Why are Larrivee Guitars not more popular?

[Kevidosa]

Well, just like the title of the post. I'm a recent and proud owner and just lust love my Larrivee, but compared to other top builders, even newer ones, Larrivee seems to be way under the radar. Any thoughts why?
Thanks,

[Rockysdad]

There's a lot of *Lemmings* in the world.  

Some people think big bucks = best guitar.
Some people think a company that's been around for a long time = best guitar.
Some people think because so & so plays it = best guitar.

I'm more than happy with my Larrivée guitars.
Apparently, I don't understand *other peoples* thinking.  

[ducktrapper]

I've been going to a lot of jams lately and usually just bring my lowly, plain Jane L-01. It's usually the least expensive guitar in the circle, always holds its own and is often the best sounding. The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind. 

[StringPicker6]

My personal theory is that Jean would prefer to keep his philosophy of building affordable quality guitars, and therefore he doesn't spend a ton of money on the company advertising budget.  All I know is that I'm done drooling over the big brands. 

[Silence Dogood]

I've said this before somewhere but it's worth repeating.  Lack of marketing (like Taylor, Martin, et al) is probably a big part of it, but I think the French name is intimidating and in some cases off-putting to some Americans.  That might sound ridiculous but things like that are a very real "thing" in parts of the country.  I've known people that wouldn't buy Dijon mustard or even eat at Italian (pronounced "EYE-talian" where I come from) restaurants—not out
of prejudice, but simply out of unfamiliarity.  There is a kind of built-in intimidation in such matters, and rather than be embarrassed, some people just shy away.   

All said, it's a shame because Larrivee makes great guitars that a lot of people would enjoy a lot more than what they currently own and likely spent way too much money for.

[ducktrapper]

I've said this before somewhere but it's worth repeating.  Lack of marketing (like Taylor, Martin, et al) is probably a big part of it, but I think the French name is intimidating and in some cases off-putting to some Americans.  That might sound ridiculous but things like that are a very real "thing" in parts of the country.  I've known people that wouldn't buy Dijon mustard or even eat at Italian (pronounced "EYE-talian" where I come from) restaurants—not out
of prejudice, but simply out of unfamiliarity.  There is a kind of built-in intimidation in such matters, and rather than be embarrassed, some people just shy away.   

All said, it's a shame because Larrivee makes great guitars that a lot of people would enjoy a lot more than what they currently own and likely spent way too much money for.

That's funny. I said the same thing years ago. I actually suggested to Matthew Larrivee that they call the guitars that they market in the USA, I dunno, Matthews or something like that. Having a similar last name beginning in L and ending in e (although luckily with no grammatical accent marks), I know how this works. 

[B0WIE]

There's a few factors. One being that they don't put a lot into advertising. Neither do they rely on gimmicks.
While they have some heritage, it's not on the level of something like Martin.
Given their approach, I'd say Larrivee does really well. Dollar for dollar, they smoke Taylor and Martin. They don't appeal as much to those who are influenced by advertising or by names, but they sell a lot of guitars and the quality and value speak for themselves.

[Kevidosa]

I guess they are happy where they sit in the mix, so to speak. I love my larrivee, don't see myself ever getting rid of it. It's so amazing I just had to wonder why. I really like the perceived ideology and marketing. Kinda makes them more respectable- great sounding, beautiful guitars, seemingly less markup than other brands, family ran. A company I can really get behind. While I also own and love my Martin, they have cool pedigree for sure, but their marketing is irritating to me and lessens the brand, at least to me, but no denying the also make great guitars.   

[unclrob]

DANG!!!!!
I thought it was because people are stupid and only play guitars played by ----------------


keep smilin and keep dancin 

[Silence Dogood]

That's funny. I said the same thing years ago. I actually suggested to Matthew Larrivee that they call the guitars that they market in the USA, I dunno, Matthews or something like that. Having a similar last name beginning in L and ending in e (although luckily with no grammatical accent marks), I know how this works. 

FWIW, I'm glad they have kept the name and stayed true to the history of the company.  I personally like the name.

[jpmist]

I'll throw in my 2¢. So far we've got several mentions of "marketing" as a restraint on the brand's popularity. And to that I can't help but notice a lot of the "top ten acoustic guitars" articles I've come across often have many of the names of the companies that advertise on the magazine or site. So "Top 10 best guitars under $2K" isn't likely to have Larrivee in there.

But another angle I'd offer is that the Larrivee family seems comfortable with the number of guitars their factory can put out. To put out say 30%-40% more volume to justify an aggressive ad budget means more investment in machines, spray booths, lumber, workers, benefits, etc, etc which is all fairly expensive and risky for a family owned business.

For Larrivee to go the way of Taylor/Gibson/Martin means a few more levels of management, marketing, sales reps, and doubling (or more) their factory capacity. This might mean outside investors and sharing control of their brand. Likely, they've decided it's simply not worth whatever extra popularity and money they'd end up with for all that non-guitar related time and trouble. And I can't fault them for that. . .

[Silence Dogood]

If they can do what they love, keep the family employed and doing well, make great guitars that thousands of people enjoy playing, then why complicate matters to become the next Taylor?  To me it's the difference between being a rock star and a studio musician that works regularly and is in demand.  I'd personally take the latter option any day of the week.

[StringPicker6]

I saw some video once of Jean being interviewed, and he said he knows of famous musicians who play the big brand names on stage because of endorsements, etc.  But when they are at home or in the studio they use Larrivee's.  I love that image.  Sounds like the Larrivee company has found something in business that is sadly missing these days:  The concept of "enough".   

[ducktrapper]

I saw some video once of Jean being interviewed, and he said he knows of famous musicians who play the big brand names on stage because of endorsements, etc.  But when they are at home or in the studio they use Larrivee's.  I love that image.  Sounds like the Larrivee company has found something in business that is sadly missing these days:  The concept of "enough".  

This is true but the question then arises ... why the heck is that? Endorsements? They won't force you to play the guitar you endorse or Martin or Gibson named after you nor can they. Maybe For the same reason I bring a 1975 Martin D-35 to a gig? Instant credibility? But then again, why is that? I think the French name thing really is a factor for the similar reason Santa Cruz guitars aren't called Hoovers. That would suck. Marketing 101.
For the record, I'll leave the Martin on a stand and play my Larrivee.  

[247hoopsfan]

Many of us have been playing Larrivees for more than 20 years.  Larrivees were really hard to find in those days.  And we were happy to have found the best sounding guitars that were "under the radar."   The move to Oxnard California really set the stage for Larrivee expansion. The only reason I want Larrivee to be more popular is so the company remains in business and so others unaware find out what amazing guitars they make.
I believe Larrivee has reached a production level they are comfortable with and  still provide the stringent QC they have.
Jean will tell you he doesn't want to build the most guitars he wants to build the best.

[ducktrapper]

Many of us have been playing Larrivees for more than 20 years.  Larrivees were really hard to find in those days.  And we were happy to have found the best sounding guitars that were "under the radar."   The move to Oxnard California really set the stage for Larrivee expansion. The only reason I want Larrivee to be more popular is so the company remains in business and so others unaware find out what amazing guitars they make.
I believe Larrivee has reached a production level they are comfortable with and  still provide the stringent QC they have.
Jean will tell you he doesn't want to build the most guitars he wants to build the best.

I have always been a little bit ... out there and personally, I don't care if they are more popular. If the family making them is good with it so am I. If they're not, I have some ideas. Here's a song I've been playing lately.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JE-J1OmmFc

[teh]

I have three Martins including 2 standard series with sunburst finishes and one custom 12 fret. I also have three Larrivees and what sets them apart is their uniqueness; a flamed maple parlor (1 of 100), a custom 12 string and a Forum VI (#12 out of 19).

Not one of these guitars is better than the others, just different. Yesterday, my 1976 Martin shaded top D35 purchased new when I turned 21 was at the top of the order, today it will be the Forum VI.

My Larrivees have sold at least 15 guitars to friends and acquaintances including another Forum VI that is identical to mine. I'll take word of mouth and first hand experience over advertising any day of the week.

[Silence Dogood]

I've had my Larrivee for 19 years now (it's my only acoustic guitar) and I've introduced a lot of people to the Larrivee brand with it over the years.  One experience comes to mind that I've not thought of in a while.  About 15 years ago a local Christian radio personality put together a 100-guitar orchestra for a special event.  I tried out and got selected (it wasn't very hard) to participate.  The thing was billed as "100 Guitars of Praise" and we set up in an old church and the guy used us as an orchestra to back up the show he was putting on.  It was really a lot of fun and something special to be a part of.  At the start of the show he had us all strum a G chord in unison and the sound was really something.  I think a lot of it got lost in the mix as the show went on, but the idea was unique and memorable, and it looked really cool to see a guitar orchestra. 

At any rate, one of the guys I was sitting next to that night was playing a Taylor.  When we were backstage getting ready to go on we naturally started talking about our guitars.  He didn't recognize the name on mine, and couldn't pronounce it (the French thing again), but when I handed it to him to play I could see a paradigm shift happening in him.  Till then he thought Taylor was the only way to go.  When he found out what I paid for my guitar vs what he paid for his, he had sort of a sick look on his face.  I never saw that guy again but I really think I made a Larrivee convert that night.  He was already talking about selling his Taylor and trying to find one of those.... "How did you pronounce that again?..." guitars.  

[eded]

I'll throw in my 2¢. So far we've got several mentions of "marketing" as a restraint on the brand's popularity. And to that I can't help but notice a lot of the "top ten acoustic guitars" articles I've come across often have many of the names of the companies that advertise on the magazine or site. So "Top 10 best guitars under $2K" isn't likely to have Larrivee in there.

Don't get me started on guitar magazines...  big glossy, as much ad pages as "articles", and like you say...  those with the biggest ads get the best reviews.

But another angle I'd offer is that the Larrivee family seems comfortable with the number of guitars their factory can put out. To put out say 30%-40% more volume to justify an aggressive ad budget means more investment in machines, spray booths, lumber, workers, benefits, etc, etc which is all fairly expensive and risky for a family owned business.

For Larrivee to go the way of Taylor/Gibson/Martin means a few more levels of management, marketing, sales reps, and doubling (or more) their factory capacity. This might mean outside investors and sharing control of their brand. Likely, they've decided it's simply not worth whatever extra popularity and money they'd end up with for all that non-guitar related time and trouble. And I can't fault them for that. . .

All of this makes sense to me.  They control their output, no rushing to make quotas, no skimping on materials, computer control only where it makes sense, being fair to employees...  And, though it might make me sound like a Commie, how much money does a person (or family) need to accumulate to be happy?  I don't know the Larrivee's personally, but they seem to be a relatively happy bunch of folks. 

Ed 

[mattwood]

I think a big part of the problem is they aren't as readily available as other brands, plain and simple.  Go into any guitar store in Texas (my state) and you'll likely find Martins, Taylors, Yamahas, etc.  There are 4 shops in the whole state that stock Larrivees according to their website.  I've been around guitars for over 50 years and saw and played my first Larrivee about 6 years ago.  Now I've had 3 since then if that tells  you anything.