# AWESOME NEW 7 STRING RANS!!! (Pic Heavy)



## mickytee (Aug 14, 2008)

Check out these awesome new Ran 7 Strings:







































































This one is a sixer, but its amazing aswell:


----------



## TimSE (Aug 14, 2008)

lots of win


----------



## turmoil (Aug 14, 2008)

very nice! i love that howling wolf inlay.


----------



## kmanick (Aug 14, 2008)

wow that top one is killer.
are these for sale (I didn't see them on the website)


----------



## D-EJ915 (Aug 14, 2008)

Man that JS is nice! same with the warrior and proline v  lol


----------



## mickytee (Aug 14, 2008)

kmanick said:


> wow that top one is killer.
> are these for sale (I didn't see them on the website)



theyre custom ordered.
theyre all in the gallery section. there are more new ones there aswell.


----------



## buffa d (Aug 14, 2008)

I like that first one. It's like a 7-string version of the JS series. very nice!
...though that finish is just hideous.


----------



## mickytee (Aug 14, 2008)

buffa d said:


> I like that first one. It's like a 7-string version of the JS series. very nice!
> ...though that finish is just hideous.



correction: It's like a 7-string, *24 fret* version of the JS series.
i love that finish! very funky!


----------



## Alex-D33 (Aug 14, 2008)

Great find


----------



## HammerAndSickle (Aug 14, 2008)

Isn't there a bit of a hassle copying Ibanez's headstock design like that?


----------



## darbdavys (Aug 14, 2008)

HammerAndSickle said:


> Isn't there a bit of a hassle copying Ibanez's headstock design like that?


My first thought when i saw the headstock 
the first one is beauty, except the pickup rings


----------



## Toshiro (Aug 14, 2008)

That Rhoads V fucking rules!


----------



## Mattayus (Aug 14, 2008)

that howling wolf is the most badass inlay i've ever fuckin seen


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 14, 2008)

Made in Poland


----------



## darbdavys (Aug 14, 2008)

Sebastian said:


> Made in Poland


the neighbour of Lithuania


----------



## trippled (Aug 14, 2008)

The second one is a pure copy of an Ibanez JS.
It looks great though.


----------



## Groff (Aug 14, 2008)

The V is full of win!


----------



## Guitar Nymph (Aug 14, 2008)

wow 

I love the maple bound fb! Also, those red tuners on the
warrior clone are sick


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 14, 2008)

darbdavys said:


> the neighbour of Lithuania



Which was united with Poland, one country... a long time ago 

At least ss.org will learn some history


----------



## Shawn (Aug 14, 2008)

Those are nice, the white one with the maple fretboard especially.


----------



## Demeyes (Aug 14, 2008)

Those are lovely looking. I really like the V, very nice job on that. The wolf inlay is really interesting. I like the look of the JS one but the finish is something I would never play in public!


----------



## darbdavys (Aug 14, 2008)

Sebastian said:


> Which was united with Poland, was a one country with Poland a long time ago
> 
> At least ss.org will learn some history


and was called Rzeczpospolita. i think this does of history will be enough for fellow ss.org'ers


----------



## Trespass (Aug 14, 2008)

Wow, that Howling Wolf inlay is brilliant, and the transparent black on those are so win


----------



## Doomcreeper (Aug 14, 2008)

I like the one with the Wolf inlay and the warrior.


----------



## Apophis (Aug 14, 2008)

Really nice


----------



## bulletbass man (Aug 14, 2008)

Really awesome. i'd love to have that v


----------



## Ancestor (Aug 14, 2008)

RAN seems to have the best customs for my taste. Those guitar are really nice. The look high quality and I'm sure they play nice.


----------



## jacksonplayer (Aug 14, 2008)

Wow, 7-string guitars and the medieval Kingdom of Poland-Lithuania all in the same thread. Where else are you gonna get that??


----------



## voiceguitar (Aug 14, 2008)

that first white and burgandy flame top guitar has a massive headstock compaired to the size of the body... its a little bit of an eye sore


----------



## CaptainD00M (Aug 14, 2008)

... I knew someone would make a JS 7 string with 24 frets one day!
Boo Ya

Uber Win.


----------



## march (Aug 14, 2008)

amazing 

man, the maple block inlayed fingerboard is absolutely ... woah ...


----------



## thesimo (Aug 14, 2008)

omg this just made me wet my pants for my ran custom which should arrive in err..7 months 

look really great tho! - that glossy maple fretboard is just wowza!


----------



## Heeboja (Aug 14, 2008)

Yup. I'm not fan of round bodyshapes. But I find that JS one sexy. So there are 2 good quality customsshops in poland i see.

Oh and btw: There's no wrong using a different company's desing on a custom. Since the specs are decided by the customer (in most cases)

This is awesome too:


----------



## s_k_mullins (Aug 14, 2008)

User01 said:


> Check out these awesome new Ran 7 Strings:


 
 I am lovin this fuckin V


----------



## kmanick (Aug 14, 2008)

Heeboja said:


> Yup. I'm not fan of round bodyshapes. But I find that JS one sexy. So there are 2 good quality customsshops in poland i see.
> 
> Oh and btw: There's no wrong using a different company's desing on a custom. Since the specs are decided by the customer (in most cases)
> 
> This is awesome too:


 
I saw that one too
Very nice!!


----------



## st2012 (Aug 14, 2008)

My soul now officially belongs to that V.


----------



## 220BX (Aug 14, 2008)

WOW!! those are some really cool looking guitars!! i'm really digging the JS clone!!! BTW correct me if i'm wrong , someone here has a RAN stephen carpenter replica with a neck pickup and a trem with the same colour as the one posted above , right???


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 14, 2008)

Those last ones look amazing, black + red is always a winners combo.


----------



## Durero (Aug 14, 2008)

That V looks like it should belong to Bob (TDW)


----------



## Rick (Aug 14, 2008)

Holy fuck, those are awesome!


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 14, 2008)

The only problem I have with the wolf is that if you search for wolf on picturesearch that is one of the first one to appear. it would have made more sense to actual get something original.


----------



## zimbloth (Aug 14, 2008)

Those look nice, that wolf Rhoads 7 is absolutely gorgeous. Amazing. 

Just curious though, has Ran _ever _made a design that wasn't a direct copy? I understand there's only so much you can do with a superstrat or flying V, but the Jackson Warrior and Ibanez JS shapes are a little overt no?


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Aug 14, 2008)

its a custom shop, its probably what the customer requested


----------



## zimbloth (Aug 14, 2008)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> its a custom shop, its probably what the customer requested



And? Most luthiers prefer not to _only_ do copies.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 14, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> And? Most luthiers prefer not to only do copies.



Apparently , ran doesn't care.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 14, 2008)

Desecrated said:


> Apparently , ran doesn't care.



Ran Guitars - custom made - ships worldwide


----------



## zimbloth (Aug 14, 2008)

Stealthtastic said:


> Ran Guitars - custom made - ships worldwide



Wow, that's ridiculous


----------



## march (Aug 14, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> And? Most luthiers prefer not to _only_ do copies.



In this instance I'd say he/they is/are making a living ... and as pointed out above, that means building what the customers want. 
On the other hand, the guy will build whatever (reasonable I suppose) shape you throw at him, just have to send a pdf. So the creative and original part of thing is 100% in the hands of the customer. Some like it, some don't. IMHO it leaves the door wide open, as far as customisation goes.

Sure, if I was them, I'd maybe throw some drawings, or mockups on the site as alternatives. But then again, do they even have the time to do that, given their 10/12+ months waiting list ?


----------



## kmanick (Aug 14, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> Wow, that's ridiculous


Damn , these guys make copies of everything.
Ran Guitars - custom made - ships worldwide

great looking stuff though.


----------



## zimbloth (Aug 14, 2008)

I agree totally, everyone has the right to make a living. It just seems cheesy that this company is 'making a living' solely on doing DIRECT copies of other company's designs. Seems wrong but what do I know?


----------



## march (Aug 14, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> I agree totally, everyone has the right to make a living. It just seems cheesy that this company is 'making a living' solely on doing DIRECT copies of other company's designs. Seems wrong but what do I know?



It may seem wrong, but for some luthiers, it becomes a sort of ego statement not to want to do "copies". On the other hand, we have to admit that the stuff they do is better than the originals, or at least they seem to be, as I've never had one in my hands.

And even then, how many volutes or curves or variations can one come up to try to differentiate himself from all the existing RG, strat or les pauls designs out there ? It's become redundant.


----------



## bulletbass man (Aug 14, 2008)

In all honesty a lot of the truly original designs look terrible. Sure he could be slightly different but the customer probably said I want an RG or I want a Warrior etc.
You can only take designs so far without them turning to crap. but yeah he could've atleast made a ran headstock or something.


----------



## sakeido (Aug 14, 2008)

bulletbass man said:


> In all honesty a lot of the truly original designs look terrible. Sure he could be slightly different but the customer probably said I want an RG or I want a Warrior etc.
> You can only take designs so far without them turning to crap. but yeah he could've atleast made a ran headstock or something.



I agree with this sentiment... it is very, very rare to see a new design I like. A lot of really unique designs suck hard, and seemed to be have been designed with no attention paid to contours, proportion, balance, or comfort. Even slight changes to a common design can make something ungodly ugly - like how a Gunslinger is hideous, while an RG isn't. 

The one thing going for Ran is they will make copies of whatever you want, which is nice if the original company won't (ie. a Jackson Soloist 7 with a strathead). They used to do it for a good price with short wait times, but now they are quite expensive and the wait times are just as long as major shops with enormous shipping charges to boot.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 14, 2008)

The only reason they're in business at all at this point is because they operate in Poland. They would have been sued into oblivion if they were in North America where the designs are typically trademarked/copywrited. Most companies would at least use their own headstock design on the guitar, but Ran decides to rip that off too. 

I totally understand that Ran makes a great guitar, but it would be nice if they could make a Ran guitar instead of just copying other designs. It may be up to the customer with the original design, but Ran does have the option of saying "no, we'd be directly copying _______". Money speaks louder apparently.


----------



## Xk6m6m5X (Aug 14, 2008)

if you look at the headstock on the js copy ..its not an exact copy thought...its more pointy than an ibanez headstock...same general shape though


----------



## XeoFLCL (Aug 14, 2008)

I saw the headstock debate coming the second I saw the JS copy 

But on a more on-topic note.. that RRV copy is to kill for. I almost shat myself when I saw that. GAS


----------



## Rick (Aug 14, 2008)

That V is fucking gorgeous.


----------



## march (Aug 14, 2008)

Yes, it all comes down to the money ... but should they be blamed for taking it, or should the people who want the product -for cheaper- be blamed for not going to the original manufacturers, and shelling out the insane amounts of money it would take to get what they want ?

See, it goes both ways. All in all, you would never be able to get what they make.

Because that BC Rich headstock is never going to be available on that Les Paul body, ever.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 14, 2008)

march said:


> Yes, it all comes down to the money ... but should they be blamed for taking it



Yes. They really should. I'm wondering how much support this company would get if someone actually managed to take them to court over infringing on designs. 

The headstock on the JS looks identical to an Ibanez. I realize that some people are rolling their eyes at the headstock issue, but if you made something, put your signature on it (kinda like Ran ripping off Bernie Rico Jr in a few shots I saw) and then some guys overseas who are basically out of reach of your legal team copy the design exactly and stick their name on it, how would you react?  

If you're going to copy a design, do it for yourself and don't go making profit off identical copies. Lots of people use the RG shape, dinky shape and whatnot, but Ran is the only company I've seen flat out copy the Ibanez headstock recently. 

Considering the backlash of Eddy Roman copying other designs with his Scorpion, Yankee Rose and other Roman labelled guitars, I'm pretty surprised for the support of Ran doing THE EXACT SAME THING.


----------



## mickytee (Aug 15, 2008)

well they do have an 'original' guitar:

Ran Guitars - custom made - ships worldwide

the headstock is somewhat similar to that bc rich one, but it isnt exactly the same.


----------



## Zepp88 (Aug 15, 2008)

I always have a problem with Ran, they do great looking work, but the copy-cat stuff is too much for me, the only thing that separates them from Roman is that they don't seem to be complete assholes or liars.


----------



## haffner1 (Aug 15, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> Yes. They really should. I'm wondering how much support this company would get if someone actually managed to take them to court over infringing on designs.
> 
> The headstock on the JS looks identical to an Ibanez. I realize that some people are rolling their eyes at the headstock issue, but if you made something, put your signature on it (kinda like Ran ripping off Bernie Rico Jr in a few shots I saw) and then some guys overseas who are basically out of reach of your legal team copy the design exactly and stick their name on it, how would you react?
> 
> ...



To compare Ran to Ed is like comparing a high profile touring act to a 2 bit (vegas?) lounge singer. They both may cover other people's work, but one will do it to a significantly higher standard. Besides, Ran is not really claiming these designs as their own like Ed tends to do. They only claim to offer a high quality product to exacting customer specifications, and from what I hear, they do a good job at it. Besides, I find it hard to believe that Ran is really taking much business away from custom shops like jackson or BC Rich any more than Agile does (even though they build by hand to a higher standard). I have a hornet 7, but I looked into getting ESP and Jackson to build one first, and both quotes ended up in the range of 5K just to get a 24 fret V H-H with a Floyd. For my situation it was Agile or nothing. Period. Yes I could have gone with a local custom shop for more money and gotten higher quality, and I still might do that later, but for now I have something with the design I needed for a price I could afford. I think that great designs should be aforded copyright protection, but on the other hand at some point it ultimately inhibits forward progress in the market. What if Fender had maintained tight control of the bolt on neck concept or the string through body trem, and the only place you could get one now was from Fender? Ok that's taking things a bit far, but my point is that most companies that have a great design that sells well, will ultimately begin to become abusive when it comes to profit taking. I bought my PRS custom 24 in 1994 with hardcase for like 1250 or something, and the following year they went to a more efficient/higher production facility and the base price jumped to like 2300 or something. Try getting a 7 string from them these days. They have the arrogance to ask 11K. 
So Ran is weak on original design. Ok. So are alot of guitar companies, but they are strong on responding to customer requirements, craftsmanship, and value (or maybe not so much that anymore- I haven't price them lately, but anyway-point made)


----------



## nikt (Aug 15, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> Yes. They really should. I'm wondering how much support this company would get if someone actually managed to take them to court over infringing on designs.




but You can't sue Ran for copying others designs so this is worthless talk


----------



## kmanick (Aug 15, 2008)

I emailed them last night and got a qoute for a 7 string jackson soloist copy.
white 
ebony board 
sharkfins
maple/alder
Schaller floyd
neck binding
6100 fret wire
pm me if you want to know the price.


----------



## thesimo (Aug 15, 2008)

lol, useful post!

If its any help 






is about 2500 euros


----------



## blackout (Aug 15, 2008)

One day, i WILL own a ran, wanted one ever since I heard about them/saw them being used by Vogg (decapitated), every instrument they come out with looks incredible, perfect amount of metal image vs class/style. I just hope their waiting time is still under a year when I get round to saving for one.


----------



## kmanick (Aug 15, 2008)

thesimo said:


> lol, useful post!
> 
> If its any help
> 
> ...


 
I would never publicly post a price quote given to me by a builder.
what is this one a copy of??


----------



## Heeboja (Aug 15, 2008)

What separates RAN from Ed Roman is that RAN doesn't offer other company's design on their website. There are only 2 designs that they offer in their website. Ed Roman is offering other company's design on his website. Besides he resides in USA. Sue him first?

Again keep in mind that those are customers wishes. Yes they have a chance to say no but who would say no to money?


----------



## Diogene303 (Aug 15, 2008)

Damn that first JS shape RAN looks damn fine with that paint job , if you don't mind me asking how much was it ?.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 15, 2008)

haffner1 said:


> To compare Ran to Ed is like comparing a high profile touring act to a 2 bit (vegas?) lounge singer. They both may cover other people's work, but one will do it to a significantly higher standard. Besides, Ran is not really claiming these designs as their own like Ed tends to do.



So it's cool to rip off other designs so long as you do it better than the guy everyone hates. Got it. Other than the total bullshit about the BC Rich widow model, i just read at least 5 different entries on his site giving credit to the original manufacturers. Strangely Ed also doesn't completely copy manufacturers logos...like Ran does on their Dean copies. 



> They only claim to offer a high quality product to exacting customer specifications, and from what I hear, they do a good job at it. Besides, I find it hard to believe that Ran is really taking much business away from custom shops like jackson or BC Rich any more than Agile does (even though they build by hand to a higher standard).



If I start a guitar company, make identical copies of Ran's OWN guitars (the two I could see) and stick my name on the headstock, that's cool then right? Actually, I got a better idea. I'll wait for Sebastien from Rotor or Blackmachine to release another guitar and I'll copy it, put pictures of it on the website and build identical copies right down to Blackmachine's signature headstock, to anyone who asks. Lets say I sell 10 of them. It's all good because they're not losing business though and because I never said the design was mine and the picture is just in my gallery, all is good. Right? Wrong.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 15, 2008)

The difference is that ran is telling his customers that it is a copy, while ed while tell you that it is a real gibson custom and sell you a cheap guitar for 15 times it's worth.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 15, 2008)

Desecrated said:


> The difference is that ran is telling his customers that it is a copy, while ed while tell you that it is a real gibson custom and sell you a cheap guitar for 15 times it's worth.



I'm referring to the Scorpions, Alien, Yankee rose etc and the ones that have "Roman" on the headstock.

Ed's a piece of shit and I know he makes copies and sticks the actual manufacturer logo on the headstock. We're not talking about that.


----------



## Heeboja (Aug 15, 2008)

But Is RAN saying that those are RAN designs? No. Is RAN flaming other companies? No. Is RAN photoshopping other guitar companies pictures? No.Is RAN building guitars that THE CUSTOMER wants? Yes. And those are from the guitar companies. There are NOT shown as the bodyshapes what they can build. Well yes but not as directly as Ed Roman. To me they don't even stand in the same league.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 15, 2008)

Heeboja said:


> But Is RAN saying that those are RAN designs? No. Is RAN flaming other companies? No. Is RAN photoshopping other guitar companies pictures? No.Is RAN building guitars that THE CUSTOMER wants? Yes. And those are from the guitar companies. There are NOT shown as the bodyshapes what they can build. Well yes but not as directly as Ed Roman. To me they don't even stand in the same league.



Again, Ed has indicated in NUMEROUS places that the RG (scorpion), Alien (JS) and others are NOT his designs. I said this before. Just because Ran doesn't have the same shitty ethics that Ed does doesn't make what they do right. They've got ALL of the pics of the cloned guitars in their gallery. That kinda implies they can build them. 

So answer me this - If I have a customer call me up and ask me to clone a Blackmachine right down to the metal plate (but with my company name on it), headstock etc... what should I do? Lets say I dont' have a single picture of it on my website. Do I rip off Blackmachine or is this totally cool? Don't beat around the bush - just answer that.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 15, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> Again, Ed has indicated in NUMEROUS places that the RG (scorpion), Alien (JS) and others are NOT his designs. I said this before. Just because Ran doesn't have the same shitty ethics that Ed does doesn't make what they do right. They've got ALL of the pics of the cloned guitars in their gallery. That kinda implies they can build them.
> 
> So answer me this - If I have a customer call me up and ask me to clone a Blackmachine right down to the metal plate (but with my company name on it), headstock etc... what should I do? Lets say I dont' have a single picture of it on my website. Do I rip off Blackmachine or is this totally cool? Don't beat around the bush - just answer that.



If you want to you can do that, it's really up to you, do you need the money or can you afford not to build it. what if that's the only thing clients want, should you build a couple or go out of business. the situation changes for everyone.

But I don't understand why you have to come off so aggressive about this ?


----------



## Heeboja (Aug 15, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> Again, Ed has indicated in NUMEROUS places that the RG (scorpion), Alien (JS) and others are NOT his designs. I said this before. Just because Ran doesn't have the same shitty ethics that Ed does doesn't make what they do right. They've got ALL of the pics of the cloned guitars in their gallery. That kinda implies they can build them.
> 
> So answer me this - If I have a customer call me up and ask me to clone a Blackmachine right down to the metal plate (but with my company name on it), headstock etc... what should I do? Lets say I dont' have a single picture of it on my website. Do I rip off Blackmachine or is this totally cool? Don't beat around the bush - just answer that.



I guess you have a point there. Yeah it would be ripping off Blackmachine. But humanity is so selfish that I wouldn't care. Most wouldn't care. Except for Blackmachine. It's just about the money. 

I don't see Ed saying that those shapes are not his. 

Direct quote:
"*Ed Roman Also Specializes In Hard To Find High Quality USA Made Instruments.
Ed Roman has Hundreds of Models, Shapes & Brand Names.
 Not Available Anywhere Else" 
*And that is from his webpage
*
*


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 15, 2008)

Desecrated said:


> If you want to you can do that, it's really up to you, do you need the money or can you afford not to build it. what if that's the only thing clients want, should you build a couple or go out of business. the situation changes for everyone.
> 
> But I don't understand why you have to come off so aggressive about this ?



I really don't like seeing double standards in an industry that I'm getting into more and more. I don't like seeing excuses made for one company and then other companies attacked for doing the same thing. If someone actually copied Elysian's shape or mine (which i doubt would happen), I'd be thru the roof pissed off.

Heeboja - there's several spots on there where Ed raises people's eyebrows, but there are also tons of statements like this one below, which was under a picture of a Jem. Please don't get me wrong, Ed is scum.

"This Guitar Rebuilt for Lindsey Mitchell
He broke the neck on his Ibanez JEM and we made him an even cooler one !!!!
This Guitar can also be built from scratch: Check out the Roman Scorpion."


----------



## Drew (Aug 15, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> Yes. They really should. I'm wondering how much support this company would get if someone actually managed to take them to court over infringing on designs.
> 
> The headstock on the JS looks identical to an Ibanez. I realize that some people are rolling their eyes at the headstock issue, but if you made something, put your signature on it (kinda like Ran ripping off Bernie Rico Jr in a few shots I saw) and then some guys overseas who are basically out of reach of your legal team copy the design exactly and stick their name on it, how would you react?
> 
> ...



Agreed 100%, Ran leaves a bad taste in my mouth. 



nikt said:


> but You can't sue Ran for copying others designs so this is worthless talk



That's not because there isn't cause to sue them, however - what they're doing is copyright infringement, plain and simple. There just happens to currently be no good way to prosecute them.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 15, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> I really don't like seeing double standards in an industry that I'm getting into more and more. I don't like seeing excuses made for one company and then other companies attacked for doing the same thing. If someone actually copied Elysian's shape or mine (which i doubt would happen), I'd be thru the roof pissed off.



I don't think it is double standards because it's so different. even if roman would design something original and sell it, he would still sell it full off mistakes and then never make up for it. 

Okay so ran is doing the outlines of another guitar but the specs differ from guitar to guitar, most of them wants a bc rich but with other specs then they offer, so ran is not hurting bc rich, and they aren't hurting their customers. 

Roman on the other hand is hurting his customers by selling bad products. 

I really don't think that ran is doing such a bad think, there are customers that wants this and he is providing a service. even if it looks the same as some other guitar, So what, almost all guitar looks like something else anyway.


----------



## march (Aug 15, 2008)

I dont understand why all the hate suddenly, even comparing them to ed roman which is a low as you can get. Whoever started with the ed roman thing anyway ?

As for exact copies, please, head out to jemsite ... that one chris in the US making RG and Jem replacement bodies, or headstocks ... ET Guitars in australia, some others in the UK I forgot the name of. Carbon paper copies, so what's all the big fuss about ?

Hell, you could even buy a EBMM Axis/EVH copy in JAPAN, years ago, and Ernie Ball knew about it. Tokai makes the most accurate Gibsons copies, Japan also. ESP pulls out their, what's it called again, Explorer series, or Edwards which are -again- Gibsons, nothing more, nothing less.

Quit the bashing and sueing/prosecution talk and stuff, it's really going nowhere. 

Man, the guy is gifted, he does great work and it comes down to this ?


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 15, 2008)

Drew said:


> That's not because there isn't cause to sue them, however - what they're doing is copyright infringement, plain and simple. There just happens to currently be no good way to prosecute them.



Yeah... RAN wouldn't last long in the USA ... but as long as they are where they are  nothing is going to change


----------



## Drew (Aug 15, 2008)

Desecrated said:


> Roman on the other hand is hurting his customers by selling bad products.



Actually, what I've heard is the quality of his guitars is generally fairly good - he has guys ghost build for him, and they're good at what they do. 

It's just that his work is never what it claims to be - see for instance the guy who paid $2500 for a limited-run BC Rich Death tribute, and got a custom done in Ed's shop built to the same specs and with a BC Rich logo, but not the limited edition model.


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 15, 2008)

So that wasn't a original BC Rich ?? damn... too bad


----------



## Drew (Aug 15, 2008)

No firm resolution, but based on the fact that when someone from BC Rich was notified through their message board they went all thge way up to the head of the parent company, then yes, I'm betting it was fake. 

Again, it plays just fine. It's just not a limited edition BC Rich custom shop guitar. 

I think comparing Ran to ER is a LITTLE strong, as Ran doesn't seem to be out to fuck people and at least puts his own logo on the headstock. But all the same, he's making copies of other people's products, which is a sort of dicey market to be in.


----------



## UGH (Aug 15, 2008)

Last time I was checking out Hexer's Ran it *flexed* at me. And then winked. I almost blacked out.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 15, 2008)

Drew said:


> Actually, what I've heard is the quality of his guitars is generally fairly good - he has guys ghost build for him, and they're good at what they do.
> 
> It's just that his work is never what it claims to be - see for instance the guy who paid $2500 for a limited-run BC Rich Death tribute, and got a custom done in Ed's shop built to the same specs and with a BC Rich logo, but not the limited edition model.



I remember posting a video in the roman thread about a guitar that was horrible made, and that was apparently not the only one. 

And also, If I'd pay 2500 dollar for something that is just a copy, (without knowing it) I think I would be pretty hurt.


----------



## bulletbass man (Aug 15, 2008)

I think ran has taken the copies a little far with the exact headstock shapes.

But If a guy came to you and said I would like a JS body but a 7 string. Would you say uh wait till ibanez releases one or are you going to say yeah I could do that for you?

I mean copying the headstock is a dick move in my opinion. But if they just changed the headstock it wouldn't be too bad.

I mean ran is making copies people want for prices people can afford. Few can spend 5K on a Jackson Custom shop guitar which isn't going to have any better quality than a Ran will.

Comparing Ran to Ed Roman is going way overboard. Sure I feel ran has gone a step too far with the copying of headstocks and such. But it's quite simple. It's want the customer wants. If you don't want a luthier build of a production guitar (I don't I much rather have a luthier build of a luthier guitar) then Ran is the company to do it. Ed Roman took credit For Karl Sanders KXK. Ran isn't doing that.

Yeah I think that Ran should just put a "ran" headstock on thier custom models. But maybe they don't just because they know they can't get sued for it. And perhaps one of those customers (or maybe all of them) wanted that headstock shape.

In the end I don't see myself buying a ran. If you don't approve don't buy a ran. It's that simple honestly. If you want a Ran made JS 7 string but you don't want a hundred percent copy ask them to change the headstock. Give them your own designed headstock. They build custom guitars at an affordable price. That's what they are going to continue to do.

There will always be gibson copies. They charge over two grand for a production line guitar. You can get a luthier build for that much. Edwards and such are building guitars (damn near the quality since Gibson has damn near zero quality control anymore) so they can be affordable. Gibson prices go up even further outside of America. (Last time I was in the UK they were 1700 pounds new)

So in the end don't buy a copy from a different company if you don't want one. But if you do ran is a nice option to have do it.



Drew said:


> Actually, what I've heard is the quality of his guitars is generally fairly good - he has guys ghost build for him, and they're good at what they do.
> 
> It's just that his work is never what it claims to be - see for instance the guy who paid $2500 for a limited-run BC Rich Death tribute, and got a custom done in Ed's shop built to the same specs and with a BC Rich logo, but not the limited edition model.


 
Yeah but He sold it to him as that BC RICH Limited Edition model. Not as something made by my guys to look like it.


----------



## blackout (Aug 15, 2008)

I don't really see the problem with RANs copies. I believe their main inspirations for their customs come from ESP, Jackson and Ibanez, and I genuinely believe that someone buying a copy of a Jackson or ESP copy would know they're not getting the same thing. The huge price difference between RAN and ESP/Jackson custom shops indicates that a lot of people who just couldn't justify shelling out the amount for one of the orginals may have a better chance at getting what they really want, and vice versa. The people who CAN afford 'the best' would likely go for the ESP/Jackson even just for the reassurance that its coming from one of the leading guitar manufacturers in the world.

And Ibanez...VERY few people will ever be lucky enough to lay their hands on an Ibanez that they've spec'd out themselves. Hell, its hard enough to even find em with decent pickups! I just think RANs a really decent alternative, but I don't think they're trying to be a replacement/ripoff, as I don't think I've seen many custom RANs spec'd as an exact copy of another guitar.


----------



## tonyhell (Aug 16, 2008)

jkhb


----------



## Mattmc74 (Aug 16, 2008)

I think that they all look awesome, but I think Ran will be sued sooner or later for making copies.


----------



## Scali (Aug 16, 2008)

Heeboja said:


> Yup. I'm not fan of round bodyshapes. But I find that JS one sexy. So there are 2 good quality customsshops in poland i see.
> 
> Oh and btw: There's no wrong using a different company's desing on a custom. Since the specs are decided by the customer (in most cases)
> 
> This is awesome too:


 
That's a copy of my Yamaha RGX body shape and inlays 







Desecrated said:


> The only problem I have with the wolf is that if you search for wolf on picturesearch that is one of the first one to appear. it would have made more sense to actual get something original.


 
Looking at the guitars they make, I don't think doing something original is what they aspire to 



User01 said:


> correction: It's like a 7-string, *24 fret* version of the JS series.
> i love that finish! very funky!


 
Looking at the neck-joint, it's a 7-string, 24 fret, *neck-through* version of the JS series.


----------



## kmanick (Aug 16, 2008)

That Yamaha RGX body shape and headstock work great as a 7.
that's one of my favorites on their site.


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 16, 2008)

Nice guitars indeed, the JS is pure sex.

And to all that copyright infringement/lawsuit stuff, I don't agree. 

Ask Ibanez to build you a custom if you're not an endorser. 
Ask Jackson CS to build you a custom 7 that isn't holy fucking shit expensive.
Ask a major company's custom shop to do any variations on body shape, put a different headstock etc... chances are they won't do it, or not to a large extent.
Ask any major company do to a fanned fret/8 string design, I dare you. 

Small custom shops exist for those needs, and I don't consider RAN is really ripping off Ibanez or Jackson or BC Rich. 
Oh yeah, sure, they're really killing the sales for Ibanez's 7 string 24 fret neck-thru JS shaped models... 

So just drop it.


----------



## Zak1233 (Aug 16, 2008)

oh my god :0 they are too sexy


----------



## Vision (Aug 16, 2008)

I just put in for an all spalted maple 27" Rhodes V.


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 16, 2008)

anyone know if they would make an 8 string now? I think that would be awesome *MAYBE* a 8 string ML or Razorback would be cool to have.


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 16, 2008)

twiztedchild said:


> anyone know if they would make an 8 string now? I think that would be awesome *MAYBE* a 8 string ML or Razorback would be cool to have.



Shoot them an e-mail, I think that I read somewhere that they could do it. It certainly is not much different in terms of building, you just have different hardware and a wider neck. 

A Razorback 8 string would really be interesting.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 16, 2008)

Am i the only one that thinks their website is pretty well done?


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 16, 2008)

Yeah, it's pretty good. And they also take very nice photos.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 16, 2008)

Yea they're photos look really well done eh? Does anybody on SS have a ran?


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 16, 2008)

Stealthtastic said:


> Yea they're photos look really well done eh? Does anybody on SS have a ran?



I believe there were some...


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 16, 2008)

Yeah i just ran a search for ran and couldnt find anything, oh well.


----------



## The Hoff (Aug 16, 2008)

That last one is a total Beauty


----------



## Jzbass25 (Aug 16, 2008)

the headstock does seem to copy ibz but I couldn't care less since I love the headstock, the top 7 is really nice cause its like a JS but with 24 frets and another string!! hah


----------



## bulletbass man (Aug 16, 2008)

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/guitar-month/47412-gotm-february-2008-hexer-s-custom-ran-v.html

A ran was february's gotm.

On the subject of custom shop 7 strings from major manufacturers. The one time I got a quote from PRS they replied 11,000

So if you got 11,000 go get a custom shop PRS. And someone on this forum will look at your guitar and go hey I like this call up ran and get it for less than half price.


----------



## UGH (Aug 16, 2008)

Stealthtastic said:


> Yea they're photos look really well done eh? Does anybody on SS have a ran?


 
Hexer and Philkilla both have sick Ran guitars.


----------



## thesimo (Aug 17, 2008)

About the 8 string Ran thing, ive had my face glued to the Ran gallery for about 6 months now, havent spotted an 8 yet, or heard of one.

But all thats different on an 8 is just a wider neck, higher radius and another machine head/bridge saddle right?


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 17, 2008)

thesimo said:


> About the 8 string Ran thing, ive had my face glued to the Ran gallery for about 6 months now, havent spotted an 8 yet, or heard of one.
> 
> But all thats different on an 8 is just a wider neck, higher radius and another machine head/bridge saddle right?



pretty much and then also you got to find the right size pick ups and also the bridge. But the Nut i think wouldnt be to hard to make (As long as it is not a locking nut) I emailed them yesterday and I am waiting a reply as to what they feel about building an 8 string guitar


----------



## cyril v (Aug 17, 2008)

satriani would shit hisself if he had a guitar that nice. don't like the finish much, but everything else looks amazing.


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 17, 2008)

Ok I just got the Email back from them saying that if I wanted them to build this:



> the Dean Razorback Body and headstock
> 27" scale neck
> 24 frets
> either the two EMG 808s if you can get them if not then a passive 8
> ...


.

then it would cost 2060 Euros, which I gues would be about 3,038.04 USD which is about what I thought they would say  thesimo if you have the cash mail them your specs


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Aug 17, 2008)

Whoa! LEDs and a custom inlay that is made just for me! (Howling Wolf.)

That is badass!


----------



## Elysian (Aug 18, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> I really don't like seeing double standards in an industry that I'm getting into more and more. I don't like seeing excuses made for one company and then other companies attacked for doing the same thing. If someone actually copied Elysian's shape or mine (which i doubt would happen), I'd be thru the roof pissed off.
> 
> Heeboja - there's several spots on there where Ed raises people's eyebrows, but there are also tons of statements like this one below, which was under a picture of a Jem. Please don't get me wrong, Ed is scum.
> 
> ...


yeah, i'd be pretty pissed if someone copied my designs, or anyones designs who i've seen on this site or project guitar. sometimes though, there are designs that are close, but not intentional copies, and thats understandable. i don't like what Ran does, but i have to admit, the quality seems amazing, from all the pictures i've seen. i just wish they put all that effort into their own designs.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 18, 2008)

That Proline V looking one owns face!


----------



## thesimo (Aug 18, 2008)

twiztedchild said:


> it would cost 2060 Euros, which I gues would be about 3,038.04 USD which is about what I thought they would say  thesimo if you have the cash mail them your specs



I did (in march - a 7 string, i think an 8 is so low it would give me bowel problems), still gotta wait until march 2009 until i get it though


----------



## Scali (Aug 18, 2008)

Hum... this makes me wonder...
Perhaps these are the guys that can build a Les Paul with LoPro Edge or ZR trem for me?
But then I'd have to decide on whether I want a 6 or 7... or both 

As for the copying... I'm not sure why, but I see custom-built 'one-off' copies of guitar differently from mass-producing a copy. And what's worse than mass-producing a copy is putting on the actual badge of the original and passing it off as the real thing.

I mean, my local luthier builds a variety of common guitar shapes, like the Stratocaster, Les Paul or EVH MusicMan, right down to the shape of the headstock. But these are built as one-offs to the customer's specs.
Somehow I never considered that as 'wrong'. Perhaps because he's building something that the customer wants, but the original manufacturer won't offer (or might offer through the custom shop, but with a big waiting list and a hefty price tag). I suppose it's also cheaper and easier to use common shapes. You don't have to reprogram your routers, and you don't have to make prototypes and things, because you already know how the guitar will turn out. And customers probably prefer a familiar shape in general.
To me it seems that Ran is doing the same.
In fact, if you look at the gallery on the Jackson website, you'll see that their custom shop also does one-off copies of other guitars. Guitars that Jackson doesn't have a license for, and doesn't mass-produce.

A company like Richwood is a bit different... They just do full-on mass-produced copies of Les Pauls and Strats and such. Not entirely fair. But still, they offer these guitars at much lower prices, so they are now available to people who would otherwise never be able to play such a guitar. So they may be ripping off the guitar company, but at least they're not ripping off the customers.

But the thing I really have a problem with, is the forgeries. Cheap guitars, such as the Richwood, but with an actual Gibson, Fender, Ibanez or such logo on them, sold as the real thing (like the notorious 'Chibanez' guitars often found on Ebay). And if that is what Ed Roman does, then apparently he's two levels below what Ran does in my book.


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 18, 2008)

thesimo said:


> I did (in march - a 7 string, i think an 8 is so low it would give me bowel problems), still gotta wait until march 2009 until i get it though



you could always tune the 8 string (if you got one) to BEADGBea from low to high. I want to get one of these I will someday hopefuly


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 18, 2008)

I just want to quote one fellow here!
I asked DPM once about a custom for me
he was 
"Sorry ,but I just do guitars "MY WAY"..."
I just wanted to compare the attitude!

Ofcourse they can copy body shapes etc. I will get a 8 string modified Kelly too.
But they are not doing "some copies" and some original stuff.
They plain ripp-off and let you choose one of the popular stuff!
And copying the Dean Logo with a RAN in it is ridiculous. No respect for other luthiers ,designers etc...
If it's the right way to make money ,than just let people copy the popular cars ,buy some Asian-ripp-off Nikes ,buy everthing copied.

I don't know how many hours did Bernie Jr. worked on his designs ,Or Shannon from Jackson ,Or DPM for Oni.....


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 18, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> If it's the right way to make money ,than just let people copy the popular cars ,buy some Asian-ripp-off Nikes ,buy everthing copied.





I think ALL the cars are copied from other cars anyway so that wouldnt really work the way you saying. FOrd owns Mazda and like 10 other companys same with Genaral Moters, so I see you point but it doesnt really work  and I know I may get Neg rep'ed for even writing this but what ever. 

Guitar Wise Fender = Charvel same body same necks same head stocks and yes I know they own Charvel now but back in the day I dont think they did. 

/End Rant


----------



## Heeboja (Aug 18, 2008)

Scali said:


> Hum... this makes me wonder...
> Perhaps these are the guys that can build a Les Paul with LoPro Edge or ZR trem for me?
> But then I'd have to decide on whether I want a 6 or 7... or both
> 
> ...



That is exactly what I feel. I know copying others suck but as long as it's not massproduced and full scale I can accept it. Forgeries are just a big bunch of shit. But let's concentrate on the main thing. Just looking at those amazing guitars and drooling Mkay?


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

twiztedchild said:


> Guitar Wise Fender = Charvel same body same necks same head stocks and yes I know they own Charvel now but back in the day I dont think they did.



Back in the day Fender did not own Charvel. They sued Charvel for stealing their designs, and won. Charvel was forced to change their designs. It's only been in the last couple of years (since Fender purchased JCMI) that you could get a strathead Charvel again.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

ogisha007 said:


> Nice guitars indeed, the JS is pure sex.
> 
> And to all that copyright infringement/lawsuit stuff, I don't agree.
> 
> ...



So basically you're saying because "I am not an endorser", or "It's too expensive" or "they won't do it", it's ok to steal the companies design? The hours upon hours they spent designing that guitar have no value? That is bullshit.

As soon as you ask a major company to vary the headstock or body design, you're in the clear completely, it's no longer a protected design.

As for ripping off Ibanez or Jackon on BC Rich. They are exact copies, they are rip offs. Period. The amount of sales they may or may not be taking from those companies doesn't change that fact.

You aren't providing any legitimate reasons why the copies should be allowed. Your argument comes down to "if someone wants something, at a price they want, it's fine." Bullshit.


----------



## DDDorian (Aug 19, 2008)

The way I see it is that Ran don't market themselves specifically on their ability to copy other designs but more generally on their ability to build whatever the customer asks for; the fact that 99% of their guitars are blatant copies of existing guitars says more about the tastes of the customers than anything else. 

As for these guitars in articular, the JS clone is definitely the best Ran I've ever seen. Probably the only one worth the insane price.


----------



## Drew (Aug 19, 2008)

Yeah, this is intellectual property theft, plain and simple. They're taking someone else's design work, slapping their own logo on the headstock, and building an exact copy with a few specs changed here and there to the customer request.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 19, 2008)

Matt Crooks said:


> So basically you're saying because "I am not an endorser", or "It's too expensive" or "they won't do it", it's ok to steal the companies design? The hours upon hours they spent designing that guitar have no value? That is bullshit.



It doesn't have any value to me, why should I care? 
And why should you care, if you dont happen to own the company itself, because then I can understand if you get upset, but if youre like me, just another player, I really donät understand why its worth getting so upset about?

And also yes, if I want a hellraiser with a quilted bubinga top, a kahler and Im willing to pay for it, I dont see what the problem is. 
Schecter isnt providing such a guitar and I really dont feel like getting a custom shape.
I dont even know how to draw, how should I even create a custom shape?
I just want the body shape and neck that Im used to, but with a different top for a different sound and a kahler instead of a tom bridge. 
Why should I have to adjust myself to a new custom shape? if the only thing Im after is a new top and a new bridge. 

Now, some of you might say, why not just buy the guitar; install a new top and kahler. 
Well in many cases that will cost as much as getting a custom, and there is a chance that the guitar will be better if its handmade from the ground up then just a heavily modified Korean shop guitar. 



> As soon as you ask a major company to vary the headstock or body design, you're in the clear completely, it's no longer a protected design.
> 
> As for ripping off Ibanez or Jackon on BC Rich. They are exact copies, they are rip offs. Period. The amount of sales they may or may not be taking from those companies doesn't change that fact.



They are not exact copies, because the specs are different, the only thing that is the same is the outline of the guitar. 
If I made a car that looked like a Volvo but equipped it with racing suspension, brakes and engine, you can't really say that it is an exact copy, it's just that they look the same, but last time I checked, you owned a car to drive with and not to look at. And the same goes for a guitar, the purpose of a guitar is to play on, and if you want to build a custom and just want your favourite body shape but with some more radical specs, I really don't see what the problem is. 




> You aren't providing any legitimate reasons why the copies should be allowed. Your argument comes down to "if someone wants something, at a price they want, it's fine." Bullshit.



I think that is a pretty good argument, if there is a need for something I don't see what's so bad about providing it, as long as it doesn't hurt anybody.
Now you dont have to agree with me and youre entitled to your own opinion, but calling it bullshit is just rude and not called for. 




Drew said:


> Yeah, this is intellectual property theft, plain and simple. They're taking someone else's design work, slapping their own logo on the headstock, and building an exact copy with a few specs changed here and there to the customer request.



In todays society intellectual property theft is so integrated that I really don't think most of us care any more. I'm not saying that it's not wrong, or that you shouldn't care, just that most people don't really mind.


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 19, 2008)

I agree with Desecrated. 

The point is, they're not really hurting the major manufacturers. Some of the stuff they provide are indeed ripoffs, but they also provide guitars that aren't one on one copies, either with a different body shape, different specs, headstock, whatever... 
I'd like you to come up with a design that doesn't look like somebody else's.

I don't really get it, if for an example Ibanez doesn't make an Xiphos bass or a 7 string JS, are you supposed to just wait for(n)ever for them to make them, or are you gonna go to a luthier and have it made, and have a guitar that suits you 100%? They don't make millions of these on an assembly line, they are made by request, for individuals who have ordered them.

Plus, another point to consider is shipping and taxes. For me, it would be tons cheaper to get a custom from Poland than to get it shipped all the way from the USA, where most guitar manufacturers are located.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

Desecrated said:


> It doesn't have any value to me, why should I care?
> And why should you care, if you dont happen to own the company itself, because then I can understand if you get upset, but if youre like me, just another player, I really don't understand why its worth getting so upset about?



So as long as someone breaking a law doesn't effect me personally I shouldn't care about the law being broken?


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

ogisha007 said:


> I agree with Desecrated.
> 
> The point is, they're not really hurting the major manufacturers. Some of the stuff they provide are indeed ripoffs, but they also provide guitars that aren't one on one copies, either with a different body shape, different specs, headstock, whatever...
> I'd like you to come up with a design that doesn't look like somebody else's.
> ...



All just justifications for intellectual property theft.


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 19, 2008)

Matt Crooks said:


> So as long as someone breaking a law doesn't effect me personally I shouldn't care about the law being broken?



Pretty much yeah, especially if nobody gets hurt.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

Desecrated said:


> Pretty much yeah, especially if nobody gets hurt.



Wow.


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 19, 2008)

Matt Crooks said:


> All just justifications for intellectual property theft.



I don't see Jackson and Ibanez getting all upset about RAN, so I don't see why should you.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

ogisha007 said:


> I don't see Jackson and Ibanez getting all upset about RAN, so I don't see why should you.



It's not that they're not upset, it that there's nothing they can do about it. If Ran operated in the US, they'd be out of business.

...and I don't really care about Ran one way or another, the cavalier attitude towards intellectual property just makes me sad, that's all.


----------



## Elysian (Aug 19, 2008)

ogisha007 said:


> I agree with Desecrated.
> 
> The point is, they're not really hurting the major manufacturers. Some of the stuff they provide are indeed ripoffs, but they also provide guitars that aren't one on one copies, either with a different body shape, different specs, headstock, whatever...
> I'd like you to come up with a design that doesn't look like somebody else's.
> ...



I've come up with designs that don't look like anyone elses, and if be through the roof pissed if ran or anyone else felt like they had the right to use them. You might not take issue with it, but this is an issue that could personally effect fellow forum members.


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 19, 2008)

Matt Crooks said:


> So as long as someone breaking a law doesn't effect me personally I shouldn't care about the law being broken?


Law where ? in the US ?


Matt Crooks said:


> If Ran operated in the US, they'd be out of business.


Yes... but they don't operate there... ...



I know that it isnt the best thing to copy others designs... but hey.. you cant do nothing about it.. and I doubt it will change... at least in the near future ?


----------



## nikt (Aug 19, 2008)

Drew said:


> Yeah, this is intellectual property theft, plain and simple.



sorry Drew but it's not in Poland. US copyrights don't work here unless you will go with your designs to patent office (here). Ran is making copies cause nobody give a damn about registring his own designs in so small coutry like Poland,and you can't blame Ran for that.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

Sebastian said:


> Law where ? in the US ?



That was just a general/hypothetical question, not specific to Ran.



Sebastian said:


> I know that it isnt the best thing to copy others designs... but hey.. you cant do nothing about it.. and I doubt it will change... at least in the near future ?



No it's not going to change. They'll continue to benefit from IP developed by other people.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

nikt said:


> sorry Drew but it's not in Poland. US copyrights don't work here unless you will go with your designs to patent office (here). Ran is making copies cause nobody give a damn about registring his own designs in so small coutry like Poland,and you can't blame Ran for that.



I CAN blame Ran for that. Just because the patents weren't filed in Poland, doesn't make it any more right. It might make it legal, but that's it.


----------



## nikt (Aug 19, 2008)

Matt Crooks said:


> I CAN blame Ran for that.



OK. so that's probably the only thing that you can do about it. as there are now laws right now, that can stop him from doing those copies


----------



## Sebastian (Aug 19, 2008)

I dont see Big companies which just dont care about their property, change anything..

I think they could... but that will not happen.

EDIT: sniped by nikt ..


----------



## zorn (Aug 19, 2008)

Although I do not believe that stealing intellectual property is to be taken lightly we are not talking about advanced rocket science here.

The whole TM thing has gotten far out of hand IMO.

If I am able to copy the Mona Lisa for personal use nobody should feel offended.
If I sell this to a friend because of the time and material involved nobody should feel offended either.
If I start to copy the ML on a larger scale and start to personalize it to my customers needs, again no one should feel offended. The painting has been part of our culture for a very long time and changing its design can even be a new act of art in itself.
If I copy the painting and try to sell it as the original then people should feel offended because I'm trying to cheat and take advantage of them.

I believe that RAN is doing the third. They fullfill certain custom needs the big companies won't offer and they sell it under their brand with all of its consequences. 
If you buy an Ibanez guitar and handle it carefully you might have a good chance of reselling it years later to Ibanez collectors for a good price. I heavilly doubt that we will see dedicated RAN collectors in the future.
Thanks through the nature of the internet intellectual property theft is quickly discovered and not good for business.

If I remember correctly RAN guitars have not a good resale value because of their highly customizable nature and their lack of originality. So people should think twice about getting one if they are unsure if it's a keeper.

It gets a little bit more tragic when small luthiers are involved. Honestly I do not believe that coming up with a simple new headstock design gives them every right to survive. It takes a bit more to stay successfull then being a one trick pony. Especially when small custom luthiers seem to appear on every corner. You need to come up with something that makes your guitars unique and desirable. If you succeed a simple copycat won't hurt your business.


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

nikt said:


> OK. so that's probably the only thing that you can do about it. as there are now laws right now, that can stop him from doing those copies



No, I can also make sure that any Ran I order doesn't infringe on IP owned by another company.

Don't get me wrong, his guitars do look awesome, and I'm sure they're great.


----------



## kmanick (Aug 19, 2008)

GMW used to make incredible Charvel San Dimas copies (I know, I have one , and have owned several). He sold tons of those (and all were excellent guitars)
Fender put out the cease order and he cant do them anymore(but now you can get one from Charvel)
I don't really have a problem with what Ran is doing. 
They are not trying to pass them off as Originals.
Now if I had them make me a 7 string Jackson soloist copy and the Headstock had a Jackson logo on it , I would have a problem with it.
If it has a ran logo I don't. Most likely you're going to get RAN to do something for you that the Original company wouldn't do anyway (case in point ,that 7 string neckthru JS that started this whole thread.). Do you think you can get one of those from Ibanez?(maybe if your last name is Satriani).
I'm even tempted to get a quote on one of those Yamaha lokking 7's, I really like that.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 19, 2008)

I'm almost 100% certain that people saying that there really shouldn't be a problem here don't own their own business. I'm trying to build my own business and it really irks me that Ran is doing what they do - copying other people's ideas. You can say they're only doing what the customer requests, but just because the customer says "I want a 7 string version of Jackson's Kelly" doesn't mean it's right when the guitar shape and headstock is blatantly copied to exact measurements. 



> It gets a little bit more tragic when small luthiers are involved. Honestly I do not believe that coming up with a simple new headstock design gives them every right to survive. It takes a bit more to stay successfull then being a one trick pony. Especially when small custom luthiers seem to appear on every corner. You need to come up with something that makes your guitars unique and desirable. If you succeed a simple copycat won't hurt your business.



I'm not understanding this "right to survive" based on a new headstock design. I think the main thing is that Ran is straight out copying the headstock design, body etc...putting a different headstock design (i dunno...like your own?) does change the look of the guitar and at a distance won't be mistaken for another brand. 


Ran copies guitars down to the last detail, not just the outline. It's legal because they're in Poland and it would be illegal here if they did it. Just because company X is too expensive for you doesn't mean that company Y making a copy of another guitar for you is ethically, legally and morally OK. Ran's got one of those. 

Also - if a simple copycat couldn't hurt small luthiers, I guess it's totally cool for me to copy Blackmachine, Oni, Sherman, Elysian and a host of other "small" luthiers trying to make something of themselves. They shouldn't take offense at all if I do that. Right?







Really? This is OK? REALLY?






If i saw this in my city, I'd seriously think "Holy shit, the guy has a Ken Lawrence!!" Then I'd look at the BACK of the headstock and see the Ran logo.


----------



## Elysian (Aug 19, 2008)

kmanick said:


> GMW used to make incredible Charvel San Dimas copies (I know, I have one , and have owned several). He sold tons of those (and all were excellent guitars)
> Fender put out the cease order and he cant do them anymore(but now you can get one from Charvel)
> I don't really have a problem with what Ran is doing.
> They are not trying to pass them off as Originals.
> ...


why would you have a problem with a headstock decal if you have no problem with a headstock? a headstock is a companies signature as much as that decal, your standards are at odds with themselves.


----------



## kmanick (Aug 19, 2008)

Only because if I see a ran ogo on there I "Know" it's a copy. if there is no logo or if they put the originals logo on there then I don't know what I'm looking at.

My standards aren't at odds with themselves at all. 
My GMW Charvel/Strat clone has a Charvel logo on it. 
(Lee would not send me a GMW logo for it)
If I ever sold it I would remove the logo.
I can see how builders would have more of a problem with this (duh)
but the other thing you need to look at is that Ran is building "Indirect" copies.
I'll use that JS as an example again.
there is no 7 string Ibanez JS that is neck thru with a maple board. The specs are different.
I agree with you guys that they should use their own headstocks but as long as they make thes copies with different specs, and don't use the original logos and try to pass them off as originals I don't have a problem with it.
the other reason I don't have an issue with RAN is because they do "One Offs".
Now if they started putting out lines of these copies, I would think tht is lame and wrong.
If someone wants a one off copy of something with different specs and can't get it from the original builders, then companies like Ran will always be around.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 19, 2008)

I really hardly beleieve how people get mistaken between law ,respect and moral.
The work ,sweat ,brainstorming ,costs for testing ,nerves , and everything else used for designing a perfect instrument ,not just good looking ,but good fitting ,good sounding get's just ripped off.And you say it's "legal".Man who cares if it's legal or not. There are many things wich are legal in some countries but are not appropiate for many of us!
The guys at RAN can do nice guitars ,but all of the guitars are ripp-offs.


----------



## Ruins (Aug 19, 2008)

this argument is like illigal mp3 or pirate windows. FUCK that.
i RANs and there is no problem with making a copy for a customer's request with his aspect to his licking


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 19, 2008)

Ruins said:


> this argument is like illigal mp3 or pirate windows. FUCK that.
> i RANs and there is no problem with making a copy for a customer's request with his aspect to his licking



Glad you think that way.

Can you give me the myspace for your band? I want to copy the music you make and put my name on it. It's all good because I'll use my name. Same thing.


----------



## Ruins (Aug 19, 2008)

go on if it makes you happy to know that you are copying.
but is it already have been stated i find it also great that RAN can build you something to your request.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 19, 2008)

Ruins said:


> go on if it makes you happy to know that you are copying.
> but is it already have been stated i find it also great that RAN can build you something to your request.



I give up.


----------



## zorn (Aug 19, 2008)

canuck brian said:


> I
> Also - if a simple copycat couldn't hurt small luthiers, I guess it's totally cool for me to copy Blackmachine, Oni, Sherman, Elysian and a host of other "small" luthiers trying to make something of themselves. They shouldn't take offense at all if I do that. Right?



No, it is not cool and as you see people will notice it.
You have every right to feel offended by the copycats.

But it is happening every day and you will have to come up with a little more then just a shape or a form. Maybe your guitars have to sound better, you'll have a better customer service, offer more value for the money...whatever.
I have never seen copies of Artinger, Teuffel, Pagelli or GUS guitars so far. I have seen copies of the Parker shape but those guitars do not offer the same features as Parker guitars.
And what about all these respected US luthiers who do nothing then endless Strat, Tele or LP copies ???


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 19, 2008)

zorn said:


> And what about all these respected US luthiers who do nothing then endless Strat, Tele or LP copies ???



Find the ones that copy the headstock exactly. There are a few out there, but the majority don't. They make the subtle changes.


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 19, 2008)

Dude, they are just following a customer's request, the law doesn't apply to them and they obviously don't give a fuck, so I don't see a point arguing over this. 

Honestly, there are far worse things in the guitar world than RAN Guitars. Ed Roman, all those chinese copycats with real Gibson and Fender logos...

...also, when's the last time you saw Ibanez make a 7 string neck-thru 24 fret JS shaped guitar?

On another note, I'd really love to see some of your many original guitar designs. I doubt most of them are vastly different from what's available on the market.



canuck brian said:


> Find the ones that copy the headstock exactly. There are a few out there, but the majority don't. They make the subtle changes.



That's just evading the law, but in the end, they would probably make it the same if they could and if the buyer wanted them to.


----------



## canuck brian (Aug 19, 2008)

ogisha007 said:


> Dude, they are just following a customer's request, the law doesn't apply to them and they obviously don't give a fuck, so I don't see a point arguing over this.
> 
> Honestly, there are far worse things in the guitar world than RAN Guitars. Ed Roman, all those chinese copycats with real Gibson and Fender logos...
> 
> ...



You'd love to see some of my many original guitar designs? Find me ONE (literally, just one) where I even MENTION that I've got more than ONE design. I had drawn mine from scratch and I've never seen another body shape like mine. If it's out there, it would be news to me. Since you obviously know ZERO about me, why are you bothering to take shots at my endeavors into guitar building? You seriously think I'm applying a double standard to myself? I drew up the headstock on my last 7 by hand and someone pointed out that it's basically the SLS headstock, which I hadn't seen. Since that's the case, it's getting changed.

Besides that, if you had read anything I've already posted, you'd understand that changing the headstock would be enough. 

I haven't seen Ibanez make a neck thru 7 24 fret seven string JS guitar, but I guarantee if I saw the one RAN made at a distance, i'd probably say I'd finally seen them making it.

I don't get this varying levels of ripping people off being acceptable in some cases (RAN) and not in others (Ed Roman). I just don't get the "Dude, they are just following a customer's request, the law doesn't apply to them and they obviously don't give a fuck, so I don't see a point arguing over this" thing. 

We are aware that the law doesn't apply as they're in Poland; I believe we're debating the ethics and legalities of it, not whether someone is comfortable getting a guitar from another luthier because they'll do it cheaper than their dream brand.



> That's just evading the law, but in the end, they would probably make it the same if they could and if the buyer wanted them to.



I eagerly await the list of luthiers that would knowingly deviate from their own design to straight copy Gibson. It's not evading the law by the way, it's OBEYING it. They make the changes necessary, no matter how little, to follow the law.


----------



## ogisha007 (Aug 19, 2008)

English is not my native, so I may not have been clear enough. The design thing was a statement to everyone, not just towards you. I'm genuinely curious as to how many truly original guitar designs have been made in the past 10 years or so.

Ripping off guitar shapes isn't just small luthier's business. ESP much? The Eclipse and the Alexi V seem oddly familiar...


Ran never said that those were their designs. Ed Roman claimed some of the stuff he didn't design as his own, is an overall douche and liar, and that's why I consider him unacceptable.


----------



## thesimo (Aug 19, 2008)

I dont see the big deal , if i am an independent customer who is ordering a custom, i should be allowed to have any shape I like, dont i have the right to get the shape i like?

If it so happens to be a similar shape to ESP then thats just tough luck for ESP (i dont mean that in an arrogant way, but it is, its the nature of the beast), they cant take away my right to have a pointy guitar, because when it comes down to it, they are enforcing a shape, and that is a very difficult thing to do... and I dont think Ran should be enforcing what people can and can't have on behalf of ESP/Ibanez/whatever.

99% of Ran's customs are clones because everyone has their fav guitar shape, Chances are if you think of your ultimate guitar you think of ibanez model X + maple top Y etc.

Very few people have the imagination/balls to do a unique design and follow it through with a $4000 bill at the end. Including me.

rant over


----------



## CapenCyber (Aug 19, 2008)

I have a custom on the way from Ran, when it gets here and I post pictures I fully expect to get comments to the effect that it is a rip off and stolen etc.

At the end of the day they would make me exactly what I want to a good quality and a good price, the company that came up with the shape it is based off could not. I bet that if you look closely most of these Ran customs have features that the original custom shop would not do.

Also don't start preaching about morals here because we all know that all of the big companies steal ideas off each other all the time, they only minutely change an angle here or there so they can get away with it.

To compare these Rans to the Ed Roman guitars or the chibanez guitars is just ridiculous, they are not pretending to be something they are not.
It's just a shape that can be drawn in 10 seconds, to compare it to a song or a novel or something is also ridiculous. 

They are making guitars based upon work other people have done without giving them credit but I bet ENGL weren't the first company to make a combo tube amp in the usual configuration and I have one. What matters most is the overall quality and tailoring to the individuals need, Ran is the best for me so I chose it.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 19, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> To compare these Rans to the Ed Roman guitars or the chibanez guitars is just ridiculous, they are not pretending to be something they are not.
> It's just a shape that can be drawn in 10 seconds, to compare it to a song or a novel or something is also ridiculous.


If this is still "a 2 minute body shape copy" ,I can't argue anymore!
If this is "ethical" ,we live in different worlds!
Ethics are ethics people ,you don't break ethics just because customer wants it.Because customers want everything!


----------



## CapenCyber (Aug 19, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> Ethics are ethics people ,you don't break ethics just because customer wants it.Because customers want everything!



I want a product. The company that came up with the original shape won't do exactly what I want. Ran will. If the original company is too inflexible to match the customers request that is their fault.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 19, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> I want a product. The company that came up with the original shape won't do exactly what I want. Ran will. If the original company is too inflexible to match the customers request that is their fault.



Umm.It's like asking Nike to make a shoe with Adidas on it ,3 stripes and adidas sole!Oh but Adidas didn't wanted to make it on cherryburst milkblue!!!And I wanted an Adidas with zoom air!
It doesn't make any sense to me.

Ofcourse they can copy or just reproduce stuff.
But look a their site.Just ripp-offs.You see everywhere ESP ,Jackson,Ibanez ,Dean with a RAN logo on it.
Any Jackson shape have sharkfins on it like the originals...Look at that Dean-ripped headstock Is it neccesarry to copy those "charactheristics"?


----------



## kmanick (Aug 19, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> If this is still "a 2 minute body shape copy" ,I can't argue anymore!
> If this is "ethical" ,we live in different worlds!
> Ethics are ethics people ,you don't break ethics just because customer wants it.Because customers want everything!


 
I have to agree on this one.
At least Change the logo shape. Ran must have their own logo, they should just use that (Like GMW did on their Charvel clones)


----------



## Rick (Aug 19, 2008)

It does seem a little weird that they don't have their own logo.


----------



## CapenCyber (Aug 19, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> Umm.It's like asking Nike to make a shoe with Adidas on it ,3 stripes and adidas sole!Oh but Adidas didn't wanted to make it on cherryburst milkblue!!!And I wanted an Adidas with zoom air!
> It doesn't make any sense to me.



I don't see any problem with that, who's it hurting? Sure it's a bit silly but If you want Nike to build a copy of an adidas shoe then what you want is a Nike made shoe. It would be bad if Nike then stole the shoe from the adidas factory and sold it to you, but they aren't.



daemon barbeque said:


> Ofcourse they can copy or just reproduce stuff.
> But look a their site.Just ripp-offs.You see everywhere ESP ,Jackson,Ibanez ,Dean with a RAN logo on it.
> Any Jackson shape have sharkfins on it like the originals...Look at that Dean-ripped headstock Is it neccesarry to copy those "charactheristics"?



No, they are not "ESP ,Jackson,Ibanez ,Dean with a RAN logo on it", they are Rans with a Ran logo on it. Please show me a guitar made by a company other than Ran on the Ran site. Every guitar was hand carved by them.

I do not want a BCRich, I want a Ran. I never did want a BCRich, so how am I taking anything away from them? It's not like I was going to buy a BCR then Ran came along and made me something identical for the same price, they are making me something better. And different.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 19, 2008)

I didn't mean that they just stamp their name on.What I mean is they practically do the same guitar and make it a RAN.
Look at this picture from 3 meters away from the screen and tell me if you don't see a "DEAN"...
I hope this gives you the idea what I'm talking about!


----------



## mickytee (Aug 19, 2008)

ok enough bickering for the moment, time for a pronbreak:

i love these 7 string RR's


----------



## Rick (Aug 19, 2008)

Gorgeous.


----------



## mickytee (Aug 19, 2008)

Rick said:


> Gorgeous.


+1


----------



## Matt Crooks (Aug 19, 2008)

User01 said:


> ok enough bickering for the moment, time for a pronbreak:
> 
> i love these 7 string RR's



Mine is better


----------



## mickytee (Aug 19, 2008)

i'l be the judge of that 

pics please!


----------



## tonyhell (Aug 19, 2008)

jikn


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 19, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> I didn't mean that they just stamp their name on.What I mean is they practically do the same guitar and make it a RAN.
> Look at this picture from 3 meters away from the screen and tell me if you don't see a "DEAN"...
> I hope this gives you the idea what I'm talking about!





I thought it was dean for a few min


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 20, 2008)

kmanick said:


> I have to agree on this one.
> At least Change the logo shape. Ran must have their own logo, they should just use that (Like GMW did on their Charvel clones)



they did change the logo. It is now Bat wings for the "Dean"ish guitars






See? 
and here is another one.







Oh hey look an Oraginal Design:





Stop Complaining guys


----------



## CapenCyber (Aug 20, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> I didn't mean that they just stamp their name on.What I mean is they practically do the same guitar and make it a RAN.
> Look at this picture from 3 meters away from the screen and tell me if you don't see a "DEAN"...
> I hope this gives you the idea what I'm talking about!



Actually you've illustrated a point brilliantly there, I thought "Washburn" actually. I could post up a picture of an Eclipse and you would instantly think "Les Paul". Everyone rips everyone else off, what matters more than the shape is the construction, sound and playability.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 20, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> Actually you've illustrated a point brilliantly there, I thought "Washburn" actually. I could post up a picture of an Eclipse and you would instantly think "Les Paul". Everyone rips everyone else off, what matters more than the shape is the construction, sound and playability.



Well Eclipse "have to look" like a LP ,since they pay for the license!!!
It was the worst example to choose LOL 
Man You should see it and think "Man what a nice RAN" ,and don't have to get closer to see "Ow that's not a dean at all..WTF is RAN?" You know.


----------



## CapenCyber (Aug 20, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> Well Eclipse "have to look" like a LP ,since they pay for the license!!!
> It was the worst example to choose LOL
> Man You should see it and think "Man what a nice RAN" ,and don't have to get closer to see "Ow that's not a dean at all..WTF is RAN?" You know.



OK, maybe the eclipse was a bad example, but you're a fool if you think every singlecut guitar doesn't owe its existence to the LP or that every strat style doesn't owe the strat shape.

I did think Ran first, but I associate the "stealth" shape more with Washburn than with Dean.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 20, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> OK, maybe the eclipse was a bad example, but you're a fool if you think every singlecut guitar doesn't owe its existence to the LP or that every strat style doesn't owe the strat shape.
> 
> I did think Ran first, but I associate the "stealth" shape more with Washburn than with Dean.



Hahaha.
Man i know your point.
But I am talkin' more about charactheristics ,not shapes.
If Ran would do another headstock on it ,and a clearer Own Logo design whatever ,you wouldn't think that's a Dean or Washburn! That's the whole point.
Instead of being creative and have the balls to be recognised as themselves ,they just ripp-off the whole concept!
Ant the whole gallery is full with ripp-offs...
That's my point.That's all!


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 20, 2008)

daemon barbeque said:


> Hahaha.
> Man i know your point.
> But I am talkin' more about charactheristics ,not shapes.
> If Ran would do another headstock on it ,and a clearer Own Logo design whatever ,you wouldn't think that's a Dean or Washburn! That's the whole point.
> ...



not all of the are "Rip offs"


----------



## Elysian (Aug 20, 2008)

twiztedchild said:


> they did change the logo. It is now Bat wings for the "Dean"ish guitars
> 
> 
> 
> ...



thats not an original design, its the bernie rico jr hellicon...


----------



## Drew (Aug 20, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> Actually you've illustrated a point brilliantly there, I thought "Washburn" actually. I could post up a picture of an Eclipse and you would instantly think "Les Paul". Everyone rips everyone else off, what matters more than the shape is the construction, sound and playability.



It was a Washburn Dime sig you were thinking of, right? Made after when Dime left Dean, and took the body design of his signature guitar with him? 

So, either way, it's a body design associated with Dimebag that Ran is replicating? And that makes it BETTER, somehow? 

Well done, Elysian. 

Question for you Ran fanbois. Look at the guitar below. 






Is there ANY reason that guitar couldn't have been ordered from Bernie Rico? Any spec that he wouldn't have done? The Ibanez JS example makes slightly more sense to me since Ibanez doesn't have a custom shop, but when you're talking about the work of a guy who does,how does that fly?


----------



## Elysian (Aug 20, 2008)

Drew said:


> It was a Washburn Dime sig you were thinking of, right? Made after when Dime left Dean, and took the body design of his signature guitar with him?
> 
> So, either way, it's a body design associated with Dimebag that Ran is replicating? And that makes it BETTER, somehow?
> 
> ...



bernie's price probably would have been extremely comparable too. unless the person buying it lived in poland, i can't see why someone wouldn't go to bernie.


----------



## tonyhell (Aug 20, 2008)

ihb


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Aug 20, 2008)

tonyhell said:


> Well yeah, Bernie Rico guitars are all 25.5 scale. Maybe the customer prefers 24.75.



Bernie Rico is a custom shop, you can get any scale length you ask for.


----------



## CapenCyber (Aug 20, 2008)

Drew said:


> Is there ANY reason that guitar couldn't have been ordered from Bernie Rico? Any spec that he wouldn't have done? The Ibanez JS example makes slightly more sense to me since Ibanez doesn't have a custom shop, but when you're talking about the work of a guy who does,how does that fly?



I dunno, ask the guy that ordered it! Perhaps he thinks Ran make a better product, or he hates Americans or something?

Whatever, he wanted a Ran more than a BR, so that's what they got. If we can assume that he did (want a Ran more than a BR; fair, since the price is comparable) then BR is already out of the picture and has already missed out on the sale, now it doesn't matter what shape it is, he doesn't want a BR.

It's just a damn shape of a piece of wood! Go have a go at Agile first, they actually mass-produce the damn things anyway yet everyone on here seems to masturbate to them and they're all "rip-offs" (apart from the horrendously ugly original designs).


----------



## Drew (Aug 20, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> Whatever, he wanted a Ran more than a BR, so that's what they got. If we can assume that he did (want a Ran more than a BR; fair, since the price is comparable) then BR is already out of the picture and has already missed out on the sale, now it doesn't matter what shape it is, he doesn't want a BR.



"Comparable" isn't "identical." I suspect he saved a couple hundred going with Ran. 

And, clearly, he wanted a Rico, since that guitar is a Rico design to a T, just under someone else's logo.


----------



## twiztedchild (Aug 20, 2008)

Elysian said:


> thats not an original design, its the bernie rico jr hellicon...



well hell. My Bad


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Aug 21, 2008)

CapenCyber said:


> I dunno, ask the guy that ordered it! Perhaps he thinks Ran make a better product, or he hates Americans or something?
> 
> Whatever, he wanted a Ran more than a BR, so that's what they got. If we can assume that he did (want a Ran more than a BR; fair, since the price is comparable) then BR is already out of the picture and has already missed out on the sale, now it doesn't matter what shape it is, he doesn't want a BR.
> 
> It's just a damn shape of a piece of wood! Go have a go at Agile first, they actually mass-produce the damn things anyway yet everyone on here seems to masturbate to them and they're all "rip-offs" (apart from the horrendously ugly original designs).



Atleast Agile tweak and make their models different. There is No Agile model that is identical to any other guitar. They are their own designs and spin offs. Those "shapes of pieces of wood" are all Copy written Which means without permission, contract, or royalties, No one but Bernie Rico guitars can produce that shape. I find it amazing they have yet to get a law suit when they ship to the USA. They make nice CNC guitars, and their prices Used to be good. Now they're up there with everyone else, accept instead of doing what guitar companies should do and Design guitars, they're just ripping them off. Look at it this way, if You run a guitar company that did Only handmade custom guitars, a smaller company like BR or MCS(who they also ripped off) you designed All of your models, and just about build everything yourself. What would you think about some company stealing YOUR design you worked so hard to design and build? Beautiful guitars. Really. Nice to look at, but the truth is they are no better than Ed Roman.


----------



## tonyhell (Aug 21, 2008)

gbhk


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Aug 21, 2008)

tonyhell said:


> Then I don't know why it says this on the specs/options page:
> 
> "All guitars are made with a 25 1/2" scale and all basses are made with a 34" scale."



That, I don't know about....but I am almost positive if you asked for a different scale length on a custom, Bernie wouldn't argue.


----------



## Ruins (Aug 21, 2008)

7deadlysins666 said:


> Atleast Agile tweak and make their models different. There is No Agile model that is identical to any other guitar. They are their own designs and spin offs. Those "shapes of pieces of wood" are all Copy written Which means without permission, contract, or royalties, No one but Bernie Rico guitars can produce that shape. I find it amazing they have yet to get a law suit when they ship to the USA. They make nice CNC guitars, and their prices Used to be good. Now they're up there with everyone else, accept instead of doing what guitar companies should do and Design guitars, they're just ripping them off. Look at it this way, if You run a guitar company that did Only handmade custom guitars, a smaller company like BR or MCS(who they also ripped off) you designed All of your models, and just about build everything yourself. What would you think about some company stealing YOUR design you worked so hard to design and build? Beautiful guitars. Really. Nice to look at, but the truth is they are no better than Ed Roman.


as customer i want high quality guitar to my licking sound and comfort wise and fucking CHEAP!!! I don't give a damn what logo will be on my headstock .
as business man it would piss me off that my work got stolen with no credit for it. but hey this is business they have found nice way to make their own buck.


----------



## crayzee (Aug 21, 2008)

I think the whole discussion here is a bit pointless. You go to a custom shop to get exactly what you want. If, FFS, this is a direct ripoff of a well-known shape, e.g. the Ken Lawrence Explorer, so be it. It's a custom shop, and what should they care if their customers are, let's say boring?
This post mustn't be understood as an offense to all the luthiers on the forum, but remember the 80s, when ESP built direct ripoffs of Explorers (the white Hetfield model, to stay in the picture)? They had different control layouts and different PUs, shape and especially headstocks were the same.
Again, I think you get a custom guitar because it's exactly what you want, so why should the custom shop bother about shapes and whatnots? YES, they're blatantly copying, YES they're showing off with it, BUT if they deliver a well-built instrument for a fraction of the price of the original, why shouldn't you go and get it? I got my Hellraiser also because she's offered most bang for the buck, at least for my needs and tastes right now.
Just my two cents.
Niels


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 21, 2008)

7deadlysins666 said:


> Atleast Agile tweak and make their models different. There is No Agile model that is identical to any other guitar. They are their own designs and spin offs. Those "shapes of pieces of wood" are all Copy written Which means without permission, contract, or royalties, No one but Bernie Rico guitars can produce that shape. I find it amazing they have yet to get a law suit when they ship to the USA. They make nice CNC guitars, and their prices Used to be good. Now they're up there with everyone else, accept instead of doing what guitar companies should do and Design guitars, they're just ripping them off. Look at it this way, if You run a guitar company that did Only handmade custom guitars, a smaller company like BR or MCS(who they also ripped off) you designed All of your models, and just about build everything yourself. What would you think about some company stealing YOUR design you worked so hard to design and build? Beautiful guitars. Really. Nice to look at, but the truth is they are no better than Ed Roman.


Well put


----------



## El Caco (Aug 22, 2008)

I'm wondering how many exact copies they have made, I'm thinking very few if any. I'm not talking about shape, I'm talking about the same guitar with a different logo. I just can't see that happening, a Ran would set me back in excess of $4000 after expenses, why would I get them to copy a guitar I can buy cheaper elsewhere and as for copying a PRS well Ran might be able to copy the shape but it will never be a PRS.

I'm glad companies like Ran exist, the major companies have created this themselves by being dicks or dictating to us what we want. Everyday I see people complaining about specs or wishing for an Ibanez with specs they refuse to make. What if I love the Ibanez shape (and I do) and I want woods they don't offer like an ebony fretboard and I just refuse to buy another cheap rosewood FB guitar, I seriously think a decent lawyer could challenge any case Ibanez could bring today, companies like Ran are building something that companies like Ibanez just flat out refuse to build.

Now here is my dilemma there are some shapes I really like that only come in wood combinations that I hate. Example I really want a Xiphos but I hate maple neckthrough guitars. There are companies that will build me what I want (wood combo) but their original shapes are not right for me or just plain suck. I'd order a B7 but Blackmachine will not take my order. Mike Sherman does not offer an inline headstock as far as I know and I would prefer something more metal than another superstrat/strat shaped guitar, KXK are not taking orders and are just not making their best designs at all, Oni has it's own design which is a different direction to what I want, well you get my point.

There also seems to be different ideas about what is allowed from builders outside the US. Some think the only thing you cannot copy is the logo, some think the headstock is also off limits very few have a problem with body shapes. The Chinese think the whole world can get fucked.

My own personal opinion is that it is a custom built guitar so the only things that should be off limits is anything that is exactly the same as you can get from the original manufacturer and their logo. I compare it to a custom car or kit car, you can build anything you want as long as you are not trying to pass it off as the real thing.

I can see the argument being made for compensating the artist for their design and perhaps some type of regulation should be introduced similar to music copyright, a set fee for using another companies body shape, a set fee for a headstock design and the logo is off limits without prior written consent. If some type of regulation like this was brought into effect with penalties for the owner as well as the builder you would think that the illegal demand for exact copies would all but disappear.


----------



## Ruins (Aug 22, 2008)

s7eve said:


> I'm wondering how many exact copies they have made, I'm thinking very few if any. I'm not talking about shape, I'm talking about the same guitar with a different logo. I just can't see that happening, a Ran would set me back in excess of $4000 after expenses, why would I get them to copy a guitar I can buy cheaper elsewhere and as for copying a PRS well Ran might be able to copy the shape but it will never be a PRS.
> 
> I'm glad companies like Ran exist, the major companies have created this themselves by being dicks or dictating to us what we want. Everyday I see people complaining about specs or wishing for an Ibanez with specs they refuse to make. What if I love the Ibanez shape (and I do) and I want woods they don't offer like an ebony fretboard and I just refuse to buy another cheap rosewood FB guitar, I seriously think a decent lawyer could challenge any case Ibanez could bring today, companies like Ran are building something that companies like Ibanez just flat out refuse to build.
> 
> ...



i agree with everything you have said except for the fees. this is the whole point of copyright either you say no o some one or you charge him with money for it that's what its all about.
all people can do is at least respect the logo that can not be copied, personally i even find it stupid to copy the logo what is the idea to give some one the credit for my hard work of building it.


----------



## El Caco (Aug 22, 2008)

Well you can cover another artists song and profit from it but you have to pay the owner royalties, I can see an argument for setting standard minimum fee for using another companies designs. Both examples are the same in that it is your work based on someone else's design but you have offered something different to the original. I guess that means if you write unauthorised on it somewhere you do not have to pay royalties


----------



## Scali (Aug 22, 2008)

Well, Ibanez used to make direct copies aswell, back in the 70s. They got sued and lost.
But if I look at the 'original' Ibanez models, who REALLY lost?
They still make a lot of models that are very close to Strats, V's, Les Pauls and such. A bit pointier here, a bit flatter there, slightly different headstock, et voila (btw, did anyone else ever think that the Ibanez headstock looks like the top of a Fender headstock combined with the bottom of a Gibson headstock?).


----------



## winterlover (Nov 11, 2008)

wiggity win!!!!


----------



## noob_pwn (Nov 11, 2008)

secks!!!
would be nice if they came up with their OWN designs though 
guess the customer is king however.


----------

