A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Construction and repair of Classical Guitar and related instruments
User avatar
rinneby
Posts: 962
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:52 am
Location: Sweden

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by rinneby » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:18 am

souldier wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:47 am
I'm curious as to what specific case you used to ship it?
A most important question, I'd like to know this as well. I can't imagine it was a Hiscox or equal?

/Jon
1950 - Jose Ramirez II
1977 - Kuniharu Nobe No.15
1990 - Antonio Raya Pardo 1A
2004 - Alain Raifort Grand Concert
2007 - Curt Claus Voigt Torres

Feel free to ask me anything about Japanese classical guitars.

vesa
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:52 pm
Location: Sulva, Finland

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by vesa » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:28 am

vincentx wrote:
And I am going to build a new one for my client.
A right thing to do.
Even bitter and sad(not to mention the extra labour).

Here is an old thread about replacing the top by James Lister, maybe you can use it.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=102792&p=1098185&h ... p#p1098185
Vesa Kuokkanen

Antonio Marin nr. 813 1995 (Bouchet)
Vesa Kuokkanen 2016

John higgon
Amateur luthier
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:25 pm

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by John higgon » Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:26 pm

Very sad indeed. Were the strings at tension when you shipped it, and would it reduce the risk of damage to ship a guitar with the strings slackened off?

Intune
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:20 pm
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by Intune » Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:48 pm

petermc61 wrote:
I don't think you can say with any certainly the seller isn't responsible. This will depend upon when the point of ownership changeover occurs.
Sadly, I once found myself embroiled in just this situation: a brand new guitar I had commissioned from a highly reputable luthier arrived with a severely cracked soundboard (despite the Hiscox Pro II case), and the luthier insisted that I must share the responsibility and the burden. For his part, he was only willing to repair the crack and further insisted I must accept a damaged guitar (at a slightly reduced price to allow for the damage). As I had paid for a new, pristine instrument, I rejected his idea and insisted he must either re-top it, build me a new one, or refund my money in full -- all of which he was unwilling to do. We quickly reached a thorny impasse.

What to do? I picked up the phone and called three of America's top luthiers -- Ruck, Byers, Connor -- and asked what they would do in a similar situation. Without hesitation, they all came down on my side: it was the luthier's responsibility, they said, to deliver an undamaged instrument; that any damage sustained in shipment prior to the buyer's taking possession was the luthier's responsibility alone, regardless of who paid the shipping cost; and that, therefore, my insistence on re-topping, re-building, or refunding was wholly justified.

I passed my findings on to the luthier in question, telling him of my intention to air our dispute in public on the internet. Apparently this did the trick, as he soon agreed to refund my money, claiming it had been the first time a guitar of his had been damaged in shipment and that he was in uncharted territory about how to resolve the responsibility issue. For my part, I learned a valuable lesson from this experience: always discuss beforehand and be entirely clear about who is responsible for any damage sustained during shipment of a guitar -- particularly a new one.

P.S. No, I won't name the luthier in question, so don't even ask.....
Intune
2010 Andres Marvi (cedar/Madagascar rosewood)

"...beware of all enterprises that require new clothes..." -- H.D. Thoreau

User avatar
souldier
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by souldier » Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:11 pm

John higgon wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:26 pm
Very sad indeed. Were the strings at tension when you shipped it, and would it reduce the risk of damage to ship a guitar with the strings slackened off?
I'm of the opinion that slackening the strings can greatly reduce the risk of damage during shipment. The combined tension of the strings comes up to around 80-100 pounds. We sometimes don't realize just how much stress and tension is being placed on the neck/top of the guitar. One hard drop combined with 80-100 pounds of tension is enough to snap off the head stock, to crack the top, pull off the bridge, etc. Also if the guitar goes through extreme heat which isn't uncommon in the summer time, the glue could loosen, causing the bridge to fly right off if under tension. No damage is done by completely slackening the strings, so I see no reason why one would want to ship a guitar with full string tension.

On another note, I believe polyfoam cases are actually superior in providing protection when it comes to shipping a guitar as foam absorbs and dissipates impact away from the guitar, while very rigid cases like your typical plywood case transfers the impact TO the guitar, increasing the chances of damage. A luthier on this forum reported that he had seen guitars damaged during transport even in very expensive carbon fiber cases, while observing that his guitars were better protected in polyfoam cases.
"Success grants its rewards to a few, but is the dream of the multitudes.
Excellence is available to all, but is accepted only by a few." - Christopher Parkening

User avatar
Andy Culpepper
Luthier
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 4:57 pm
Location: Ithaca, NY USA

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by Andy Culpepper » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:08 pm

souldier wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:11 pm
John higgon wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:26 pm
Very sad indeed. Were the strings at tension when you shipped it, and would it reduce the risk of damage to ship a guitar with the strings slackened off?
On another note, I believe polyfoam cases are actually superior in providing protection when it comes to shipping a guitar as foam absorbs and dissipates impact away from the guitar, while very rigid cases like your typical plywood case transfers the impact TO the guitar, increasing the chances of damage. A luthier on this forum reported that he had seen guitars damaged during transport even in very expensive carbon fiber cases, while observing that his guitars were better protected in polyfoam cases.
Totally agree. To me the TKL Zero Gravity is the absolute best case for shipping but most players seem to turn their nose up at it.

User avatar
Chris Sobel
Luthier
Posts: 1068
Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 8:44 am
Location: Vancouver, WA

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by Chris Sobel » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:43 pm

Hi Vincent,

I'm really bummed to hear about the shipping incident. There has been a lot of speculation in this thread about what you could have done to avoid it, and while those things are worth pondering for future shipments, they are often outside our control.

Regards,

Chris
CE Sobel Guitars

User avatar
Michael.N.
Posts: 6625
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:28 am
Location: UK

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by Michael.N. » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:21 am

Intune wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:48 pm
petermc61 wrote:
I don't think you can say with any certainly the seller isn't responsible. This will depend upon when the point of ownership changeover occurs.
Sadly, I once found myself embroiled in just this situation: a brand new guitar I had commissioned from a highly reputable luthier arrived with a severely cracked soundboard (despite the Hiscox Pro II case), and the luthier insisted that I must share the responsibility and the burden. For his part, he was only willing to repair the crack and further insisted I must accept a damaged guitar (at a slightly reduced price to allow for the damage). As I had paid for a new, pristine instrument, I rejected his idea and insisted he must either re-top it, build me a new one, or refund my money in full -- all of which he was unwilling to do. We quickly reached a thorny impasse.

What to do? I picked up the phone and called three of America's top luthiers -- Ruck, Byers, Connor -- and asked what they would do in a similar situation. Without hesitation, they all came down on my side: it was the luthier's responsibility, they said, to deliver an undamaged instrument; that any damage sustained in shipment prior to the buyer's taking possession was the luthier's responsibility alone, regardless of who paid the shipping cost; and that, therefore, my insistence on re-topping, re-building, or refunding was wholly justified.

I passed my findings on to the luthier in question, telling him of my intention to air our dispute in public on the internet. Apparently this did the trick, as he soon agreed to refund my money, claiming it had been the first time a guitar of his had been damaged in shipment and that he was in uncharted territory about how to resolve the responsibility issue. For my part, I learned a valuable lesson from this experience: always discuss beforehand and be entirely clear about who is responsible for any damage sustained during shipment of a guitar -- particularly a new one.

P.S. No, I won't name the luthier in question, so don't even ask.....
He obviously did not have insurance. Then again even if he tried to claim it's not guaranteed that he would have been paid out. It amounts to another risk for the luthier, however low that risk is. I agree that it is the responsibility of the luthier. As soon as the box is opened and the guitar arrives intact it then becomes the responsibility of the buyer, even if the instrument is on trial.

As for packing. I built a rigid box from plywood, the guitar case would be placed within the box surrounded by a few inches of large cell bubble wrap. I even had customers ship the empty plywood box back to me, financially it was cheaper than building a new box each time I shipped a guitar. It wasn't long before I changed my mind on this. The plywood added a lot of weight and there were signs that it was being thrown about, the edges of the box were suffering even after just a couple of trips. I think it offered better crush resistance but probably lower impact resistance. I switched back to custom made cardboard boxes but I insert a couple of thin plywood sheets that correspond to both the back and front areas of the guitar.
Historicalguitars.

User avatar
Justfun
Posts: 846
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 7:58 pm
Location: New York Queens

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by Justfun » Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:59 pm

this sucks.
I know you will make it better.

Fred
Richard Reynoso, Cypress \ Spruce 2016
Lozano Spruce 2001
Inofuentes 1997

sphsieh616
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:29 am
Location: Taiwan

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by sphsieh616 » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:43 am

What a Tragedy!
SF Express is also my first choice when shipping.
sorry to hear that.

BTW, I've read your blog a few years ago,
I think it's the most informative blog of classical guitar in Chinese.

MessyTendon
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:33 am

Re: A new born guitar devastated during shipping

Post by MessyTendon » Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:37 pm

Send it to me...I'll glue it and play it :) Really I would...but ouch that hurts.

I think it was likely stacked and got compressed enough to crack. As tragic as it appears, There is good reason to celebrate. That guitar likely sat under a ton of other materials in the shipping container, literally a ton.

Return to “Luthiers”