Re: The Loar Announces The LM-300 Mandolin

Originally Posted by
Potosimando
I assume the name is perfectly legal. Regardless, I would never buy a "The Loar", nor would I ever talk it up or encourage anyone to consider buying one, simply because of the name...it is hard for me to see the name as anything but underhanded piggy-backing and misleading, and it likely will prove to be more so as time goes on. Being legal doesn't mean that something is right.
And what a shame, as the instrument line gets high marks for tone and playability, relative to others in its price range and beyond. In my opinion an instrument ought to be able to stand on its own two feet without relying on marketing gimickry or slight-of-hand...but I guess we are more of a "marketing" culture than a "quality" culture (marketing first, quality second). Surely "The Loar" name will always be a problem for many, especially those of us who hold the name Loar in a special place.
Were I to sign this post "The David Grisman", "The Chris Thile", or whoever, then many would be P.O.'d and rightly so.
I totally agree, I thought it was a cheap marketing ploy when they first came out and still do.
The Mike
Mike,
Edmonton, Ab.
"Take me back to 1953."
Stanley V5
Collings MF5
Gibson A Jr.
Bookmarks