Why do people not like Ken Smith basses.

[Brad Johnson]

I believe you across the board. But I'm not finished building my toolbox, even though I've slowly been working on it for 25 years now; So I'm still actively looking up potential purchases, and I don't want to have three basses from the same builder sitting in my music room. I don't get to go to NAMM, I don't know a bunch of luthiers personally, and I'm not willing to make a purchasing decision based solely on TB opinions.

Funny thing... I got to know luthiers by contacting them, typically by phone. Like I said, coming up before the internet I never had to depend on it and used other skills to find the info I wanted/needed. Yes, it takes more effort than clicking a link but at the end of the day I know a heck of a lot more about the actual product and quite often the person behind it than any website has ever told me.

Haven't been to NAMM in years and wasn't buying because of NAMM when I did. The only purchase I made because of what I saw at NAMM was meeting Marco at Markbass and checking out his stuff. Again, no website factored into that. Quite often websites don't have the info I'm looking for anyway.

I don't make purchases based on TB opinions. I'll leave that at that.

I also find that too many magazines are too busy trying to keep advertisers happy to give a real, hard-hitting review of anything, and most importantly, I don't live in a city with an exquisite selection of high-end basses. So a manufacturer's website is usually my first stop, post-TB.

And apparently it can be your last stop too. That IMO makes no sense.

I don't live in a city that has an exquisite selection either. For years locally the only high end stuff we had was Alembic and Ken Smith. That's all. So I made the effort to get my hands on other stuff. I actually enjoy the process and there have been far more misses than hits... but at least I knew, based on something tangible, which a website is not IMO.

We no longer live in a world where a website doesn't matter. A *lot* of people use bass makers' websites to get info. Look, if there was only one Ken Smith or Mike Tobias-level maker, things would be different. Today, we have so many totally top-notch basses to choose from that if I don't like the pointy butt of a Smith or an Alembic's body, I'm not taking a dive by opting for another über bass.

I still disagree. Websites don't matter in general as much as they do FOR YOU. I'm a pretty successful shopper when it comes to gear and websites haven't been key in that success, not by a long shot and still aren't. And where you would dismiss a product over a website, I certainly wouldn't. You're only shortchanging yourself IME and that's cool if that's what you want to do. I'm about doing my own research, contacting actual human beings and taking my chances as I see fit. It's paid off remarkabley well.

I don't see a good (not necessarily flashy or overly slick) site as a flourish on top of a great product; I see it as my first serious interface with that product's maker when I'm exploring a possible new bass.

Cool, whatever works for ya. It's typically not my FIRST interface with a product and it definitely wouldn't be my last as you've stated.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Then you think about how many people bought a bass solely from looking at a website and you can see the results on the "for sale: bass guitars" forum...

That's typically because of their flawed buying process.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I know it's not a straight up Ken Smith bass, but don't the KSD basses have some QC issues? And by some, I mean a lot?

Not that I'm aware of... then again, some people see setup as a QC issue.

 

[matante]

Brad Johnson,

I don't see where Dan B ever said he wouldn't buy a Smith because of his website. You're putting words in his mouth.

The fact is that Smith's website is horrendous, and at worst, it can be seen as bad customer service. By looking through his site it's difficult to know exactly what the distinctions are of the different models. I wanted to know what the Tiger models looked like and couldn't find them by navigating his site. I had to google it in order to find the page on Smith's website that contained the pictures. Even then, there was no explanation of what differentiates the various models, other than a price list.

You're right that none of this is a big deal. Not big enough to avoid buying his basses if you're interested, but it's also not a big deal to fix it. Professional website design is cheap, and the fact that his site looks homemade (by a wacko) makes him and his business look amateurish to someone who who is not familiar with him and his basses.

One more thing, if you, as business, want to convince the public that you make beautiful products, you need to show that appreciation for beauty in other areas: your website, your business cards, etc. The fact that his site is so ugly makes it easy to understand why his basses are considered ugly by most people here.

 

[chadds]

This whole post is foolish. His website may make an impression on you, but the quality of his basses, whether people like them or not, overrides any of that. You don't have to be abstract about whether his "website design skills" affect his bass-building. You have years worth of live examples of his real work which is what he gets paid to do. Have you been to the Bartolini website? Any questions about the quality of their products? Not from me. If you've ever talked to Ken, you'd realize that his website sorta resembles his "no frills" personality, so he gets an exemption from the "presentation" thing. His site is just quirky and not a big deal. If he tells you a bass will be ready in 4 months, it will be ready in 4 months, and I'll take that B4 a nice website.

I'm on the third redesign of my company's website. It is some shopper's first impression of your business. Yet I can tell you my company may be excellent at what we do and consistent over three decades but the artistic vision, skill and quality of the web designer may or may not match us.

So knowing how that goes if I know someone has a great product if they haven't chosen the best designer or gotten around to it, oh well.

If they are just embracing this idea and hopefully they are, be patient. You might be young and want an excellent site. The builder thankfully has been building instruments or amps for twice your life time. That's what I want to play. See?

 

[chadds]

P.S. folks can come into this century and hire someone with a contemporary vision to handle that aspect of their business.

Do I love his basses? Well I've moved on. I heard something else in my head and found it! The old review in a BP shoot out was correct. I have done a lot of live performances and studio recordings with that Smith BMT Elite G and was quite satisfied.

When I read that a studio Nashville cat turned his bass and treble eqs all the way up I attempted this. Then my Smith spoke with greater
authority.

 

[roadkill2309]

Funny thing... I got to know luthiers by contacting them, typically by phone. Like I said, coming up before the internet I never had to depend on it and used other skills to find the info I wanted/needed. Yes, it takes more effort than clicking a link but at the end of the day I know a heck of a lot more about the actual product and quite often the person behind it than any website has ever told me.

Haven't been to NAMM in years and wasn't buying because of NAMM when I did. The only purchase I made because of what I saw at NAMM was meeting Marco at Markbass and checking out his stuff. Again, no website factored into that. Quite often websites don't have the info I'm looking for anyway.

I don't make purchases based on TB opinions. I'll leave that at that.

And apparently it can be your last stop too. That IMO makes no sense.

I don't live in a city that has an exquisite selection either. For years locally the only high end stuff we had was Alembic and Ken Smith. That's all. So I made the effort to get my hands on other stuff. I actually enjoy the process and there have been far more misses than hits... but at least I knew, based on something tangible, which a website is not IMO.

I still disagree. Websites don't matter in general as much as they do FOR YOU. I'm a pretty successful shopper when it comes to gear and websites haven't been key in that success, not by a long shot and still aren't. And where you would dismiss a product over a website, I certainly wouldn't. You're only shortchanging yourself IME and that's cool if that's what you want to do. I'm about doing my own research, contacting actual human beings and taking my chances as I see fit. It's paid off remarkabley well.

Cool, whatever works for ya. It's typically not my FIRST interface with a product and it definitely wouldn't be my last as you've stated.

Wouldn't be my last interface either.

I respect that you still like to do things the old fashioned way. I'm similar on a lot if things, but when it comes to choosing a new bass, I call only after I've narrowed things down to a couple of choices, or at least that's what I did for my first boutique axe. And it's an approach that works for me. Sure, I discussed things with TBers in the beginning, then I tried out a few friend's basses, but then I checked websites to get a feel for what the options were before calling a busy shop up. Then i went down to NYC to try some put in person (admittedly not hard to do when you've got in-laws down there). I thought it would be more respectful that picking up the phone and saying 'man, I'm looking to buy a new bass, and you're one of six choices. What do you offer over the others?'

You're coming at this argument from the inside. You represent repeat business in this case, as do most of the other guys who are defending Smith's effort-free website. In this argument, I'm potential *new* business, which is what a maker needs to grow. New business might not have had the opportunity to try a smith out. I'm not going to call up a bass maker and ask him to list all the top woods he offers (just as an example), but I'll look at the basses on his site to get an idea. I'll read the stats and the options, then I'll narrow it down and call. Everything but the call I'll likely do for several makers, then call either the one I've decided on or the last two. I'll try to sit down and play some before calling, because going through that whole process then deciding I hate the neck would feel kind of like a waste.

There it is: my process. Different than yours? Yup. Still legit? Also yup. Do I feel that I'm losing out in any way? Nope.

At the end of the day, if 'my basses are so good that I'm above catering to new buyers' was really a legit business practise, Fodera's website would be a bunch of ASCII text and an animated GIF of a butterfly.

 

[rodneyat]

At the end of the day, if 'my basses are so good that I'm above catering to new buyers' was really a legit business practise, Fodera's website would be a bunch of ASCII text and an animated GIF of a butterfly.

There was a time not too long ago that this was almost the case. Their website is much improved now but was horrendous a few years ago.

Yes, Ken Smith's website is bad. But, as many have said..who cares?!?!? If you look at some of the very long standing, well respected builders out there. Fodera, MTD, Alembic, Smith, Pedulla etc. Many of them do not have great websites or it has only been recently that they have been changed. Why? THEY DON'T HAVE TO! Their basses are that good and people are not going to buy a $5K+ bass, based on a website. They are usually going to already have experience with the product and have played a few. As some have already said...Get out and play one if you can.

Back to the OP's question. I have owned 7 or so Smiths. All were great basses. He builds a great product and will not let something leave his factory that is not perfect. Yes, he can be cantankerous at times. But, he still builds a good product. Yes, they have a unique look and tone. But, that's what a lot of people are going for. That's why there is chocolate and vanilla ice cream! Some people will like Smith basses, some people won't.

As a side note: Because of the unique tone of the preamp and more so the pickup placement of a Smith. You may find that you need to do more midrange tweaking than you do with some other basses. There is a reason the bass has so many knobs...use them.

 

[iwearpumas]

If a luthiers web page is out dated, it tells me that the luthier is spending the majority of the time working on the product, and not the web page.

 

[rodneyat]

If a luthiers web page is out dated, it tells me that the luthier is spending the majority of the time working on the product, and not the web page.

+1

 

[Brad Johnson]

Brad Johnson,

I don't see where Dan B ever said he wouldn't buy a Smith because of his website. You're putting words in his mouth.

Haven't been accused of that in a while.


How do you read this, matante?:

"A maker's site is usually the first step I take to clear the usual TB consumerist fog around a bass I've never seriously looked at. For a one-man show, I could see cutting a corner or two on the marketing side, but for bigger players, it's an amateur touch that I can't reward with my money. We live in a world full of exquisite basses, so anything at all that puts me off will make me go to the next guy".

I read it that it's usually the first step he takes. And that if it's a bigger player (think Smith falls in there?) that because of that amateur touch he would not reward them with his money? And it would fall under anything that put him off so he'd move on. Did I put any of that in his mouth? Better, did Roadkill say I was putting words in his mouth?


I don't get how, IF you actually read what he's said objectively, you'd make that accusation of me.

The fact is that Smith's website is horrendous, and at worst, it can be seen as bad customer service.

No, at worst it could be seen as a crime against humanity.


Look, I get it. Some of you really need a nice looking website. Heck, I don't mind a nice website myself but as I've already said, more often than not I've been disappointed with the products produced by some of the nicer websites I've seen. Maybe that's a coincidence and maybe it's a product of spending more time on the visual than the functional aspect of the product.


Lots of people make great looking stuff. Lots of people buy products because they look great. And lots of those people, who actually use the products vs. hanging them on the wall, are disappointed with those products and IME it's because they put the brunt of their focus during the acquisition process in the wrong place.

So yeah, it may be a coincidence that me not doing that and paying closer attention to what I think really matters has been part of why I'm usually happy with what I buy.

By looking through his site it's difficult to know exactly what the distinctions are of the different models. I wanted to know what the Tiger models looked like and couldn't find them by navigating his site. I had to google it in order to find the page on Smith's website that contained the pictures. Even then, there was no explanation of what differentiates the various models, other than a price list.

Was there an email address and/or phone number available to contact them for further questions or was that too much like work?

You're right that none of this is a big deal. Not big enough to avoid buying his basses if you're interested, but it's also not a big deal to fix it. Professional website design is cheap, and the fact that his site looks homemade (by a wacko) makes him and his business look amateurish to someone who who is not familiar with him and his basses.

Cool. If you don't mind, send me the contact info for some of these cheap professional website designers. Seriously. My experience has been that it's not cheap and it's not easy to do well. Looking forward to that info. TIA.

I know a few builders have customers do their sites, that's about as cheap as I've seen. Smith's have a well established relationship. Potential customers know that people buy them, they are not cheap so if they think the "cheap" look of the website translates directly over into the basses, cool.

I'd think more the more intuitive among us might think that he spends more time on the product than the website. Might even be too busy to worry about it.

One more thing, if you, as business, want to convince the public that you make beautiful products, you need to show that appreciation for beauty in other areas: your website, your business cards, etc. The fact that his site is so ugly makes it easy to understand why his basses are considered ugly by most people here.

No offense... do you not understand how silly that statement looks? First, it's a thread about why people don't like Smiths... think many of the respondents might not like Smiths?


And the idea that because a website is unattractive they'd find the bass unattractive TOO? You honestly see a corelation? Wow.

What this thread has shown me is that many people get hung up on all sorts of stuff that folks like myself don't. Smiths look fine to me, that has never been my issue with them. Smith has done ads since the 70's and they always looked professional. I understand that a website is an ad too.

McDonalds has revamped their onsite menus. They now have very nice high def photos of each item. The photos look great. The problem though is that most people know their food will bear little resemblance to these nice shiny photos. And they'll taste the way they've always tasted.


So if I was truly interested in a bass I'd have no problem putting in more than the minimal effort described by some of you in seeking out more information. And again, the most important thing is always getting a bass in my hands... that's the only way I know of to gauge my satisfaction with a product.

 

[bass12]

If a luthiers web page is out dated, it tells me that the luthier is spending the majority of the time working on the product, and not the web page.

That sounds very romantic but it would be a faulty assumption to make.

 

[roadkill2309]

There was a time not too long ago that this was almost the case. Their website is much improved now but was horrendous a few years ago.

Yes, Ken Smith's website is bad. But, as many have said..who cares?!?!? If you look at some of the very long standing, well respected builders out there. Fodera, MTD, Alembic, Smith, Pedulla etc. Many of them do not have great websites or it has only been recently that they have been changed. Why? THEY DON'T HAVE TO! Their basses are that good and people are not going to buy a $5K+ bass, based on a website. They are usually going to already have experience with the product and have played a few. As some have already said...Get out and play one if you can.

Back to the OP's question. I have owned 7 or so Smiths. All were great basses. He builds a great product and will not let something leave his factory that is not perfect. Yes, he can be cantankerous at times. But, he still builds a good product. Yes, they have a unique look and tone. But, that's what a lot of people are going for. That's why there is chocolate and vanilla ice cream! Some people will like Smith basses, some people won't.

As a side note: Because of the unique tone of the preamp and more so the pickup placement of a Smith. You may find that you need to do more midrange tweaking than you do with some other basses. There is a reason the bass has so many knobs...use them.

You're right about Fodera's old site. MTD as well. But for your main point, you're also repeat business, so it doesn't matter. The website isn't for guys who already know the company unless its bring used the way Sadowsky does it to show off the new, available basses. For guys like you, who've already bought these basses, your points are valid. In terms of growing the business, especially in the world beyond TB, though? Not so much.

 

[rodneyat]

You're right about Fodera's old site. MTD as well. But for your main point, you're also repeat business, so it doesn't matter. The website isn't for guys who already know the company unless its bring used the way Sadowsky does it to show off the new, available basses. For guys like you, who've already bought these basses, your points are valid. In terms of growing the business, especially in the world beyond TB, though? Not so much.

Well, this all probably comes down to selling through dealers vs selling direct. If you are selling direct like Sadowsky...you would expect a really good website. They are a top notch operation all around. Great customer service, good website and an awesome product. Tying in to the OPs post. Those that say they don't like a Smith are probably not going to like the Sadowsky Modern/24 fret either. It's a good example of a "Fender inspired" instrument that does not sound like one. Very much in the tonal range of a Smith. Both great basses but with a very unique voice.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Wouldn't be my last interface either.

But that is how you broached this. See my previous post.

I respect that you still like to do things the old fashioned way. I'm similar on a lot if things, but when it comes to choosing a new bass, I call only after I've narrowed things down to a couple of choices, or at least that's what I did for my first boutique axe. And it's an approach that works for me. Sure, I discussed things with TBers in the beginning, then I tried out a few friend's basses, but then I checked websites to get a feel for what the options were before calling a busy shop up. Then i went down to NYC to try some put in person (admittedly not hard to do when you've got in-laws down there). I thought it would be more respectful that picking up the phone and saying 'man, I'm looking to buy a new bass, and you're one of six choices. What do you offer over the others?'

Funny thing... for many luthiers that's still the best way to contact them. It's not lacking in respect to call and be honest about your search. And most aren't too busy to talk to new potential customers at that point. In fact they probably expect serious inquiries to come in that way. Look at all of the complaints about builders not returning emails in a timely fashion.

You're coming at this argument from the inside. You represent repeat business in this case, as do most of the other guys who are defending Smith's effort-free website.

This is simply not true. The inside of what? I wasn't on the inside with Greg Yancey, Jack Read, F Bass, Eshenbaugh, Elrick, R Bass ad nauseum when I became interested and eventually bought basses. I wasn't on the inside with Smith when I finally bought one and the website had zip to do with that purchase. I wasn't on the inside with Brubaker when I bought my first one, used, here on TB.

You can end up on the "inside" by contacting the builders on a personal level. That's what I do. In fact, I contacted one builder, who had a rep for being curt (no, not Smith) and to my surprise he was approachable and kept me on the phone for about an hour. So take what you hear with a grain of salt. Tire kickers who hound builders for info rarely see a problem with what they're doing.

In this argument, I'm potential *new* business, which is what a maker needs to grow. New business might not have had the opportunity to try a smith out. I'm not going to call up a bass maker and ask him to list all the top woods he offers (just as an example), but I'll look at the basses on his site to get an idea. I'll read the stats and the options, then I'll narrow it down and call. Everything but the call I'll likely do for several makers, then call either the one I've decided on or the last two. I'll try to sit down and play some before calling, because going through that whole process then deciding I hate the neck would feel kind of like a waste.

Cool, do what works for you. I'm just saying there's another way and if you're ruling stuff out as yoiu said you were... that's on you more than anything. IMO IME of course.

There it is: my process. Different than yours? Yup. Still legit? Also yup. Do I feel that I'm losing out in any way? Nope.

You clearly are if you're not getting your hands on everything you're initially interested in. No?

At the end of the day, if 'my basses are so good that I'm above catering to new buyers' was really a legit business practise, Fodera's website would be a bunch of ASCII text and an animated GIF of a butterfly.

I wonder if their website was done by one of them cheap designers?


Besides, for people that know the Fodera story, their website was way down the list of things that really needed to be addressed. And those issues have obviously been addressed very well.

 

[Brad Johnson]

You're right about Fodera's old site. MTD as well. But for your main point, you're also repeat business, so it doesn't matter. The website isn't for guys who already know the company unless its bring used the way Sadowsky does it to show off the new, available basses. For guys like you, who've already bought these basses, your points are valid. In terms of growing the business, especially in the world beyond TB, though? Not so much.

Absolutely no offense intended... IME people who are genuinely serious about buying a $4k plus bass will not be turned off by a website. It would be nice to think that someone would drop that kind of coin inspired mainly by the website but it usually takes more than that. Much more.

A website can be a valuable part of a search... but there's more to it than that. Otherwise you have a recipe for disappointment.

 

[Brad Johnson]

If a luthiers web page is out dated, it tells me that the luthier is spending the majority of the time working on the product, and not the web page.

That does seem to be the general consensus. I see way more folks who'd say "The website sucks, guess I'll have to call or email for more up to date or detailed info" than "Their website sucks. Next".

 

[Jack Butler]

"It's all about fingerstyle playing...."

Since when do you make the bass playing rules?
Personally, playing with fingers and playing no frills solid stuff ala Duck Dunn is my thing. I don't like the slapping/popping stuff even when done by the masters, and have no interest in playing in that way. But the world would sure be boring if everyone were the same.
By the way, I'm not saying my playing compares in any way to Dunn!

 

[Phil Smith]

The fact is that Smith's website is horrendous, and at worst, it can be seen as bad customer service. By looking through his site it's difficult to know exactly what the distinctions are of the different models. I wanted to know what the Tiger models looked like and couldn't find them by navigating his site. I had to google it in order to find the page on Smith's website that contained the pictures. Even then, there was no explanation of what differentiates the various models, other than a price list.

I think it's pretty clear what the models are on his site. If you click on "Basses" you have the option to click on:

Neck-Thru Model
Custom Bolt-On Model
BSR "J" Model

Click on Neck-Thru Model and you have all the models that are available.

I just don't see how what you're saying jives with what's on the Ken Smith site today.

 

[bass4worship]

I own four of them and they all seem to be lacking low. I also have problems with the preamp on them. They look nice but that it to me. I saw one guy Smith that sounded good and that what got me wanting one. I don't think they for everyone.