# I've tracked down the Agile factory...



## Hertz32 (Feb 24, 2015)

Its the World Musical Instruments company ltd in Incheon, South Korea. A subsidiary of Samick I believe. 
Check out the Chapman Guitars factory tour day one, you can see a couple Agile headstocks and in one shot you can see the Agile logo on a reverse 8 string headstock quite clearly.

This factory also produces the:
Schecter KM7 + diamond series, syn gates etc
PRS SE line
Deans
LTD including the james hetfield iron cross 
DBZ
BC Rich
Chapman Guitars
James tyler variax guitars for line 6

In case you had any doubts about the quality of Agile


----------



## wigger (Feb 24, 2015)

I've suspected the same, but I wasn't sure in the beginning.

The video really proofs it, see your yourself f.e. at mark 0:53.


----------



## Hertz32 (Feb 24, 2015)

@3:44 by chappers right elbow.


----------



## vilk (Feb 24, 2015)

That's funny because I was trying to say this the other day when someone put the kibosh on me


----------



## Tom Drinkwater (Feb 24, 2015)

Rondo most likely gets products from several sources, World Music being one of them for sure. I'm assuming some of the lower priced SX stuff is made in China or Indonesia.


----------



## Hywel (Feb 24, 2015)

Tom Drinkwater said:


> Rondo most likely gets products from several sources, World Music being one of them for sure. I'm assuming some of the lower priced SX stuff is made in China or Indonesia.



Definitely this. Rondo has such a range of prices on it's models that some are bound to be made in cheaper locations. Makes their higher end stuff a bit more tempting though. Good spot!


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Feb 24, 2015)

The only difference between Agile and anything else that comes out of that factory really is that Agiles don't really go through a setup once they're stateside. They get them from the factory and ship them out to whoever orders them. This is why so many are not the greatest straight out of the box, but are wonderful after a good and proper setup. As I've heard it worded in the past, you the owner are the final stage of quality control.


----------



## asher (Feb 24, 2015)

Chokey Chicken said:


> The only difference between Agile and anything else that comes out of that factory really is that Agiles don't really go through a setup once they're stateside. They get them from the factory and ship them out to whoever orders them. This is why so many are not the greatest straight out of the box, but are wonderful after a good and proper setup. As I've heard it worded in the past, you the owner are the final stage of quality control.



Which is how the prices stay down.

Also, add the .strandberg* Boden OS line to the OP's list, if anyone's counting.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Feb 24, 2015)

Hertz32 said:


> This factory also produces the:
> Schecter KM7 + diamond series, syn gates etc
> PRS SE line
> Deans
> ...



Nope. No doubts about the quality. Its low and the list you gave are also low end guitars. At least the ones being produced at that factory. 
BC rich USA guitars arnt made there. Actual PRS's and not the budget models arnt made there. Dean custom shops arnt made there. ect...

Point being, those guitars are fine, but to try to use that list to justify the quality of agile is kinda laughable IMO.


You get a good bang for your buck. You dont need a high end guitar to play and sound good. But lets not kid ourselves. Agiles are still low end guitars. And thats ok.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Feb 24, 2015)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> Nope. No doubts about the quality. Its low and the list you gave are also low end guitars. At least the ones being produced at that factory.
> BC rich USA guitars arnt made there. Actual PRS's and not the budget models arnt made there. Dean custom shops arnt made there. ect...
> 
> Point being, those guitars are fine, but to try to use that list to justify the quality of agile is kinda laughable IMO.
> ...



Low price doesn't instantly equal low quality. I have more guitars made by cheap foreign factories that play better than some of the $1500+ usa guitars I own. That factory pumps out a lot of high quality guitars. Who gives a shit if it costs 6k and was made in the USA if it plays like shit? What's the difference between a well made Ltd with name brand hardware/electronics and a well made Gibson USA besides the price?

edit: I realize this came out sounding a lot more confrontational sounding than I intended. My only point is that "low end" is kind of a silly term to use. A properly made Korean guitar that's constructed of Mahogany wood, SD pickups, and various quality parts, is not way off base from a USA made guitar with nearly/exactly identical specs. Your chances of getting a dud are greater from massively mass produced guitars sure, but that's why folks should always try before buying.


----------



## Hertz32 (Feb 24, 2015)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> Nope. No doubts about the quality. Its low and the list you gave are also low end guitars. At least the ones being produced at that factory.
> BC rich USA guitars arnt made there. Actual PRS's and not the budget models arnt made there. Dean custom shops arnt made there. ect...
> 
> Point being, those guitars are fine, but to try to use that list to justify the quality of agile is kinda laughable IMO.
> ...



Yeah cos a $1500 guitar is low end 
Point is, the SE line has been lauded as being brilliant for almost any money. Whether you wanna be snobbish about low end or high end is up to you, but when does a guitar become high end anyway? 

If all guitars were free, how would you distinguish low and high end guitars? Its how they play, not how much they cost. And by all means, Agiles are solid as .... construction wise. If you wanna moan about the need to have it set up, then you buy a CS guitar from overseas and tell me that being CS makes it exempt from changes in transport


----------



## Hertz32 (Feb 24, 2015)

The real question is, why does Agile still have such large heels on their neck thru's when the factory is clearly capable of a gorgeously carved heel? I'd happily pay an extra $20 for that!


----------



## House74 (Feb 24, 2015)

And BCPRSLTDBZ Agschecdeanmanberg Guitars is born


----------



## xwmucradiox (Feb 24, 2015)

Hertz32 said:


> Its the World Musical Instruments company ltd in Incheon, South Korea. A subsidiary of Samick I believe.
> Check out the Chapman Guitars factory tour day one, you can see a couple Agile headstocks and in one shot you can see the Agile logo on a reverse 8 string headstock quite clearly.
> 
> This factory also produces the:
> ...



I would say the quality of the brands listed here varies and depends heavily on what happens to the guitars after they make it to the facilities that do final setup in the US. Just being made in the same factory does not make all those guitars equivalent in overall quality.


----------



## tedtan (Feb 24, 2015)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Low price doesn't instantly equal low quality.



I wouldn't equate low end with low quality. Sure, a low quality guitar would be low end, but a guitar could be low end based on price point without being low quality, so the two terms aren't synonymous even though there is some overlap.




xwmucradiox said:


> I would say the quality of the brands listed here varies and depends heavily on what happens to the guitars after they make it to the facilities that do final setup in the US. Just being made in the same factory does not make all those guitars equivalent in overall quality.


 
Since a guitar can be set up in many different ways, depending upon what the player wants, it's setup doesn't have anything to do with it's quality. They have to be thought of as two separate things (the guitar's quality and the quality of the setup).


----------



## Explorer (Feb 24, 2015)

xwmucradiox said:


> I would say the quality of the brands listed here varies and depends heavily on what happens to the guitars after they make it to the facilities that do final setup in the US. Just being made in the same factory does not make all those guitars equivalent in overall quality.





tedtan said:


> Since a guitar can be set up in many different ways, depending upon what the player wants, it's setup doesn't have anything to do with it's quality. They have to be thought of as two separate things (the guitar's quality and the quality of the setup).


Extending tedtan's observation, the base quality of the guitar doesn't come down when it hasn't been set up yet.

Going to an extreme example, does a Porsche's base materials and construction quality drop if it hasn't had a good tune up yet?


----------



## bostjan (Feb 24, 2015)

I know this is a pretty unpopular position here, but:

A) All of the guitars on that list are expected to be of acceptable quality.
B) A guitar of acceptable quality can be set up to be an excellent instrument.
C) A guitar of exceptional quality is going to be higher quality than a guitar of acceptable quality with a good setup.

Also, which factory a guitar comes from does not dictate the quality. For example, Samick built guitars for Washburn for a time. There was rumoured to be a policy (I have seen evidence to support this, although I cannot say for certain that it is absolutely true, and not just a fishy set of circumstances) that guitars built at that factory that did not meet Washburn's specification were rebranded Samick, given no model number (nor serial number in some cases) and exported anyway.



> Yeah cos a $1500 guitar is low end



Hehn? What Agile costs $1500? The most expensive one I see on their site right now is $1200, and that's a multiscale nine string with a Kahler.


----------



## Hollowway (Feb 24, 2015)

Who owns that factory, anyway? A corp? Or a person? That's quite the operation they have there. I'm impressed with how many instruments they can reliably crank out.


----------



## weirdoku (Feb 24, 2015)

I thought this was old news?


----------



## Hollowway (Feb 24, 2015)

weirdoku said:


> I thought this was old news?



Well then it would be "olds" wouldn't it?


----------



## asher (Feb 24, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> Well then it would be "olds" wouldn't it?



Never stop posting


----------



## mnemonic (Feb 24, 2015)

Surely every WMI instrument made isn't to the exact same quality? 

A company that size, I'm sure they have difference 'service levels' or whatever you want to call it. Ie. pay more per-guitar-made for higher quality wood, or better skilled workers to build them. 

I wouldn't be surprised if there were multiple production lines there, depending on the quality of the instrument being made.


----------



## GRIZ (Feb 24, 2015)

i would imagine that different companies have different levels of quality control. no matter how many guitars are made in the same building, i am sure some of them would go through more stringent quality control standards...

my problem with agile is that every one i have had the opportunity to play, there have been severely noticeable issues. on my buddies 830, his locking nut had horrible spacing so the lowest and highest strings were practically in the very edge of the board. 

it's that kind of "quality" i want to avoid


----------



## Michael T (Feb 24, 2015)

Just thought id throw my experience out there.
I worked in a Tape factory made packaging tape, painters tape ect. The funny thing was we would produce stuff for U Haul, Staples & Frog tape (expensive ass painters tape) plus we would make our company branded products. When in reality they were all the same tape just a different logo on the inside core. Same QC same everything so basically you cheap dollar store tape was the same as the expense big store tape just labeled differently


----------



## xwmucradiox (Feb 24, 2015)

tedtan said:


> Since a guitar can be set up in many different ways, depending upon what the player wants, it's setup doesn't have anything to do with it's quality. They have to be thought of as two separate things (the guitar's quality and the quality of the setup).



Final setup is not merely turning screws and setting string action for a lot of the bands discussed here. Schecter, for example, seems to do quite a bit more fretwork on their guitars than some of the other brands, and as a result their instruments are quite a bit better playing. 



Explorer said:


> Extending tedtan's observation, the base quality of the guitar doesn't come down when it hasn't been set up yet.
> 
> Going to an extreme example, does a Porsche's base materials and construction quality drop if it hasn't had a good tune up yet?



Raw materials quality is somewhat irrelevant here when were talking about final fretwork and QC. If I showed you a Schecter or PRS SE guitar that was absolutely fabulous in every respect for $600 and then I showed you a $400 Agile that needed to go into the shop for $200 in fret, nut, and setup work would you still take the agile because it came out of the same factory and had the same 'base quality?" You'd probably go for the instrument that didn't need to be fixed when it was brand new. 

Setup, fretwork, final QC, etc... these are the things that make all the difference between guitars that are great and guitars that are junk when you're looking at entry level and mid range instruments. I personally think Agile is doing its customers a huge disservice by not inspecting and performing QC on the products they sell.


----------



## SilentCartographer (Feb 24, 2015)

YAY, ban lifted, also yay


----------



## Explorer (Feb 24, 2015)

xwmucradiox said:


> I personally think Agile is doing its customers a huge disservice by not inspecting and performing QC on the products they sell.



My tech costs me less than $200 for a full set-up, including fretwork. 

Since I do this with most instruments anyway, it's not a hardship. 

Saving a huge amount of money by leaving QC/set-up to the customer, instead of something already done, is a disservice the same way saving a huge amount of money by buying parts and hardware from Home Depot is a disservice rather than buying a full deck. Not everyone agrees that they'd rather spend the money for a completed job. 

For those who can do their own work competently, it's a joy to not pay for someone else to do something. 

If you can't imagine that kind of thinking, I suspect your food bills are kind of high, given that grocery stores and making your own food would be suboptimal compared to restaurants and take-out....


----------



## asher (Feb 24, 2015)

SilentCartographer said:


> YAY, ban lifted, also yay



Did you miss the "Why are you happy...?" thread?


----------



## Explorer (Feb 24, 2015)

I miss the Public Ban List. Maybe the lack of both those topics balances out....


----------



## trem licking (Feb 24, 2015)

This seems to be the go to factory for anyone wanting to have guitars made haha.

And as far as QC goes, there are obvious differences between companies. Im pretty sure agile does not reject any guitar shipped... that's the job of the customer hence the low prices. Schecter, however, has models that are rejected and stamped as factory bstocks. I have seen a few of these for sale on ebay. the fact that the guitar gets shipped to schecter and inspected before shipping to customers and distributers is why you see less flawed schecters vs agiles, and also why schecters are a few notches up in price.


----------



## Tom Drinkwater (Feb 24, 2015)

When you get a new guitar and it arrives perfectly set up you are pretty lucky. A lot of music stores have to set up pretty much every guitar that arrives. Fender used to be notorious for shipping out nearly unplayable instruments. Ibanez was noted for years for sending out fairly well sorted instruments and music stores liked that sort of thing because it effectively raised their profit margins because all that was needed was to tune it and hang it on the wall. Buying direct, especially on the cheap, will most likely result in the need of a set up and possibly some light repair work.


----------



## Axayacatl (Feb 24, 2015)

Michael T said:


> Just thought id throw my experience out there.
> I worked in a Tape factory made packaging tape, painters tape ect. The funny thing was we would produce stuff for U Haul, Staples & Frog tape (expensive ass painters tape) plus we would make our company branded products. When in reality they were all the same tape just a different logo on the inside core. Same QC same everything so basically you cheap dollar store tape was the same as the expense big store tape just labeled differently



Seconding this. I spoke to the actual manager of a large factory that produced dish soap. He claimed the high end dish soap that had all the appointments (like the scent or special things to keep your hands from getting dry) was exactly the same product as the lower end dish soap. The only difference was that the high end one had nicer packaging, a nicer logo, and beautiful non-flakey female hands on the font.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Feb 24, 2015)

tedtan said:


> I wouldn't equate low end with low quality. Sure, a low quality guitar would be low end, but a guitar could be low end based on price point without being low quality, so the two terms aren't synonymous even though there is some overlap.



I made assumptions since the subject of the thread itself is in regards to quality.


----------



## Explorer (Feb 24, 2015)

CC, I again have to mention that I'm immature enough to laugh inside whenever I see your user name.


----------



## Hollowway (Feb 25, 2015)

Michael T said:


> Just thought id throw my experience out there.
> I worked in a Tape factory made packaging tape, painters tape ect. The funny thing was we would produce stuff for U Haul, Staples & Frog tape (expensive ass painters tape) plus we would make our company branded products. When in reality they were all the same tape just a different logo on the inside core. Same QC same everything so basically you cheap dollar store tape was the same as the expense big store tape just labeled differently



Yeah, I had a friend who worked at Proctor and Gamble, and told me that Old Spice and Secret were the exact same deodorant, but with difference scents. So Secret is pH balanced for a woman, my ass!


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Feb 25, 2015)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Low price doesn't instantly equal low quality. I have more guitars made by cheap foreign factories that play better than some of the $1500+ usa guitars I own. That factory pumps out a lot of high quality guitars. Who gives a shit if it costs 6k and was made in the USA if it plays like shit? What's the difference between a well made Ltd with name brand hardware/electronics and a well made Gibson USA besides the price?



Low price doesnt equal low quality. And if you read my post, it says that. I'm sure you havnt jived with some expensive guitars, but in my experience, 6k will practically always get you an amazing instrument. Other wise they wouldnt exist because no one would buy them. 




Hertz32 said:


> Yeah cos a $1500 guitar is low end
> Point is, the SE line has been lauded as being brilliant for almost any money. Whether you wanna be snobbish about low end or high end is up to you, but when does a guitar become high end anyway?
> 
> If all guitars were free, how would you distinguish low and high end guitars? Its how they play, not how much they cost. And by all means, Agiles are solid as .... construction wise. If you wanna moan about the need to have it set up, then you buy a CS guitar from overseas and tell me that being CS makes it exempt from changes in transport



Again, I said that you get a great bang for your buck with an SE. I'm not sure what part of my original statement you didnt read. I'm not being snobby at all about low end v high end guitars. I'm just being realistic.1500 bucks should get you a great guitar, but I wouldnt necessarily consider it high end. Probably the low side of high end based on price. Many guitars go for 5k plus. 


It sounds like you guys are butthurt over this and I assume its because your into the guitars listed and feel like I slighted them by calling them "low end". Well I'm just being realistic. There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing on an inexpensive guitar. I already said that a great player could pickup a 300 dollar guitar and do just fine with it. But it doesnt mean that there isnt a low end, mid tier, and high end in the guitar world just because it hurts your feelings.
I'm not trying to be a snob by any means. I'm just saying that you shouldnt get mad at me because I'm just speaking the truth. I'm not talking down this stuff, but it IS the budget model factory. And thats ok, but to brag about Agile's being made in the budget factory doesnt make sense to me.


----------



## rainbowbrite (Feb 25, 2015)

Hertz32 said:


> If all guitars were free, how would you distinguish low and high end guitars? Its how they play, not how much they cost. And by all means, Agiles are solid as .... construction wise.



this is not true given the number of hilarious/sad/tragic Rondo stories on this site.


----------



## Explorer (Feb 25, 2015)

rainbowbrite said:


> this is not true given the number of hilarious/sad/tragic Rondo stories on this site.



Are you saying that there are more Agiles which don't pass quality control than ESP LTDs? How do you know what the QC rejection rates are for ESP LTDs?

Oh... are you assuming that since the customers are the ones doing quality control and are more visible, that means that ESP LTDs inherently have a higher quality when they roll off the line? 

What proof do you have for your assertion, if any?

BTW, there's a forum member who destroys the PRS guitars which don't pass QC. I don't think he'd be employed if that number was zero.


----------



## DancingCloseToU (Feb 25, 2015)

Explorer said:


> CC, I again have to mention that I'm immature enough to laugh inside whenever I see your user name.



No one should be too immature for Rocko's Modern Life!

yep,






OT: Very well said explorer.

I've never had a "miss" with Agile, and I've owned a good handful of them (7 or 8?)... the only one I sent back was simply because I changed my mind about the color, not because of QC or anything. I'm sure it would have played well after a solid setup.

Just like any other guitar I've purchased (Ibby, ESP, PRS, EBMM etc., no real customs yet), I've had to restring and do the final stages of setup/playability/QC myself.


----------



## tedtan (Feb 25, 2015)

xwmucradiox said:


> Final setup is not merely turning screws and setting string action for a lot of the bands discussed here. Schecter, for example, seems to do quite a bit more fretwork on their guitars than some of the other brands, and as a result their instruments are quite a bit better playing.



I get what you're saying, but I don't attribute that to set up or quality control. I attribute it to the price point at which the instrument sells.

Fretwork is not part of a setup, it's part of the inherent quality level of the instrument (at least as it exists at a given point in time, since fretwork can always be redone at a later date). A guitar with more work done to it will sell at a higher price to make up for the added work (all else being equal). Likewise, if a guitar line has poor fretwork out of the factory, that is not poor quality control. It's the level of quality the manufacturer has determined is necessary for that line of instruments in order to hit a given price point.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Feb 25, 2015)

the SX stuff is made by the Kala ukulele company I believe. We were across the hall from them at NAMM. They had a few SX instrument hanging there, so we asked them about it, and they explained that they are the factory that produces the SX product line.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Feb 25, 2015)

tedtan said:


> I get what you're saying, but I don't attribute that to set up or quality control. I attribute it to the price point at which the instrument sells.
> 
> Fretwork is not part of a setup, it's part of the inherent quality level of the instrument (at least as it exists at a given point in time, since fretwork can always be redone at a later date). A guitar with more work done to it will sell at a higher price to make up for the added work (all else being equal). Likewise, if a guitar line has poor fretwork out of the factory, that is not poor quality control. It's the level of quality the manufacturer has determined is necessary for that line of instruments in order to hit a given price point.



This is a semantics issue apparently. When I say "final setup" I dont mean a setup like you would get done at a repair shop with simple action and intonation adjustments. Many of these guitars come into the US in need of further manufacturing and assembly to get them ready for sale. Pickups and electronics, for example, are installed at US facilities a lot of the time. Even some hardware is likely installed in the US. Im talking about everything that is done in the US to get an instrument ready for sale and that can include fretwork, electronics install, traditional setup, etc...

Schecter is selling a lot of guitars at similar price points to agiles that are supposed to be in the same price bracket but are delivering a vastly superior instrument. Agile is just boosting 'value' by supplying a name brand pickup selection in an instrument that otherwise receives no individual attention to make sure it is up to snuff on QC.

The notion that price determines quality is a bit backwards. There is a correlation between the two but charging more doesn't make something better. Some manufacturers are just willing to accept a lower margin to increase market share and make up the difference in volume while improving their reputation. That ends up serving a brand much better than simply hitting a price point.


----------



## rainbowbrite (Feb 25, 2015)

Explorer said:


> Are you saying that there are more Agiles which don't pass quality control than ESP LTDs? How do you know what the QC rejection rates are for ESP LTDs?


I am saying rondo/agile is garbage.


----------



## tedtan (Feb 25, 2015)

xwmucradiox said:


> This is a semantics issue apparently. When I say "final setup" I dont mean a setup like you would get done at a repair shop with simple action and intonation adjustments. Many of these guitars come into the US in need of further manufacturing and assembly to get them ready for sale. Pickups and electronics, for example, are installed at US facilities a lot of the time. Even some hardware is likely installed in the US. Im talking about everything that is done in the US to get an instrument ready for sale and that can include fretwork, electronics install, traditional setup, etc...



You're certainly welcome to make up your own definition for a word, but you can't expect others to understand what you mean when using it unless you define it for us.




xwmucradiox said:


> The notion that price determines quality is a bit backwards..



I didn't say that price determines quality. I said that manufacturers build down to a price point rather than up to a quality level, especially in the lower price brackets, all else being equal (don't forget that last part of the sentence).




xwmucradiox said:


> There is a correlation between the two but charging more doesn't make something better. Some manufacturers are just willing to accept a lower margin to increase market share and make up the difference in volume while improving their reputation. That ends up serving a brand much better than simply hitting a price point.



Obviously simply raising the price of something doesn't improve it's quality, but you can't get PRS quality at Schecter price points (I'm talking the imports here as I haven't played the US Schecters yet), so there is more than a mere correlation at play. And even if a company were willing to take a lower margin in hopes of selling higher volumes to offset their lowered margins per unit, there is only so much that can be done at a given price point because (1) putting in more man and/or machine hours increases the cost of manufacturing that instrument and (2) there is only so much margin to be given up.

As for market share at the expense of margins, guitar companies aren't typically big enough to sustain the kinds of losses incurred in going after market share for very long. Companies that successfully employ those marketing tactics are typically large, well funded multinational conglomerates that can take a loss in one division (say, consumer electronics) because the other divisions (perhaps banking, property and casualty insurance, and automobile manufacturing) are more than making up for it. So while it is a viable strategy, it's application is limited in the guitar market due to the relatively small size of the companies competing here.


----------



## SilentCartographer (Feb 27, 2015)

asher said:


> Did you miss the "Why are you happy...?" thread?


 
whoops, there was actually a paragraph reffering to the topic which I though I copied and pasted from another source to quote but it didn't clearly post. Also yeah I was excited, This site is what Im on a majority of my work day so I was overjoyed.. anyway back to the topic!


----------



## Hollowway (Feb 27, 2015)

rainbowbrite said:


> I am saying rondo/agile is garbage.



Did you have a bad experience with them or something? I've got three Agiles, and they're surpisingly good. They needed a proper setup when I got them, but solid all the way around.


----------



## Noxon (Feb 27, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> Did you have a bad experience with them or something? I've got three Agiles, and they're surpisingly good. They needed a proper setup when I got them, but solid all the way around.



+1 My Agile is awesome. Just needed fresh strings and a little TLC. Now it slays.

I think most of the hate comes from people that haven't tried one. Sure, there have been some turds, but there have been NGDs with Fvck ups from Ibanez, Jackson, LTD, etc. it isn't just Agiles that have issues.


----------



## SilentCartographer (Feb 27, 2015)

I'm keen to get an Agile.. I've seen enough positive NGDs and a plethora of other good reviews to feel comfortable going with them.. an intial setup does not bother me at all.


----------



## Hertz32 (Feb 27, 2015)

Agiles are solid guitars whether you like it or not. And their QC still remains better than Gibsons xD


----------



## jamesfarrell (Feb 27, 2015)

trem licking said:


> This seems to be the go to factory for anyone wanting to have guitars made haha.
> 
> And as far as QC goes, there are obvious differences between companies. Im pretty sure agile does not reject any guitar shipped... that's the job of the customer hence the low prices. Schecter, however, has models that are rejected and stamped as factory bstocks. I have seen a few of these for sale on ebay. the fact that the guitar gets shipped to schecter and inspected before shipping to customers and distributers is why you see less flawed schecters vs agiles, and also why schecters are a few notches up in price.



I've had a few deans. They go directly from China > Warehouse in USA > you. 
Dean don't do sh*t to their guitars. Sucks because I love the ML's. If you get one, be prepared to fix chips and wrench.


----------



## jamesfarrell (Feb 27, 2015)

Hertz32 said:


> Agiles are solid guitars whether you like it or not. And their QC still remains better than Gibsons xD



Gibson did away with their QC department in the early 90's


----------



## tedtan (Feb 27, 2015)

jamesfarrell said:


> Gibson did away with their QC department in the early *6*0's



FTFY


----------



## M3CHK1LLA (Mar 1, 2015)

i spied a few of mr. dave mustaines "angels of deth" at the 1:37 mark


----------



## Rick (Mar 2, 2015)

rainbowbrite said:


> I am saying rondo/agile is garbage.



I have 4 and have had no issues with any of them.


----------



## cardinal (Mar 2, 2015)

I have one Agile and a bunch of guitars that cost several times more than the Agile. The Agile fought me when setting it up. Had a hard time dialing it in for whatever reason. 

But I did eventually get it sorted, and I think it's a great instrument. Fit and finish is certainly nice. The body is two pieces nicely book matched.

Certainly you can buy fancier guitars with bigger brand names. But I'd consider it a "professional" quality instrument. There are tiers of instruments well below this one, so I don't think I could ever consider it "low end."


----------



## Noxon (Mar 3, 2015)

Having the opinion that Agiles are junk is totally cool, but it's subjective. To say that they're garbage to me would be saying that everything else made in the factory is garbage. That clearly isn't the case. They may not be "high end" guitars, but just because something didn't cost three grand and take three years to make doesn't mean it's a turd. 

The QC and set up are admittedly sketchy sometimes, but that's true of most brands. I used to work at my local guitar shop before the internet killed it, and we would receive Schecters, Jacksons, and even american Strats that would just be in ....ing horrendous condition and set up horribly. Some even had obvious flaws that required them to be refused and sent back. I don't think there are more duds from Agile out there than there are from any other "low end" line. Just my opinion.


----------



## Slunk Dragon (Mar 3, 2015)

The Agile I own has been nothing but good to me, and I always recommend them to people curious about ERGs.

Not sure where all this hate for them stems from, but from what I understand, their customer service is also pretty good, too.


----------



## NorCal_Val (Mar 5, 2015)

I saw a used Agile 8 in the Sacramento GC a couple of days ago.
It looked pretty nice.(blue flamed maple top)
I didn't have time to play it, but the neck felt good.

Sort of glad I've already gotten an M80M or I would've been
sorely tempted.


----------



## ngrungebb91 (Mar 8, 2015)

NorCal_Val said:


> I saw a used Agile 8 in the Sacramento GC a couple of days ago.
> It looked pretty nice.(blue flamed maple top)
> I didn't have time to play it, but the neck felt good.
> 
> ...



Also saw a used Interceptor 7 in a local MusicGoRound here in Wilkes Barre, PA. $249. I was amazed. It was a little beat up. When I played it though... the set up was amazing. Great guitars.


----------



## SilentCartographer (Mar 8, 2015)

$249, damn, I would have jumped on that badboy.. I very much doubt 'll find a used one in a shop here in Canada, unless maybe Toronto or Vancouver..


----------



## HighGain510 (Mar 9, 2015)

I get that a lot of the Agile fanboys are getting upset when some people are saying the QC isn't quite up to snuff on a lot of them (or some people just plain don't know what to look for on a quality guitar vs one that has problems, so they SAY it's an amazing guitar when really it is not... ), but it IS the truth that some of the stuff leaving the WMI factory is far from perfect. I don't know what Kurt does as far as QC and further setup/fretwork on the Agile stuff once he receives it, but based on my own experiences with Agile I can say he likely is not touching them when they land in the states which also explains why so many are hit/miss. Again, not to be rude, but some folks honestly don't see stuff like poor fretwork, sloppy routing, bad setups etc. and I've seen them rant and rave about how amazing some of their guitars are only to see the pictures of their guitars in the NGD thread and go "WTF?! they didn't even crown the frets... and the action is super high... and the electronics are wired wrong... " etc. 

While anecdotal in nature, I spoke with Ed Yoon @ Strandberg when purchasing my Strandberg Boden OS 7 and he informed me that the number of guitars listed on the site did not match actual inventory as some of the guitars that arrived had "QC issues" that he did not deem fit for working on and shipping out. Companies like Strandberg have folks like Ed Yoon in place now to weed out guitars like that to ensure the products leaving the shop are playing the way they should and that there are no major material defects or crappy fretwork. For Agile? My guess is at the pricepoint Kurt sells most of those models, they're not getting a full check-up by a tech and having the final fretwork done in the US.  This would also explain why so many Agiles have been delivered with jacked up fretwork over the years, it sounded like Ed had to go through each guitar and clean them up quite a bit. From what I've heard, PRS and Schecter do the same thing with their techs working in the US handling the final QC and setup work (likely including fretwork as well) which is why those products have been consistently getting better and better. It certainly made me feel better about buying my Boden OS knowing that Ed had guitars he felt were NOT up to snuff from WMI as he knows guitars inside and out and if he truly felt they could be worked over by himself and still go out the door at the quality level expected, he would have done so, but did not in this case. When a similar guitar gets shipped to Rondo, I highly doubt Kurt is going through them at the same level of detail, which again explains why there have been so many dud examples hitting the market over the years. 

Please don't misunderstand what I'm saying here. I'm definitely not saying WMI produces garbage instruments, in fact far from it. That would be totally unfair and quite obviously an incorrect statement, but that being said... they DO seem to require a decent amount of tech work, up to and including major fretwork, upon arrival to the US. I've had a ton of WMI-produced guitars (and still have several in the form of PRS SE's and my Strandberg OS) over the years and the quality of these guitars has seemingly improved, but that might have more to do with adding more skilled labor on the final QC/setup end than the originating factory itself. 

Stating categorically that Agile guitars are built in the same factory as a laundry list of other low-to-mid tier guitars means they are of the same quality as the guitars you're comparing them to is flawed logic. The BASE guitars themselves can vary based on the woods used for each line (some brands might opt for cheaper cuts of wood, multi-piece laminate bodies etc.) and the features added for each, but the final product is a result of the FINAL QC and setup work (including fretwork) which it seems are two steps NOT handled by WMI, so it's not as simple as "WMI produces both Agile and PRS SE guitars, therefore they are equal."


----------



## Explorer (Mar 9, 2015)

HighGain, Are you saying that people have been claiming an equivalence in base quality is the same as an equivalence at the end of a quality control process? 

I'm not sure any alleged "fanboys" have claimed that. They only claim that the Agile instruments are of the same quality level, prior to QC, as the other instruments from that same factory, prior to QC. If someone *did* make the first claim (Agile pre-QC = other brand's post-QC) in this topic, I'd be interested in seeing a quote. 

Given your exchange with Ed Yoon, it's clear that QC can only do so much, and that some instruments do wind up getting rejected, whether by Ed at Strandberg or by purchasers of Agile instruments. I'm not sure you could refer to Ed, or Agile purchasers, as "fanboys" for finding that the QC process has successful outcomes. 



HighGain510 said:


> II've had a ton of WMI-produced guitars (and still have several in the form of PRS SE's and my Strandberg OS) over the years and the quality of these guitars has seemingly improved, but that might have more to do with adding more skilled labor on the final QC/setup end than the originating factory itself.



Even you make the case that it is likely QC and not the factory work which is at work. I don't think that logic is wrong, and I don't think base quality has a correlation with how much QC is put on top of that.


----------



## VBCheeseGrater (Mar 9, 2015)

Noxon said:


> They may not be "high end" guitars, but just because something didn't cost three grand and take three years to make doesn't mean it's a turd.





The longer i play and the more guitars i play, the more i find this to be true. At this point pretty much any guitar outside of true beginner/low end $100 models could turn out to be something i really like or bond with once I set it up to my liking. My current fav is not my most expensive, which was reinforced playing both at my gig Saturday.


----------



## HighGain510 (Mar 9, 2015)

Explorer said:


> HighGain, Are you saying that people have been claiming an equivalence in base quality is the same as an equivalence at the end of a quality control process?



Did you even read the OP that started this thread?



Hertz32 said:


> Its the World Musical Instruments company ltd in Incheon, South Korea. A subsidiary of Samick I believe.
> Check out the Chapman Guitars factory tour day one, you can see a couple Agile headstocks and in one shot you can see the Agile logo on a reverse 8 string headstock quite clearly.
> 
> This factory also produces the:
> ...



Ummm... if you read his post, it kinda went like so: 

- List provided of other guitars made in same factory 
- Statement IMMEDIATELY following claiming said list alleviates any doubts regarding quality of Agile guitars. 

You see nothing qualifying that the other brands are better with regard to quality because they have superior QC and final fretwork/assembly/setup performed by the respective brands that they belong to, merely that by factory association, any questions regarding the quality of Agile should be gone. Sorry, I'm not trying to say anything the OP didn't say and then vehemently tried to defend throughout the thread. 



Explorer said:


> I'm not sure any alleged "fanboys" have claimed that. They only claim that the Agile instruments are of the same quality level, prior to QC, as the other instruments from that same factory, prior to QC. If someone *did* make the first claim (Agile pre-QC = other brand's post-QC) in this topic, I'd be interested in seeing a quote.



The only folks discussing the fact that the FINAL QC OTHER BRANDS BUILT IN THE SAME FACTORY ARE RECEIVING are the people who either don't own an Agile or are folks like myself who have played/owned several Agiles as well as guitars from the other brands in the list and can differentiate between them based on the final additional fretwork and QC the other brands receive that it is clear Agile is not receiving. 



Explorer said:


> Given your exchange with Ed Yoon, it's clear that QC can only do so much, and that some instruments do wind up getting rejected, whether by Ed at Strandberg or by purchasers of Agile instruments. I'm not sure you could refer to Ed, or Agile purchasers, as "fanboys" for finding that the QC process has successful outcomes.



You're trying *way* too hard to twist words into something else, and sadly I don't fall for troll bait, but thanks for coming out.  

Now I'm curious, do you own an Agile currently?



Explorer said:


> Even you make the case that it is likely QC and not the factory work which is at work. I don't think that logic is wrong, and I don't think base quality has a correlation with how much QC is put on top of that.



My statement was, and still is, that "they DO seem to require a decent amount of tech work, up to and including major fretwork, upon arrival to the US." If you would like to quote me, feel free to use my actual words.  The OP is trying to correlate the fact that items built in the same factory should alleviate any concern over the quality of the instrument. That's what he stated, no types of caveats added with regard to finished product vs raw product whatsoever, and that statement alone is simply not true. 

If the same factory is building all of these guitars and it ships out 20 guitars built for Agile and 20 guitars built for Strandberg, and since they are built by the same factory that is known to have some flawed instruments that should not be sold (say a flat rate of even ~10% majorly flawed/should not be sold), but only Strandberg is scrapping the 2 per 20 built and Agile is not, that doesn't resolve any doubt I had about the Agile brand if they're still selling 2 out of every 20 guitars that was majorly flawed as if it had no problem because they're not doing final QC and fretwork on the guitars. Again, keep in mind that *I'm speaking strictly to his statement*, he did NOT qualify that his statement wasn't accounting for the QC applied to finished instrument several of the other brands from that list produce as a final product, he was attempting to compare Agile to the other brands built in the same factory in terms of quality overall which is misleading. 

You're a smart boy, you don't need to attempt to be smug and twist my statement into something else, if you'd like to have a rational discussion I'm all for it but don't go trying to change what I'm saying when you know exactly what I said.  When you try to post like that, I'm am happy to return the smugness right back to you, so please don't try talking down to me or attempting to change what I'm saying to make it seem like the point I made was incorrect. Picking and choosing which piece of a statement you want to hear is an interesting tactic, but not one that works well in the instrument discussion section of the forum. Maybe head back to P&CE if you want those types of arguments, sir.


----------



## Noxon (Mar 9, 2015)

Dudes, they're just guitars... No big deal. 

I'm a fanboy _and_ I admit that the QC on Agiles is less than stellar. I'm not saying they're the greatest guitars ever made. Im just saying that they aren't the complete pieces of shit that they get made out to be. I also realize that my opinion is subjective...


----------



## HighGain510 (Mar 9, 2015)

Noxon said:


> Dudes, they're just guitars... No big deal.
> 
> I'm a fanboy _and_ I admit that the QC on Agiles is less than stellar. I'm not saying they're the greatest guitars ever made. Im just saying that they aren't the complete pieces of shit that they get made out to be. I also realize that my opinion is subjective...



Yep, and I qualified my initial statement with that info as well, that's why I don't really get why it was called out. I OWN GUITARS CURRENTLY THAT WERE BUILT BY WMI, so I'm not hating on the factory or the brands they build for, nor am I saying they put out nothing but turds.  The big difference is the level of attention they receive afterwards by the companies who put their name on the headstock, and that difference can be quite major in some cases.  

I'm not trying to fight or argue with anyone, simply calling out the fact that just because two items are built in the same factory doesn't guarantee that the final product that is sold to the consumer is guaranteed to be of the same quality when they each undergo varying levels of finishing (or in some cases, none ). I don't know if things have changed but my understanding was that with Agile, they were basically drop-shipped from WMI -> Rondo -> Consumer without going through any type of major QC inspection or addressing issues like poor fretwork. I don't pretend to know the true "cannot be sold" failure rate from WMI, it could be very high or it could be fairly low (and I stated what I have heard was simply anecdotal evidence, not that it was set in stone as "WMI has a high failure rate and these jacked up guitars still ship out from their factory regardless") but what I do know is that several of the guitars I received from Agile or picked up second-hand from the original buyers had varying levels of issues and it was clear that either there was no added QC happening at Rondo or if there was, they were missing quite a bit.  That being the case, I felt the need to express that while they might be built in the same factory, giving a list of other brands built there doesn't necessarily mean the guitar will be great because there are a bunch of other factors at play after the guitar leaves their factory.


----------



## Hertz32 (Mar 9, 2015)

I believe I acknowledged a final setup is required for pretty much any guitar at aome point in the thread... If I didn't, I am now. My statement that that list alone would dispel any thoughts that Agiles were anything other than superb was clearly exaggeration - in my head at least. Although I appreciate that that may not translate well over text. 

What Agiles are though, is in roughly the same price bracket as Chapman Guitars (in the UK at least) so if you watch the factory tours for Chapman guitars, you should see the work and effort that goes into producing a guitar in that price bracket. 
Chapmans do have a setup stage in the UK however, whereas Agiles don't really. 

Watch the videos, and make of them what you will.


----------



## Noxon (Mar 9, 2015)

HighGain510 said:


> Yep, and I qualified my initial statement with that info as well, that's why I don't really get why it was called out. I OWN GUITARS CURRENTLY THAT WERE BUILT BY WMI, so I'm not hating on the factory or the brands they build for, nor am I saying they put out nothing but turds.  The big difference is the level of attention they receive afterwards by the companies who put their name on the headstock, and that difference can be quite major in some cases.
> 
> I'm not trying to fight or argue with anyone, simply calling out the fact that just because two items are built in the same factory doesn't guarantee that the final product that is sold to the consumer is guaranteed to be of the same quality when they each undergo varying levels of finishing (or in some cases, none ). I don't know if things have changed but my understanding was that with Agile, they were basically drop-shipped from WMI -> Rondo -> Consumer without going through any type of major QC inspection or addressing issues like poor fretwork. I don't pretend to know the true "cannot be sold" failure rate from WMI, it could be very high or it could be fairly low (and I stated what I have heard was simply anecdotal evidence, not that it was set in stone as "WMI has a high failure rate and these jacked up guitars still ship out from their factory regardless") but what I do know is that several of the guitars I received from Agile or picked up second-hand from the original buyers had varying levels of issues and it was clear that either there was no added QC happening at Rondo or if there was, they were missing quite a bit.  That being the case, I felt the need to express that while they might be built in the same factory, giving a list of other brands built there doesn't necessarily mean the guitar will be great because there are a bunch of other factors at play after the guitar leaves their factory.



Oh, I feel ya, man. I didn't take anything you said as being confrontational or anything.

When I got mine, I was aware of the possible QC pitfalls and went into it knowing that I may have to do some work to it. I also knew if it was too bad, Kurt would take it back. I think as long as you go into buying an Agile knowing that you are the final step in the QC process, then they are an incredible amount of guitar for the money. However, I wouldn't go as far as saying that they are equal to say, a Strandberg or something. (although, I think they have that potential) 

I could be wrong, but I think one of the ways Kurt keeps the customer cost down is cutting back on some things, final QC being one of them. Personally, Im okay with that. My Agile showed up in good shape. Maybe I was just lucky.


----------



## cardinal (Mar 13, 2015)

Part of the issue is the range of tolerances the factory's is set up to reproduce and whether that factory is willing to reject things that fall outside of a given set of tolerances, whether those tolerances are the grade of wood, trueness of the fretboard radius and level, etc. 

Even really terrible factories can churn out a very nice guitar if you get lucky and all the random tolerances line up the right way. The mark of a quality "brand" of guitars is consistently great instruments. However, a specific guitar from any maker could be a world-class instrument if you hit the lottery.


----------



## Explorer (Mar 13, 2015)

cardinal said:


> Part of the issue is the range of tolerances the factory's is set up to reproduce and whether that factory is willing to reject things that fall outside of a given set of tolerances....



Again though, the factory is making a broad range of instruments, and the brand is the place undertaking QC. 

I imagine that if Rondo or .strandberg* or any other company gets an instrument which is terrible, they would have some mechanism (invisible to us) to get some kind of recompense from the factory. If .strandberg* got 50 guitars, and 47 of them were irredeemable, I don't think they'd just say, "Well, we spent the money, but the factory has no obligation to make even *one* of the ordered instruments playable."

HighGain510 already noted that out of all the Bodens coming from this same factory, some were rejected as not being deemed "fit for working on and shipping out." 

It's unlikely that this factory says, 'Okay, on this line, we want you to pay less attention to your job, okay?" I think it's more likely that the QC happens at the brand facility once the instruments arrive from the factory. 

And, as has been mentioned, the QC inspectors for Rondo happen to be the end customers. That's why those end customers get pricing which reflects their role as QC employees.


----------



## bostjan (Mar 13, 2015)

Explorer said:


> It's unlikely that this factory says, 'Okay, on this line, we want you to pay less attention to your job, okay?" I think it's more likely that the QC happens at the brand facility once the instruments arrive from the factory.



The factory has to have some level of its own quality assurance and quality control.

Although the different machine operators are not told to pay less attention to their jobs, different machines will operate within different tolerances. Each guitar is going to be made with different tools and machines, and thus, there will be variability in the manufacture of each guitar.

So, even being made six inches away from each other, one guitar made by skilled machinist on old equipment will not be equivalent in quality expectations to a different guitar made by an equally skilled machinist on brand new equipment.


----------



## cardinal (Mar 13, 2015)

I'm not sure anyone in here is arguing anymore, though the posting remains argumentative? The factory makes guitars as a contractor for various brands. The quality of those guitars varies depending on random tolerances the factory can control and what the brand is willing to accept. If the factory's tolerances are wide and the brand is OK with that, you may be able to find awesome examples of that brand's guitars but not consistently. If any of the factory, the brand, or both are willing and capable to police tighter tolerances, the guitars should be more consistent. Assuming the design is solid, those guitars should be consistently nice. 

Who knows how this specific factory maintains its equipment or whether they both have machines capable of a range of tolerances and contract to use machines with certain tolerances for certain brands (for varying prices) or if the brands make contracts requiring specific tolerances (I assume they would), where higher tolerances means a higher price for the contract work because it requires either nicer machines or more rejects.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Mar 13, 2015)

When people nitpicks so anally, the only outcome is a turd of a thread.
An evidence of a certain level of quality has turned out in a silly argument.

I would suggest to all the people nitpicking on low end and mid tier guitar to pick up a blo torch and burn those crappy factory, so that 90% of guitarists won't be able to afford a decent instrument and you can keep your custom guitar owner elite status


----------

