Pondering why the Mirage never caught on like PRS?

[holLoWskull]

All the talk of PRS guitars in the "it was fun..." thread has got me wondering why the hell the Mirage I, II, and Maple Top models were relative sales flops while the PRS CE22 is a hit? We've covered Hamer's questionable marketing strategy in other threads, but I'm still shocked the Mirage series (especially the Maple Top version which is about as close in function to a CE22 you'll find in a Hamer) never became sales successes even by Hamer standards (such as a Daytona, T-51, or Studio). Slap in a 5-way Superswitch and some 4-conductor pickups and you've got any of the different wiring options as a PRS CE22; if it's the Mannmade trem that makes PRS buyers open their wallets that same unit will line right up and work on the Mirage as well; if a '10 Top' makes you giddy, well it was a standard grade top on every Mirage. Maybe it was the lack of inlay/binding options (though to me the PRS moon inlay looks like overized dot inlays on an unbound neck)? Feel free to add to the rant (or remind me how some think the Mirage looks like a "boat oar")

[rj2858]

I think you've got it on the "ginger bread" aspects, i.e. inlays, binding, colors with double stained tops, but also in terms of function, as I know I don't want to buy a guitar that I've immediately got to be changing vibrato, pickups, wiring and switching on. I don't know that the 22 was PRS' top seller, or if it was the 24, like I bought back in '89, but that's something else you weren't gettin' from Hamer

I'm sure that the Mirage looked like a less competent copy of a PRS to many, with only the "3 singles" version with its' Koa top and blended heel, offering anything unique. I know that's how I saw it, AFTER I bought my Custom 24

[morningstar]

A long time ago, the conventional wisdom was that the guitar, a Terry McInturf design, was too expensive to produce and got cancelled. Hence, McInturf's departure.

That's what I remember anyway.

[velorush]

Don't get me wrong, I seem to be great guitars and I really like the modded ones like Veatch's, but every time I get excited about one in the FS section, the body shape reminds me too much of another guitar that just didn't catch on:

The ES-335S

Yes, I know the Hamer is made way better, different scale length, superior in every way... but there's just that similarity...

I know, I know. Feel free to fling rocks, garbage and or feces in an indignatious show of disapproval.

[RobB]

PRS tremelo vs. Wilkie rattle-fest...

PRS body elegance vs. Mirage dwarfism..(I know, and have owned 3 Mirages).

PRS neck vs. Mirage neck which sticks out like a friggin' broomstick...

I shan't go on.

[Feynman]

Uh, it's the headstock.

I agree.

[hamer4ever]

Did McInturf work at Hamer? Did he design the Mirage?

[SteveB]

Mirages just look kind of odd and balance bad.

And while you could have "slapped" all that stuff mentioned onto a MIrage, Hamer never did. When I bought my first PRS, I had no intention of buying a PRS because it had that stigma of being an expensive showpiece guitar. Then I made the mistake of trying a CE-24, and quickly bonded with it. PRS was really almost the only non-shreddy looking guitar with 24 frets. 25" scale was perfect. The tremolo/string pull/locking tuner combination makes for the most useable and stable tremelo anywhere that is not double locking. The rotary gave reasonable single coil sounds along with the HB ( although I've since moved away from the rotarys). The guitar balanced absolutely perfect and was nicely contoured. Fret access was exceptional. The Mahogony/Maple bolt neck/Maple top produced a nice clarity to the sound even with the hot pickups. The Wide/Thin neck profile was perfect. In short, for me at the time, it was essentially the guitar I would have designed myself, and to this day I can pick up any PRS 24 and immediately feel perfectly at home on them. I eventually found my way to my current and probably forever #1, a '91 Alder body/Maple top CE-24. I've modified it with WB gregwinds and duncan tripleshot rings for switching, and it's currently wearing planetwave auto trims that I'll probably switch over to the newer PRS phase II tuners. The one thing I was never fond of on early PRS was the winged tuners.

[RobB]

Did McInturf work at Hamer? Did he design the Mirage?

Yep. We also have him to blame for the Eclipse!

Hey, I keed, I keed, only because I love!

[JohnnyB]

Hmmm. What could it possibly be?

[Andrew]

The Mirage was designed around the Koa and is a competent design, especially with the shallow headstock angle. It was a bad decision not to blend the neck joint on the Mirage II like the I.

I actually vastly prefer its shape to a PRS. Would a 25 rather than 25.5 inch scale really have been better?

The one let down was the nasty Wilkinson trem. The biggest mistake Hamer made was using their hardware, their wrap-around bridge is rubbish too. I found this out by changing the trem on my Mirage and suddenly it was brilliant guitar. It's only a cheap Wilko trem but with seventies brass saddles.

The ABM (as on the Vintage S) would have been better and costs only pennies more than the VSV/VS1000.

However the Mirage would never catch on because it was straying into another's territory, well defended with extensive marketing and advertising.

[Studio Custom]

It was always, the marketing or lack thereof.

Paul started a decade later, did very little that was unique and built his company in to the # 3. Meanwhile Hamer had at least a dozen innovations that others later adopted, yet they get no credit for the ideas.

[polara]

Marketplace perceptions

PRS: "Yeah, of course, PRSs rock. All the big guys play them and I see their ads all the time.They look cool, and I can spot the body shape and and headstock shape across a room. The guitars are well made, easy to play, have fancy tops, good parts. I like them."

Hamer: "The ones I've seen look just like a Gibson, but I saw another that looked just like a Fender, and I think I saw a pointy one that was neon pink. Doesn't that goofy guy from Cheap Trick play one with five necks? I picked up a Hammer Slammer and it was a crappy guitar. Are they still in business? I head Kramer bought them."

[MCChris]

As others have said, it comes down to marketing. Name a SINGLE notable guitarist who played a Mirage. You can't. Aesthetics are relative, but it's amazing how a guitar suddenly becomes beautiful when it's associated with a famous player.

After that, yes, the stubborn loyalty to Wilkinson didn't do the model any favors, although I will say that I have no issues with the trem on my Mirage. I also own a CE22, and both guitars are keepers (at least as much as a guitar can be a keeper for a fickle guy like me).

[kizanski]

Marketplace perceptions

PRS: "Yeah, of course, PRSs rock. All the big guys play them and I see their ads all the time.They look cool, and I can spot the body shape and and headstock shape across a room. The guitars are well made, easy to play, have fancy tops, good parts. I like them."

Hamer: "The ones I've seen look just like a Gibson, but I saw another that looked just like a Fender, and I think I saw a pointy one that was neon pink. Doesn't that goofy guy from Cheap Trick play one with five necks? I picked up a Hammer Slammer and it was a crappy guitar. Are they still in business? I head Kramer bought them."

Sure, you "can spot the body shape and and headstock shape across a room," unless it's a smokey bar and that PRS is a single cut. Then the Gibson lawyers get involved. lol

...and Hamer was never sued over their models that "look like a Gibson."

Obviously, personal taste is what it is, and for the record, I think the PRS Artist 24 is a perfect looking guitar, but unfortunately, I have yet to play one that had a neck that I liked. Combine that with the fact that you can get just about any Mirage for half the price of any used PRS, and I'm happy to change some hardware - if it even needs it.

[Rodan]

Hmmm. What could it possibly be?

See, visually, I really prefer the Mirage. I find the uneven cutaway depths and left & right "waist" indents a lot sportier (is that the right word?). I prefer the rear-locking tuners to the PRS' and as for the blended heel...well, just looka' the block on that PRS! Prop's to form following function.

I almost never used the "blower" switch on my Mirage I and the slightly corroded trem' bridge is blocked. The 'Smith might take the edge in those areas of utility...

I see the Mirage as closer to the PRS Santana design, but still not enough to call it derivative.

[bcsride]

PRS was simple genius. Take the two dominate solid body guitars and "average" them out with a few good marketing twists even initially before there were lots of endorsers.

LP = 24.75 scale, set neck, mahogany body with maple top, TOM bridge, H-H with Vol. Vol. Tone, Tone, and 3 way

Strat 25.5 scale, bolt on, alder (or ash) with maple neck, tremolo, SSS with 5 way.

So, you through those in the blender and get

25 scale, set neck, mahogany with carved maple, tremolo, H-H with "5 way" to get some coil tapped sounds.

The PRS design lets you get some stratish sounds, some LPish sounds, and you can whammy with a set neck.

Of course, that is pretty darn close to a Mirage so I don't know why the mirage didn't do better. So, add a bit of marketing?

The cool initial per-endorser everywhere marketing was the crazy tops, colors, and of course the dragon inlay. I remember hearing folks talk about the dragons. They'd go to stores that had one just to look at it. The dragon made people talk about PRS. The dragon was a showcase for craftsmanship.

One of my old guitar players had an early pink PRS (I think before there were called CU or anything, there were just PRS?). Totally over the top flame pink finish. Played it in hair metal bands in the late 80's early 90's. Played it in Country bands in the mid 90's. Still has it. Is still his best guitar 'cause it sounds awesome. He has a matching purple one as well. Even more eye catching. But, he never plays it as it doesn't sound as good. Same guitar, same design, I think about 2 years apart in production. Different wood - I mean both are mahogany and maple but different specific pieces of wood.

And, the body design is very beautiful. In fact, if I could get a PRS with legit binding on body and neck (yep, I like it) and a TOM bridge (yep, I like it) I'd probably get one.

On the other hand, I thing the PRS SC body shape is ugly. But I think most folks like those as well.

[crunchee]

I had a Mirage (HBs, Koa top) once upon a time, never could bond with it. One thing that I didn't like, was the volute on the neck, just below the headstock on the back of the neck. I never could figure out why that was necessary on that model, when Specials, Studios, and Artists of the time didn't have it...because of the trem, maybe? I just didn't like the looks of it, having it there reminded me of the volute on a '70's Gibson. I don't care much for Sperzels, either, so that didn't help.

I never looked at the Mirage as a PRS killer, or even a PRS equivalent for that matter, as I never got into PRS. I wouldn't mind having a Custom 22 with a stoptail, or a similar McCarty; but nowadays they're starting to have too damn many models for a casual observer like me to even try to keep track of, much less want.

[veatch]

Nothing to add, just wanted to take the opportunity to post this pic. It's a hell of a guitar, and Greg did a great job making it right.

Before:

After:

[Toadroller]

Hmmm. What could it possibly be?

I always thought this was more in the PRS vein:

Import Stellar 1 I picked up for $100. Oak top; set neck, 24 frets, aggressive strat-esque body shape. It's pretty, but it just hangs on the wall and doesn't get any real play time from me.

[SteveB]

Paul started a decade later, did very little that was unique and built his company in to the # 3.

you mean other than body shape, custom designed bridge, custom designed locking tuners, unique wiring system, exceptional fret access, and 24 frets on a well balanced double cut carved top body? Yep, nothing unique there.

[kizanski]

The 5 Way Rotary Switch could not possibly be a popular item with a regularly gigging musician (unless that musician rarely or never switches from one pickup to the other).

Imagine playing on the neck pickup (Position 1) and then wanting to switch to bridge humbucking for a quick solo (Position 5)...*CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* ...ok...solo...and then back to the neck pickup, *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK*. Back to rhythm.

Not to mention that you can not visibly tell where you are in your pickup selection. On any other guitar I can think of (except maybe a Jazzmaster) this is not a problem.

Not the best functional layout for those pickup options.

Some people hate the sound of out-of-phase pickups and split coils, but that's a different discussion for a different thread.

[DaveL]

don't get me wrong, I liked the eclipse, it's right in my wheelhouse of mid late 90's hamers

with chunky necks... but if I weren't a hamer freak, I might be tempted to say, eeeesshhh...

put a bag on it's head. I don't get that same feeling from the mirage, at the same time,

it is not one of the best looking axes I've seen... and koa isn't everyone's taste even tho

it is a beautiful wood.

[KH Guitar Freak]

The 5 Way Rotary Switch could not possibly be a popular item with a regularly gigging musician (unless that musician rarely or never switches from one pickup to the other).

Imagine playing on the neck pickup (Position 1) and then wanting to switch to bridge humbucking for a quick solo (Position 5)...*CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* ...ok...solo...and then back to the neck pickup, *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK*. Back to rhythm.

Not to mention that you can not visibly tell where you are in your pickup selection. On any other guitar I can think of (except maybe a Jazzmaster) this is not a problem.

Not the best functional layout for those pickup options.

Some people hate the sound of out-of-phase pickups and split coils, but that's a different discussion for a different thread.

I never had a problem going from between the bridge and neck settings on the 5 way rotary. However, if you want to change to a specific "in between" sound on the fly, it can be a bitch at times...

[MCChris]

The 5 Way Rotary Switch could not possibly be a popular item with a regularly gigging musician (unless that musician rarely or never switches from one pickup to the other).

Imagine playing on the neck pickup (Position 1) and then wanting to switch to bridge humbucking for a quick solo (Position 5)...*CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* ...ok...solo...and then back to the neck pickup, *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK*. Back to rhythm.

Not to mention that you can not visibly tell where you are in your pickup selection. On any other guitar I can think of (except maybe a Jazzmaster) this is not a problem.

Not the best functional layout for those pickup options.

Some people hate the sound of out-of-phase pickups and split coils, but that's a different discussion for a different thread.

I never had a problem going from between the bridge and neck settings on the 5 way rotary. However, if you want to change to a specific "in between" sound on the fly, it can be a bitch at times...

Not to mention a nightmare for the sound guy. There's significant variation in volume between most of those settings.

Nice Swiss Army knife guitars for the studio, though.