Chunweh Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I see where you guys are coming from, but I'm not sure you should have changed the logo. The vintage look is what a lot of kramer fans love and the logo is a huge part of that! Also, it means that an 80's fan (for example) is more likely to go for an old used Kramer than a new one, because that is what he/she wants to hold in their hands! If you retain the same feel then you would get more people interested in buying brand new kramers. Does this make sense? Anyway i just think you would benefit from having a few more with the old logo (maybe the massive logo! ) as I for one would instantly buy a new striker or Baretta if it had the full vintage look! This sounds a tad silly but looks go a long way when people think of Kramer! What do you lot think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moku Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 i agree, but as a company gibson/kramer can't look back and live in the 80s; they have to be forward-looking and come out w/ something new and find new customers rather than old farts like me who still hold on to the 80s past they can't make it as a company if they just replicate models with old logo. new company, new logo. my .02 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamanthaM Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 i agree' date=' but as a company gibson/kramer can't look back .....................................they can't make it as a company if they just replicate models with old logo. [/quote'] Ya, But isn't that EXACTLY what they have been doing with Gibson, since IDK the 50's? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinTheHood Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 I dont like the new logo either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Scary Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 I also am stuck in the 80's Kramer era. HOWEVER I think the new logo is welcomed. Remember that during the 80's Kramer were innovators!! They always were doing something different. My Pacer classic is on stage every night with me as is my Assault 211. One has the classic look while the other has great new look and is built very well. I love hte new 2010 line with both logos!.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego the guy Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 i agree, but as a company gibson/kramer can't look back and live in the 80s; they have to be forward-looking and come out w/ something new and find new customers rather than old farts like me who still hold on to the 80s past they can't make it as a company if they just replicate models with old logo. new company, new logo. my .02 cents. dont worry,buddy! im stuck in the 80's too and i wasnt even alive back then! but hey, im probably the only gu in my school who likes old music from the 80's... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiodtk5 Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 Well, I can't say that I even knew that Gibson changed the Kramer logo until I read this thread. The old logo was better. Just add this to the list of great marketing moves in the history of Gibson. seriously at this point Kramer only has one thing going for it...1980's heritage. You put a new logo on it and make guitas that aren't from the Kramer heritage, then why use the Kramer name. I mean seriously what weight does the Kramer name have on selling guitars in 2010? You might as well just call it Henry. You are trying to market it from nothing anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Well, I can't say that I even knew that Gibson changed the Kramer logo until I read this thread. The old logo was better. Just add this to the list of great marketing moves in the history of Gibson. seriously at this point Kramer only has one thing going for it...1980's heritage. You put a new logo on it and make guitas that aren't from the Kramer heritage, then why use the Kramer name. I mean seriously what weight does the Kramer name have on selling guitars in 2010? You might as well just call it Henry. You are trying to market it from nothing anyway. The Kramer pacer is awesome, i dont know what your talking about dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiodtk5 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 The Kramer pacer is awesome, i dont know what your talking about dude. Maybe I was a bit confusing in my ramblings, but what you just said totally agrees with what I said. The Pacer is a historical, traditional Kramer guitar. That is exactly the guitar that Kramer should be making. However, under Gibson Kramer is now making guitars like the Assault 220 & 221 and the Pariah. Those guitars have no heritage with the Kramer brand and won't have lots of pull under that name. In short I think Gibson is trying to make Kramer into something it never was. Don't misunderstand what I am saying in that I am not trying to say the products with the Kramer name on them are bad. What I am trying to say here is Gibson is resurrecting a brand name that has not done much for the past 20 years. While bringing this brand back they change the traditional logo and product offering. So why call it Kramer then? There is no brand identification with the logo and little identification with the product offering. As such Gibson could call this brand offering anything they wanted to. I suggested the name Henry would provide as much brand recognition as how the Kramer guitars are being marketed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinTheHood Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 Maybe I was a bit confusing in my ramblings, but what you just said totally agrees with what I said. The Pacer is a historical, traditional Kramer guitar. That is exactly the guitar that Kramer should be making. However, under Gibson Kramer is now making guitars like the Assault 220 & 221 and the Pariah. Those guitars have no heritage with the Kramer brand and won't have lots of pull under that name. In short I think Gibson is trying to make Kramer into something it never was. Don't misunderstand what I am saying in that I am not trying to say the products with the Kramer name on them are bad. What I am trying to say here is Gibson is resurrecting a brand name that has not done much for the past 20 years. While bringing this brand back they change the traditional logo and product offering. So why call it Kramer then? There is no brand identification with the logo and little identification with the product offering. As such Gibson could call this brand offering anything they wanted to. I suggested the name Henry would provide as much brand recognition as how the Kramer guitars are being marketed. The way I see it, is that the non traditional Kramers basically picked up where the Epiphone superstrats left off. Not only that, but they are as high a quality or higher than a good portion of the old Epi superstrats...for a better price, even. If you want an Epiphone superstrat, you buy a Kramer. Personally, I think the Kramer name is going to sell that type of guitar better than Epi ever managed to. And I dont think it is coincidence that Epiphone ended their line of superstrats at about the same time they acquired Kramer. With that said, I dont particularly like the new logo, and I dont think they should have changed it...at least on the traditional models, because those are the models that actual Kramer fans are more likely to buy. I can see changing the logo on the non-traditional models, I suppose, but I still think it is ugly. And there is some brand identification to a point, and especially if you are looking at it from a combinded brand point of view. With the Kramer name, you know that your are buying a guitar from a company that has always specialized in superstrats. With the Gibson/Epiphone quality, you know that you arent getting a USA high-end guitar, but you are still getting a guitar that meets or exceeds the quality standards of Epiphone. Thats not a bad thing, escecially for the price point. Look at the selection of guitars you get in the $300 price range from Epiphone. Its pretty pathetic. And forget getting anything with a locking trem system or coil-splitting. Kramer was dead before they left New Jersey, and even they were outsourcing to Asia near the end. Kramer had a huge track record of financial problems. If it wasnt for Gibson, Kramer would be long gone. Some people might actually prefer it that way. But personally, I'm thankful that they are carrying on the name if only to offer well built, affordable superstrats with quality somewhere between the Epiphone and Gibson brands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoRedFoot Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 What new logo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinTheHood Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 What new logo? You've probably seen it by now, but here you go... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoRedFoot Posted November 14, 2010 Share Posted November 14, 2010 You've probably seen it by now, but here you go... Oh that...yeah, maybe cuz Gary is doing his own thing again? There are a few models of HIS stuff I wouldn't mind getting my hands on. Not the cheap Gibson owned Kramers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cullenszoo Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Well I hate to go all moderate on everyone, but I like both. I am a product of the 80s and I remember seeing my rock gods shredding away on Kramers with the block letters on a banana headstock. And the Gibson made Striker I own has them. But, having played it, It dosn't matter what logo it has on it cause it out plays ANY guitar I've ever picked up. The logo is just a logo, the quality is what will put Kramer back on top. I'm sure Gibson, who's name has been around since the early 1900s, and has the same logo, understands that the insturments make the brand not the other way around. Aside from financial issues, Kramer fell from grace because they were more trend than quality. Not that there weren't good guitars, but it was about the style. Metal and Hard Rock aren't as popular today as they were in the mid 80s so insturments that are built for that type of playing have become a niche market. Jackson, another big name for metal was bought by Fender. It only makes sense that Gibson should aquire Kramer. in order to compete in that market. My Striker FR-422SM is built for the demands of a metal player. It plays circles around the Jackson I had. I am fond of the old logo but I think Gibson is making the statment "this isn't your fathers Kramer!" Maybe I was a bit confusing in my ramblings, but what you just said totally agrees with what I said. The Pacer is a historical, traditional Kramer guitar. That is exactly the guitar that Kramer should be making. However, under Gibson Kramer is now making guitars like the Assault 220 & 221 and the Pariah. Those guitars have no heritage with the Kramer brand and won't have lots of pull under that name. In short I think Gibson is trying to make Kramer into something it never was. Don't misunderstand what I am saying in that I am not trying to say the products with the Kramer name on them are bad. What I am trying to say here is Gibson is resurrecting a brand name that has not done much for the past 20 years. While bringing this brand back they change the traditional logo and product offering. So why call it Kramer then? There is no brand identification with the logo and little identification with the product offering. As such Gibson could call this brand offering anything they wanted to. I suggested the name Henry would provide as much brand recognition as how the Kramer guitars are being marketed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard_wally Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 It might be a much needed change! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrygtr62 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I like the old logo of the K descending to the end of the headstock, or the other one without it, those logos kick ***, my SM1 has the sloping one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.