RAN guitars offline. Did they close? Update: Trouble Relocating

Discussion in 'Sevenstring Guitars' started by chopeth, Feb 16, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cip 123

    cip 123 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,953
    Likes Received:
    1,037
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Location:
    Scotland
    Status, Parker, Flaxwood, EGC, Ampeg, Steinberger, Rainsong, Composite acoustics.

    It's been tried and is still happening however you run in to various problem such as - Guitarists don't like change. The materials/time to make certain non-wood instruments often leaves them being very expensive and either not justifiable to make or not justifiable for any player. Some materials make things heavy such as acrylic/resin. It's more expensive than cheap wood, like the cites rosewood debacle, we just got cheaper wood from some companies and other companies admitted that ebony isn't actually that expensive and put it on their models. Some companies that make "woods" that are sustainable are small (Rocklite, Richlite) and may not be known to large builders. You have a company like Parker in which every guitar is so complicated to make it makes a very unsustainable business.

    It's been tried, people are still trying. But no ones going to buy a Les Paul with a Resin fretboard.
     
    XPT707FX likes this.
  2. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,313
    Likes Received:
    5,547
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    What patent is that?
     
  3. cip 123

    cip 123 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,953
    Likes Received:
    1,037
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Location:
    Scotland
    LeviathanKiller likes this.
  4. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,313
    Likes Received:
    5,547
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    The one that doesn't seem to be online anywhere? I'm interested to see exactly what the patent covers.
     
  5. cip 123

    cip 123 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,953
    Likes Received:
    1,037
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Location:
    Scotland
    I hate to take this thread too wildly off topic so this will be my last post on anything outside RAN.

    You're the authorised dealer, why don't you ask them ;)

    But here's some info anyway - "In 1996 Enserink Innovation BV continued as Catalyst Instruments BV, which later sold the build technology to Aristides Instruments BV, who are injecting quality guitars to this day."

    https://www.enserinkdesign.com/project/electric-guitars

    The Arium material it seems was developed a while back in the 90's, used by Enserink Designs it then switch hands and has ended up with Aristides. There are patents held by Enserink designs and I'm sure there are patents held by Aristides. Whether those patents include the chemical makeup of Arium is unclear however if you google the material you'll be hard pressed to find anything other than Aristides. Though that may not even be it's real name given Enserink calls it a "sound compound"

    Lastly given the equipment needed to create a guitar like an Aristides you'd be crazy to even try. It may not be against a patent to make a guitar from Arium, but I would only really trust Aristides to do it.
     
  6. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,313
    Likes Received:
    5,547
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Ahhh, that's why it was never coming up when I tried to patent search it. Maybe dig into this a little later. But I just think (maybe because I probably will order an Aristides fairly soon and hang out on the associated FB groups) people are making much too big a deal about Arium as a unique/optimal build material. There's lots of composite materials that are spongy and resonant, and have been tried before (as you pointed out previously).

    There's just a big start-up cost to getting it all going, so until the market is clamoring for it, I don't think big companies are going to switch over. But I don't think this is on the basis of IP, is my point (/opinion, since I'm not staring at the patent - but then again, no one else is either! :))
     
  7. LeviathanKiller

    LeviathanKiller Knee-shooting Archer

    Messages:
    1,789
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Location:
    Deep Southeast
    I'm just waiting for the day they have Arium "flavors". Try our bassy flavor or looking for something with more attack? try the "trebly" flavor. :lol:
     
    Edika likes this.
  8. StevenC

    StevenC SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,882
    Likes Received:
    1,349
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    All of the patents I can find relating to this are expired anyway.
     
  9. diagrammatiks

    diagrammatiks SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Location:
    china
    Starting up with arium is super expensive as well. Almost impossible for someone to just make a guitar out of it just starting out.
     
  10. 777timesgod

    777timesgod Stop reading this...I said stop!

    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    162
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Location:
    Cyprus, Europe
    Just to get back on topic, regarding the offer that Skervesen made, I have a questions or rather a request for clarification.

    Lets say you put 400 as a deposit for your Ran custom build and the situation with the luthiers/new place of work happened. Skervesen offers a build spot for that sum but you do not have the total for a Skervesen or do not like their type of build or you may feel that if you go through, the new guitar will remind you of the Ran that never came.
    The questions is, can one of the Ran transfers sell his build spot to a third party? That is, getting 250-300 from someone else for the 400 spot and letting them move onwards?

    I assume that yes, so here is another one. Can someone buy the transfer and reduce the amount they need to pay for a current build that they have? Meaning, that you owe Skervesen 1500 more and you buy the 400 build spot for 250-300 and now you owe Skervesen 1100. Logically, they will not want this, as I assume (like a previous poster) that they got build material from Ran - bodies, humbuckers, components and this would make the whole situation harder to manage.
     
    LeviathanKiller likes this.
  11. Wolfhorsky

    Wolfhorsky Regular idiot

    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    422
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Location:
    Wadowice, Poland
    So if You made a ripoff - it is legal, but unfair or what?
    Are You sure, that all „Ran ripoffs” were the infringements of the patents?
    Don’t feel attacked. I just want to make this fair.
     
  12. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,313
    Likes Received:
    5,547
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Steven wouldn't rip-off the Aristides shape and branding. That's more Ran-level shenanigans. We're just talking about composite materials in an exo-skeleton type stuff that seems expired.
     
    Jonathan20022 and StevenC like this.
  13. Wolfhorsky

    Wolfhorsky Regular idiot

    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    422
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Location:
    Wadowice, Poland
    It looks like a double standard.
     
  14. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,313
    Likes Received:
    5,547
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    It's not. If anything you were closer to a double standard in comparing our opinion of Ran to that of other boutique builders that will sometimes copy a headstock or body shape of a known and often trademarked/protected design.
     
    StevenC likes this.
  15. StevenC

    StevenC SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,882
    Likes Received:
    1,349
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    I never mentioned anything about Ran infringing on patents, nor did I say that ripping off Aristides body shape was OK.

    I said Ran ripping off Ken's headstock wasn't cool in my book, and I said that Aristides no longer has patent protection on their production methods.

    As I said earlier, I've played both a Ran and a KL. Anybody else who has played both is probably as qualified as I am to say which is better. Hands down the answer is KL. Rans are nice, KLs are top notch. Narad has some cool guitars and I'd say most of his are closer to KL than Ran.
     
  16. Wolfhorsky

    Wolfhorsky Regular idiot

    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    422
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Location:
    Wadowice, Poland
    Fair enough. You made Your point.
     
  17. Wolfhorsky

    Wolfhorsky Regular idiot

    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    422
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Location:
    Wadowice, Poland
    Body shape or headstock is way less than R&D of Aristides construction.
    As far as Ran goes - i don’t care if they made straight ripoffs of some shapes.
    They had their own designs and they did dinally focus on that. Making copies can be seen as unethical, but i am 100% sure that everyone who wanted a copy won’t ever get the original. Even if they were rejected by Ran or some other company/luthier.
     
  18. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,313
    Likes Received:
    5,547
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    We're not implying that one should rip-off Aristides' IP. If Aristides had a patent on some type of construction, and that patent is expired, then it's fair game. That is as fair as it gets, according to how these IP systems work around the world. The patent is there to protect the use of IP for what is considered a fair duration, to make up and capitalize on money spent on initial R&D.

    The copies of small builders are often dealing with things that aren't patented or trademarked, so this is entirely, objectively different in this case. It's rarely really within a small builder's ability to seek out legal action, often across national borders, over what amounts to a tiny loss in sales, so it's rarely in the builder's best interests to try and defend it that way. You want to copy a KL headstock, I think you're probably legally okay to do so. But Ken doesn't like it when people copy his headstock design, and for that reason alone I'm going to look down on a company that chooses to do so, and to make posts that reflect that. There's not a right answer -- it's shady ethical stuff. But I have just as much a right to that opinion and that justification as anyone to theirs.

    If you want a KL guitar and choose not to work hard and save the money for it, and want to hire Ran to make a copy, against what Ken would want, then that's on you. I think it's shitty, but whatever. Like I'm not going to pay $15k+ for a blackmachine. They're not worth it to me. So I could get some knockoff that looks like one but otherwise has next to nothing in common with it, but I'd rather not have anything blackmachine-style at all than have a phoney one. To me it's kind of a weird sense of entitlement to say, "Yea, I can't afford that but I deserve that." Plenty of totally usable guitars out there in all shapes and sizes and price points.
     
    StevenC likes this.
  19. Wolfhorsky

    Wolfhorsky Regular idiot

    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    422
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Location:
    Wadowice, Poland
    I am 90% with Your statements.
    Hypothetically, what if a builder/company doesn’t offer the desired option and someone wants the design/looks but with unavailable features? For example: i would buy or order boden, but with different fan and neck carve. It is impossible to get Strandy that way. Within Your idea, I shouldn’t get my copy/homage with the features that I want only because the company makes well designed guitars (that can’t meet my needs) and by making the copy i will make them lose money (i woundn’t buy original anyway).
     
  20. MaxOfMetal

    MaxOfMetal Likes trem wankery. Super Moderator

    Messages:
    30,920
    Likes Received:
    10,878
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Location:
    Racine, WI
    No one is entitled to a given guitar design.

    You're welcome to order whatever you want, and a builder is free to build whatever they want*, but it doesn't make it ethical to rip off someone's design.

    Ethics, legality, and reality don't always intersect in our favor.

    *If legal.
     
    XPT707FX, c7spheres, narad and 2 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.