Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center

Hamer Guitars USA might be coming back soon.


BCR Greg

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, serial said:

Ahhh, the HFC is family and every now and again, we have brotherly disagreements.  I've been here since 1996 and there have been a half-dozen or more 'nuclear' spats.  This doesn't even come close...

;)

Yeah, that's real! Sir Douglas/Ed Rechts bouts come to mind. Laugh-out-loud hi-LARIOUS!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 608
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 minutes ago, Ed Rechts said:

WHAT????

Yeah.  I get blamed for everything around here!

I was wondering what it would take to get you to surface.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, kizanski said:

I was wondering what it would take to get you to surface.  

I heard through the grapevine that Hamer was coming back, and I wanted to see if I could order a red 12 string Chaparral bass. I know this woman that really wants to replace the one she had that was stolen....

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, RobB said:

Yeah, that's real! Sir Douglas/Ed Rechts bouts come to mind. Laugh-out-loud hi-LARIOUS!

I thought it was Ed and AnDy.  Maybe that was a different one. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the pAnZy one. And I can't remember yesterday. A classic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting back on topic. I don't think there is a market share out there for a new HamerUSA startup. No one under age 30 knows/cares who Cheap Trick or Living Colour are. The few hundred HFCers that are still active guitar buyers...I dunno. Speaking for myself, it would be cool to see well-made, accurate reissues of classic Hamers. I would never purchase one, however, as original examples (excepting 4-digits) are still a relative bargain in the used market. 

The Frankenstein monster never asked to be resurrected from the body parts of other unwitting corpses. Best to let the dead RIP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, RobB said:

Getting back on topic. I don't think there is a market share out there for a new HamerUSA startup. No one under age 30 knows/cares who Cheap Trick or Living Colour are. The few hundred HFCers that are still active guitar buyers...I dunno. Speaking for myself, it would be cool to see well-made, accurate reissues of classic Hamers. I would never purchase one, however, as original examples (excepting 4-digits) are still a relative bargain in the used market. 

The Frankenstein monster never asked to be resurrected from the body parts of other unwitting corpses. Best to let the dead RIP. 

If you are starting from square one, why do so with a tarnished brand with no signature model?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobB said:

Getting back on topic. I don't think there is a market share out there for a new HamerUSA startup. No one under age 30 knows/cares who Cheap Trick or Living Colour are. The few hundred HFCers that are still active guitar buyers...I dunno. Speaking for myself, it would be cool to see well-made, accurate reissues of classic Hamers. I would never purchase one, however, as original examples (excepting 4-digits) are still a relative bargain in the used market. 

The Frankenstein monster never asked to be resurrected from the body parts of other unwitting corpses. Best to let the dead RIP. 

That's the thing. There are so many famous guitarists out there in famous bands that used to play Hamers, but I doubt many would return to the fold so to speak even if given the opportunity 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Texsunburst59 said:

I know I'm not one of the REAL regulars here...

 

Your opinion and comments are just as valid and valuable here if youve been a member for 20 years or 20 minutes.

Your contributions and thoughts are always welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cmatthes said:

Your opinion and comments are just as valid and valuable here if youve been a member for 20 years or 20 minutes.

Your contributions and thoughts are always welcome.

Although respect is earnt ✊️

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, tmsfo said:

This brings to mind an essay written by Bill Nash several years ago:

 

"It may be a bit of a strange concept...


I think this is an interesting argument, but I also still think it is an argument, not necessarily a fact.  

Fender has changed hands and changed plans, but it isn't as if they fired everyone each time the company changed hands, or as if Leo Fender was handbuilding every guitar prior to 1964.  Yes, I know they had to buy a whole new factory in 1985, but it was still a group of folks who had been at Fender previously along with all the intellectual property.  A strat isn't rocket science.  I mean, think of what's in it and how they were made.  You're going to seriously tell me that those folks could not have built a strat more-or-less identical to a 63 Strat?  A guitar that was created to be cheaply reproduced over and over again?  Poppycock!

The whole genesis of the bolt-on neck without a headstock pitch was to enable mass production.  It's like people getting pissy about rock music "selling out" when rock music was a very commercial enterprise from the word go.   It also assumes that because guitar collectors think pre-CBS Fenders are the best that those strats were, by extension, the epitome of Leo Fender's vision for the strat.  And there is at least evidence that that is a false assumption as Fender claimed that some of the strat-style guitars he was making at G&L were actually the best refinement of what he intended a strat to be.  In a way, by bringing Leo himself into the mix, Nash is kind of having his cake and eating it too.  If Leo Fender matters that much, what about G&L?  If not, then why does his being at Fender matter that much after he came up with the original design?  

I don't want to create a false dichotomy here.  There are certainly more ways to take that than just those two questions, but they kind of lept to mind.  Mostly, my point is that Fender, at least as far as I know, while having many eras, also has an unbroken lineage back to the beginning.  I happen to think institutional knowledge matters.  If Ford wanted to make a 66 Fastback again, they could, and they could do it better than anybody else.  I know this will be outrageous to some, but the Fender Custom Shop probably already turns out better guitars, guitar-to-guitar, than Fender did in the 50s.  Even Leo Fender seemed to think the clamour for vintage Fenders was a bit odd.  I can't find the exact interview, but he mentioned that all those guitars were basically grabbing a body, a neck, and parts out of a bucket, throwing it together, and having a guitar.  What the Fender CS does is far more meticulous than what was going in back in 1957, no matter how much Bill Nash loves old Fenders.  I know he talks a lot about imports too, but he also states directly that "No one has made a real Fender guitar since 1964."

The big difference with a company that has changed hands and Hamer is that it seems any new version of Hamer would have no institutional inheritance.  The main players in Hamer are all off doing other things - kind of the reverse of G&L where you have "the guy" but not "the name."  The speculation that occasionally floats around here leans toward any new Hamer having "the name" but none of "the guys," or at least one of the big guys that it would take to even get us diehards to consider the brand somehow connected to the old brand.  I don't entirely agree with Nash - I think FMIC can makes as real a Strat or Tele as they want when they feel like it, which is often because they can charge an arm and a leg for one - but I also think the situation with a new Hamer is different. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, jwhitcomb3 said:

That's right. You have the same opportunity to demonstrate you're a damned fool as we old timers had!

That's right but if you are new then making a fool of yourself makes people think you are a fool anyway. To get some real kudos earn some big time respect over the years then BOOM hit everyone with a "Hamer coming back" thread. Easy 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Armitage said:

It would be cool if they let someone like Shishkov just run with them... a 1 to 5 man shop...

He already is and he's killin' it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LucSulla said:


I think this is an interesting argument, but I also still think it is an argument, not necessarily a fact.  

Fender has changed hands and changed plans, but it isn't as if they fired everyone each time the company changed hands, or as if Leo Fender was handbuilding every guitar prior to 1964.  Yes, I know they had to buy a whole new factory in 1985, but it was still a group of folks who had been at Fender previously along with all the intellectual property.  A strat isn't rocket science.  I mean, think of what's in it and how they were made.  You're going to seriously tell me that those folks could not have built a strat more-or-less identical to a 63 Strat?  A guitar that was created to be cheaply reproduced over and over again?  Poppycock!

The whole genesis of the bolt-on neck without a headstock pitch was to enable mass production.  It's like people getting pissy about rock music "selling out" when rock music was a very commercial enterprise from the word go.   It also assumes that because guitar collectors think pre-CBS Fenders are the best that those strats were, by extension, the epitome of Leo Fender's vision for the strat.  And there is at least evidence that that is a false assumption as Fender claimed that some of the strat-style guitars he was making at G&L were actually the best refinement of what he intended a strat to be.  In a way, by bringing Leo himself into the mix, Nash is kind of having his cake and eating it too.  If Leo Fender matters that much, what about G&L?  If not, then why does his being at Fender matter that much after he came up with the original design?  

I don't want to create a false dichotomy here.  There are certainly more ways to take that than just those two questions, but they kind of lept to mind.  Mostly, my point is that Fender, at least as far as I know, while having many eras, also has an unbroken lineage back to the beginning.  I happen to think institutional knowledge matters.  If Ford wanted to make a 66 Fastback again, they could, and they could do it better than anybody else.  I know this will be outrageous to some, but the Fender Custom Shop probably already turns out better guitars, guitar-to-guitar, than Fender did in the 50s.  Even Leo Fender seemed to think the clamour for vintage Fenders was a bit odd.  I can't find the exact interview, but he mentioned that all those guitars were basically grabbing a body, a neck, and parts out of a bucket, throwing it together, and having a guitar.  What the Fender CS does is far more meticulous than what was going in back in 1957, no matter how much Bill Nash loves old Fenders.  I know he talks a lot about imports too, but he also states directly that "No one has made a real Fender guitar since 1964."

The big difference with a company that has changed hands and Hamer is that it seems any new version of Hamer would have no institutional inheritance.  The main players in Hamer are all off doing other things - kind of the reverse of G&L where you have "the guy" but not "the name."  The speculation that occasionally floats around here leans toward any new Hamer having "the name" but none of "the guys," or at least one of the big guys that it would take to even get us diehards to consider the brand somehow connected to the old brand.  I don't entirely agree with Nash - I think FMIC can makes as real a Strat or Tele as they want when they feel like it, which is often because they can charge an arm and a leg for one - but I also think the situation with a new Hamer is different. 

 

Well stated.  No DNA, no Hamer.

Period.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

16 minutes ago, serial said:

He already is and he's killin' it!

As much as I have enjoyed Hamers (a lot of them over the years) Mike has clearly taken it to the next level. And I say that confidently not even having TOUCHED one. Yet.

Taking a step backward (Shishkov & Hamer = "Shamer"??) does not compute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, cmatthes said:

Well stated.  No DNA, no Hamer.

Period.

Agreed on both points.  Can we get back to mindless quarreling now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...