doing it, well... f... 'em! I got what I wanted.

Did you go on-record in the past saying a company's great, and you feel negative feedback from other people challenges that? Is the fear that you'll have to admit to yourself you might have given glowing recommendation to a company that has sub-par policies? You clearly had a good experience with the product(s) you bought from the company, someone else might not have. Both of those stories are perfectly valid and reflect either positively or negatively on the company- as they should! Both types of stories will help consumers who may be considering buying certain products get a feel for how consistently good or bad a company is.

I'm sorry for the rant, I just can't wrap my head around why this thread has gone on for seventeen bloody pages...

Brand loyalty is a powerful thing. You'll see the same thing on car forums (Ford Vs. Chevy) or with video games (Playstation Vs. Xbox). At the end of the day, if I have a positive experience dealing with a company I will likely recommend them, and if it's negative then I won't and will probably caution others as well. Speaking on Gibson, I bought a new SG last year and just so happens its one of the best guitars I've ever owned. However I do realize that getting a stellar Gibson is a bit of a crap shoot, so I'd still tell people to proceed with caution. I'm still keeping up with this particular thread because I was one of the unfortunate ones who had bad dealings with Kiesel and maybe its just a morbid curiosity at this point to see how other people who had issues are being treated by them. If someone gets an amazing guitar from Kiesel, then fantastic! But it does seem pretty undeniable lately that the ratio of great ones to lemons has been tipping in favor of the latter.

 

[Science_Penguin]

Yeah, I get brand loyalty... but I don't GET it... if that makes sense...

I mean, I understand that it's a mindset people have, I just really don't understand why the mindset exists in the first place. When you stop to think about it, there's just no reason for it (again: unless you're a stockholder).

It's entertaining to watch, sure (which is why I've been keeping up with this thread) but, after a while, I just can't help but call it all into question.

 

[saminator]

I'd imagine people who've purchased from a particular brand, especially ones as controversial as Kiesel, may cultivate a feeling of loyalty to justify said purchases to themselves. If they admit that the company screws up, perhaps that means they made a poor decision by buying something from that company.

Outside of that (and having stock in or working for said company), I wouldn't understand brand loyalty either...

 

[Jeff]

Carvin is not the same Kiesel, there are plenty of older carvins that are basically from another era.

Saying Kiesels are not on par with a PRS SE is a joke

If you consider american strats and prestiges high end, then Kiesels are high end.

So you're saying Kiesels are even better than 2005-2015 era Carvins? Sure.

American Strats and Prestiges aren't high end, and yet they're both definitely a lot better than any Carvin or Kiesel I've owned or played.

It must be exhausting to be a Kiesel apologist.

 

[Jeffbro]

So you're saying Kiesels are even better than 2005-2015 era Carvins? Sure.

American Strats and Prestiges aren't high end, and yet they're both definitely a lot better than any Carvin or Kiesel I've owned or played.

It must be exhausting to be a Kiesel apologist.

All five of the Carvins I had weren't even on par with a PRS SE, so I don't know where people get "high end" from.

So you never owned a Kiesel, probably never even touched one. You also bought 5 carvins that were all apparently crap... not fishy at all. Classic signs of a bandwagon hater, exaggeration and making up BS.

Kiesels are no doubt better than older carvins, specs/design/woods/quality, that's not up for debate

Saying prestiges and american strats are not high end is straight snobbery, those are $1-2k+ professional level instruments, both are similar in quality to Kiesel

As I said before, I'm not biased in this discussion. I've had multiple Kiesels and sold all of them because they didn't quite fit my taste. But I can't deny they were all built very well. Their customer service needs work, they have some QC issues as do many other brands, but bashing their overall quality and value is unreasonable. Saying Kiesels are not on par with PRS SEs is absolutely wrong. No Kiesel has ever been straight traded for an SE.

 

[mnemonic]

Kiesels are no doubt better than older carvins, specs/design/woods/quality, that's not up for debate
.

Why not? Just because its new doesnt mean it's better. I had never heard of design issues with a Carvin before, they have always been well balanced and well thought-out in my eperience. These bridge/saddle or maybe neck pocket issues that we can clearly see in the pictures posted in this thread lead me to believe a lot less time and effort has gone into the design of these new models.

 

[marcwormjim]

Saying Kiesels are not on par with PRS SEs is absolutely wrong. No Kiesel has ever been straight traded for an SE.

You heard it here, kiesel-hating, bandwagon hillary-voters: Not only are Kiesels on-par with PRS SEs, but trading a Kiesel for an SE is the true test of the brand's quality.

 

[laxu]

Threads like this confuse me...

I've never understood the need to defend, of all things, a guitar manufacturer, since, at the end of the day, they're just a company. They sell products, people buy them, and occasionally some screw-ups happen. And it happens with certain companies more often than others, which I think consumers should be made aware of so they can decide for themselves weather the risks are worth it.

There's a difference between hyperbole and valid criticism. OP is perfectly good criticism against the brand. It seems that as this thread has gone on suddenly people who probably have never even tried a Kiesel are jumping on a hate bandwagon saying all they make is crap. Which is not true. Mob mentality does not help anyone and people are quick to ignore the various happy Kiesel owners even on this forum if you just search for NGD Kiesel threads.

Kiesel has issues that they should resolve. They need to improve their customer service so the treatment OP got does not happen. They need to make sure the QC issue OP had does not happen.

My experience with Kiesel is that they don't always make a perfect guitar, but I had nothing but good to say about the customer service I received. I can live with the very small cosmetic issues on mine because it meant I paid less money and received the guitar in much less time compared to going with a domestic custom builder or even most European ones. I will still recommend Kiesel guitars for people asking what they should get, especially if they live in the US where they are a really good deal IMO.

 

[macgruber]

As I said before, I'm not biased in this discussion.

 

[Lemons]

As I said before, I'm not biased in this discussion.

*anxiously clicks at where the "like" button used to be*

 

[GuitarBizarre]

Jeffbro is the most deluded member of this forum since Major Tom.

Congratulations.

 

[Carl Kolchak]

What's there to gain from defending Kiesel? Hell, let's not even delve into specifics- what's there to gain from defending Gibson, Fender, Ibanez, Schecter, ANY guitar maker?

On-line bragging points? That warm, fuzzy feeling of submerging your vestigial individuality into that of a group collective? 5% off your next purchase?

 

[Demiurge]

FFS, "fake news" hysteria has hit the guitar market. Asteroid now.

But really, if this is what passes for a 'haters piling it on' thread, then maybe things are getting better. Look at the threads for Etherial or S7G- worlds different. Here, it seems that most of the posters are customers of the Carvin/Kiesel that have something to say from their experiences with customer service or build quality.

 

[beerandbeards]

On-line bragging points? That warm, fuzzy feeling of submerging your vestigial individuality into that of a group collective? 5% off your next purchase?

If there's 5% off my next EBMM then.....

Ernie Ball is the greatest manufacturer or guitars and all others suck. All bow down at the temple of Lord Petrucci and his guitar designs. Leo Fender was a loser. SAD!

 

[cwhitey2]

If there's 5% off my next EBMM then.....

Ernie Ball is the greatest manufacturer or guitars and all others suck. All bow down at the temple of Lord Petrucci and his guitar designs. Leo Fender was a loser. SAD!

 

[Petar Bogdanov]

Hey it's 150 free bucks! Youtube reviewers do it for less!