We have various Ohana at different price points. FWIW, the ukulele that was under $100 USD was not of the same quality of the much more expensive ones. The quality was good for the given price points on the all solid wood ones. However, IMHO these were not of the same caliber as our Koaloha 1200-1400 ukuleles. YMMV
How is Ohana for overall quality?
- Thread starter default
- Start date
- Status
I got a solid mahogany top from Elderly Instruments at one point. It was around $120. There were some cosmetic things like stray glue drops inside and some things outside. That said, it sounded and played great.
I got another one from MIM, a solid spruce top soprano B-stock (SK22 I think) that wasn't perfect cosmetically either, I mean it was a B-stock..but really nothing stood out that bothered me. It also sounded and played great. MIM's setup was a bit more thorough I'd say.
I don't have either now, but that isn't because there were problems with either. I just don't keep many instruments at once. I'd consider them again in the future, and prefer MIM as the dealer.
I got another one from MIM, a solid spruce top soprano B-stock (SK22 I think) that wasn't perfect cosmetically either, I mean it was a B-stock..but really nothing stood out that bothered me. It also sounded and played great. MIM's setup was a bit more thorough I'd say.
I don't have either now, but that isn't because there were problems with either. I just don't keep many instruments at once. I'd consider them again in the future, and prefer MIM as the dealer.
Last edited:
cdkrugjr
Well-known member
At the low end IME it’s even more important to buy from someone reputable like Mim or Elderly. They won’t sell you a bad instrument, period.
Whereas one time I went intentionally to pick up a cheap beater quick at a Big Box, I had to go through EVERY uke they had before I had one that intonated remotely correctly. “Great sir, would you like us to get one new in a box?”
Um . . . NO . . .
Whereas one time I went intentionally to pick up a cheap beater quick at a Big Box, I had to go through EVERY uke they had before I had one that intonated remotely correctly. “Great sir, would you like us to get one new in a box?”
Um . . . NO . . .
Even from just looking at some of the pictures that Mim and other sellers post, I can often see several issues like the ones that are described by the OP. On one of the higher end models, there were quite obvious flaws in the purfling on every single one I found pictures of. While this is just cosmetic and doesn't necessarily correlate to sound, it makes me question their quality control and strive for perfection that I'd expect from any company at any price point (within reason of what is to be expected at each price point. I'd rather have a plain uke with no obvious flaws than one that is blinged out untidily with Abalone or rope binding or whatever).
As to the assumption that Ohana and Mainland might both come from the very same factory: Are Mainland ukes really built in China as well?? I somehow thought they were made in Vietnam, but I can't find any clear information about their origin anywhere...
As to the assumption that Ohana and Mainland might both come from the very same factory: Are Mainland ukes really built in China as well?? I somehow thought they were made in Vietnam, but I can't find any clear information about their origin anywhere...
Last edited:
merlin666
Well-known member
They must have some quality control, as indicated by the large number of B stock available at Mim's. I wonder if some of the poor quality reports are actually of B-stock items that were bought at hugely reduced prices.
Are they marked "B stock" by the factory or by Mim? Is there a stamp to mark them "B stock" on the label inside to make it clear to any future owner that it is not their A game?
mikelz777
Well-known member
My Ohana long neck soprano was a B-stock from Mim. It's not stamped or indicated as such in any way on the sound hole label so I'm guessing the designation came from Mim herself. When I contacted her about the uke I eventually bought she said that the body was covered in light scratches like the finish wasn't totally buffed out and that's why she marked down the price and called it a B-stock. When I received it I had a very hard time finding the scratches. I literally had to hold it up to natural light at the perfect angle just to see them. I really had to look hard to see them so they're not at all visible when you look at it normally.
Obviously, there are cases like above where it was noted MIM herself marked something B-stock.
That said, usually on the B-stock instruments she sells it is clearly stated in the text that she bought them as B-stock from Ohana.
Honestly, the B-stock I had from MIM was every bit as good as the normal stock one I got elsewhere as far as cosmetics go....which is to say they both had issues, but nothing that really bothered me. I'm more interested in structure, playability, and sound. Sound-wise I can't say one was better than the other either...just different... To be clear, I like an uke that has an overall look that is appealing to me, but I'm not worries as much about blemishes that are cosmetic only.
So I'd have to agree that if someone is looking for something that is really, really good cosmetically you need to be extra careful with this brand. My experience is with models less than $130...so my expectations weren't as high for cosmetics to begin with. If I was paying $500 for one I'd expect better there...
That said, usually on the B-stock instruments she sells it is clearly stated in the text that she bought them as B-stock from Ohana.
Honestly, the B-stock I had from MIM was every bit as good as the normal stock one I got elsewhere as far as cosmetics go....which is to say they both had issues, but nothing that really bothered me. I'm more interested in structure, playability, and sound. Sound-wise I can't say one was better than the other either...just different... To be clear, I like an uke that has an overall look that is appealing to me, but I'm not worries as much about blemishes that are cosmetic only.
So I'd have to agree that if someone is looking for something that is really, really good cosmetically you need to be extra careful with this brand. My experience is with models less than $130...so my expectations weren't as high for cosmetics to begin with. If I was paying $500 for one I'd expect better there...
Last edited:
I don’t believe you can go wrong with an Ohana. Take a close look at the 70 series, laminate bodies and solid top. The TK-70, tenor is around $225.
I have an Ohana TK-50GS B-stock Solid Cedar/Rosewood tenor. It was my second ukulele. I knew very little about ukes when I bought it. I thought it sounded the best of all the tenors in the shop. And was miles ahead of my first uke a Fender Nohea laminate. Most of what little knowledge I had at the time, came from Barry's web site. I knew there was a difference between laminate and solid. And that I needed to get a setup.
The music store owner sold it to me as a new "first" quality instrument, not as a B stock. I had no idea that was a thing. I just thought the "B" on the label was a model number. I have come to find that the "S" in the model number stands for "Second"*. It sounds nice, chimey. Has very good sustain. Good projection. It has a very heavy poly high gloss finish. Which hides a number of minor cosmetic flaws. D shaped neck is very comfortable. Some of the best fret ends I've ever played, that are nicely rounded and set beck from the fingerboard edge. The nut is 1-7/16" with string space 1-1/8". I put Living Waters Low-G strings on it and it booms. The body is 2-7/16" to 2-5/8", and the edges are rounded so it's also comfortable on the arm. All in all, it's a good uke that is enjoyable to play.
*I had decided to sell the uke to a UU Member on this site and was taking pictures of it to send to him, when I really began to notice the flaws. That's when I realized what the "S" and the "B" meant on the label. Boy, was I mortified when I told him.
The music store owner sold it to me as a new "first" quality instrument, not as a B stock. I had no idea that was a thing. I just thought the "B" on the label was a model number. I have come to find that the "S" in the model number stands for "Second"*. It sounds nice, chimey. Has very good sustain. Good projection. It has a very heavy poly high gloss finish. Which hides a number of minor cosmetic flaws. D shaped neck is very comfortable. Some of the best fret ends I've ever played, that are nicely rounded and set beck from the fingerboard edge. The nut is 1-7/16" with string space 1-1/8". I put Living Waters Low-G strings on it and it booms. The body is 2-7/16" to 2-5/8", and the edges are rounded so it's also comfortable on the arm. All in all, it's a good uke that is enjoyable to play.
*I had decided to sell the uke to a UU Member on this site and was taking pictures of it to send to him, when I really began to notice the flaws. That's when I realized what the "S" and the "B" meant on the label. Boy, was I mortified when I told him.
Last edited:
OP
OP
default
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2017
- Messages
- 40
- Reaction score
- 0
So after reading all this and doing some thinking on things, I went ahead and bought the Ohana I had been eyeing. Hopefully a pic will show up in this post...
Going in, I knew that:
1, this was from a small shop and they don’t do setups (none locally do)
2, there were some big QC issues that I noticed, but felt they did not hurt the functionality
3, I would have to completely tear the uke down and redo it, which I did in about an hour going fairly slow and kinda stumbling thru it
4, there’s a few small issues I can’t fix myself, no do i feel that they could be fixed by anyone else outside of a pro woodworker or luthier (some are finish issues, one is the resonator isn’t round...)
All that said, the damn thing is beautiful to play. I still need to dial in the neck angles and all but I think I’m set.
I had to take it all apart to recenter the head, straighten the tail piece and most of the hooks, set the bridge blah blah blah.
I think that my uke is probably better quality than say a kmise but not by much, but it does have a nice head on it rather than a no name.
Going in, I knew that:
1, this was from a small shop and they don’t do setups (none locally do)
2, there were some big QC issues that I noticed, but felt they did not hurt the functionality
3, I would have to completely tear the uke down and redo it, which I did in about an hour going fairly slow and kinda stumbling thru it
4, there’s a few small issues I can’t fix myself, no do i feel that they could be fixed by anyone else outside of a pro woodworker or luthier (some are finish issues, one is the resonator isn’t round...)
All that said, the damn thing is beautiful to play. I still need to dial in the neck angles and all but I think I’m set.
I had to take it all apart to recenter the head, straighten the tail piece and most of the hooks, set the bridge blah blah blah.
I think that my uke is probably better quality than say a kmise but not by much, but it does have a nice head on it rather than a no name.
With one of the Ohana ukes that I bought from Mim, she sent an email telling me that she had found a blemish during setup, and would either discount that instrument, or I could have its twin, which had no blemishes. I looked at the photos that she sent me, decided that it made no difference whatsoever - neither I, nor the audience would see it without going over every bit of the instrument with a magnifying glass, and it didn't affect the sound one bit. So I refused to accept the discount, stayed with the instrument I had ordered, and I am 100% happy with it.
I have no intention of selling it, but if I ever do it will only be to someone who plays it, looks it over closely, and offers me something we both agree to be a reasonable price. Otherwise, I'll just keep it until I can't play anymore, and if neither my nephews nor my wife's niece and nephew's kids want it, I will give it away.
(And to be honest, without going back through that year's emails, I have no idea which uke it was that had the blem, or what it was; I just remember Mim offering to give me a price break, and that I chose not to accept it, because it was so not a big deal. She is totally honest, and I've been happy to spend money with her.
I have no intention of selling it, but if I ever do it will only be to someone who plays it, looks it over closely, and offers me something we both agree to be a reasonable price. Otherwise, I'll just keep it until I can't play anymore, and if neither my nephews nor my wife's niece and nephew's kids want it, I will give it away.
(And to be honest, without going back through that year's emails, I have no idea which uke it was that had the blem, or what it was; I just remember Mim offering to give me a price break, and that I chose not to accept it, because it was so not a big deal. She is totally honest, and I've been happy to spend money with her.
greyghost
Well-known member
I have two Ohanas: An absolutely gorgeous gloss solid mahogany pineapple soprano, and a solid mahogany sopranissimo. They are both very well-made, and they both sound great and play very well. This is partly due, as it seems to be for many in this thread, to the magic of a good setup (the pineapple came from Mike at Uke Republic, and the O'Nino from Mim, about whom not enough good can be said--I've bought 3 ukes from her, and all are fantastic players). Set up properly, and stepping up to the solid woods from the low-end laminates, Ohanas offer fantastic bang for the buck.
JackLuis
Well-known member
I have two Ohanas I rarely play, they are great, but they have an annoying third string that booms louder than the others. I've tried changing strings and detuning and a lot of things but the booming third strings ruin it for me. If I ever get to note picking, it won't matter but for strumming chords, they suck!
For my strumming play I stick with my Rubin/Caramels. Very cheap but nice and easy to play.
For my strumming play I stick with my Rubin/Caramels. Very cheap but nice and easy to play.
I have a pair of Ohana ukes myself: a Sinker Redwood/Rosewood Concert from Elderly, and a Redwood/Rosewood Tenor from Mim's Ukes. Both are all-solid woods and both are fabulous instruments. I love the way they play and sound! I also have a couple of Kala ukes: an MGM Tenor and a Solid Acacia Baritone, both from The Ukulele Site. They're both fine ukes, as well. The folks at Kala have stepped up their game in recent years.
SwanShadow
Member
The Ohana TK-39 that I just put down to type this post came from Mim, and is everything an average-to-mediocre player (looking in the mirror now) needs it to be. If it has any construction flaws, they aren't evident to my untrained eye. Thanks to Mim, the setup and playability are magical.
I do think the setup makes a huge difference. I'm developing a bit of arthritic stiffness in my fretting hand, and I can't play the budget Kala uke I started on (purchased from Amazon) at all now. But both the Ohana from Mim and the laminate Kala I have (purchased from Uke Republic) still let me do my thing most days. (On the days when I can't, it's not the uke's fault.)
I do think the setup makes a huge difference. I'm developing a bit of arthritic stiffness in my fretting hand, and I can't play the budget Kala uke I started on (purchased from Amazon) at all now. But both the Ohana from Mim and the laminate Kala I have (purchased from Uke Republic) still let me do my thing most days. (On the days when I can't, it's not the uke's fault.)
bynapkinart
Well-known member
I will second the TK-39 as a superb but relatively inexpensive uke option. It definitely has all of the "bark" you'd expect from a mahogany uke and the build seems pretty thin and light compared to other imports! It's the only imported ukulele I play currently and holds its own/delivers something different than my Kamaka and Koaloha.
- Status
Similar threads
