Yeah, that was a little harsh, but that's ok.
You state: "But, you have come to this group more than once, asked for
opinions and then promptly ignored the overwhelming opinions"
I haven't ignored any of the feedback I've received so far. The frequency
shifter isn't built yet and I haven't sold one yet...
I take into consideration all feedback I receive, but just because x number
of people want something doesn't mean they automatically get it. Did you see
the Simpson's episode where Homer was given the opportunity to design his
"dream car"? It was a disaster. This isn't product design by proxy. I'm
asking for opinions to guide my decision making, not to make the decisions
for me.
When several people ask for larger knobs, there is a silent contingency that
is also counted. When people don't reply they tell me one of two things:
1. They didn't see the message (which is unlikely if they are subbed to the
group and are regular participants)
2. They don't care enough about the issue to make a comment.
Two big reasons I tend to want to put small knobs on my MOTM format modules
is:
1. I have thousands of them in stock.
2. They automatically differentiate a module as Encore in a sea of MOTM.
I can look at Dave Bradley's Synth of Doom and without even trying I can
pick out the two UEGs. That's important for product recognition. It fits in
and stands out at the same time.
I'm still considering some variations on the large knob small knob issue. It
turns out I could combine 1 large and 1 small knob on the Coarse/Fine
controls. When mounted that way, it "looks" like a vernier control, even
though they don't touch. (they are close)
To address your issue with the schematics: To supply schematics outside of a
service manual is an invitation for trouble to be blunt.
If I were to provide schematics I am basically giving the OK for people to
mess around with the design. When something breaks, who pays for it? What if
they Stoogify a panel within the first year? Should I pay anything to repair
it? I don't think so.
Paul's modules were designed and documented with the intention of having the
customer in there with a soldering iron. Mine are not. The FS is 90% surface
mount and most of you don't have all the equipment necessary to do all
repairs on it anyway. If something breaks, it's probably going to be a jack
or a pot, and you don't need schematics to change those. The UEG is all
through hole, but the design is very simple. It's the code that makes it
tick.
I have an internal policy about schematics and as long as I am actively
supporting a product, generally the schematics remain unavailable. When the
day comes that the UEG is no longer supported by me, I will release the
schematics, and the code in a single HEX file so someone with a device
programmer could replace and reprogram the microcontroller. That day hasn't
come yet.
Best regards,
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: J. Larry Hendry [mailto:
jlarryh@...]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 5:12 PM
To: MOTM List
Subject: Re: [motm] Frequency Shifter group question
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tony Karavidas <tony@...> My inclination is to
> leave it basically as show here:
> http://www.encoreelectronics.com/cont_fs1.html
> because of a few reasons:
> 2.. Because of the fact I plan to use smaller knobs, the extra lines
> don't
seem to buy any thing in terms of knob setting ability.
> Not that those are good reasons, but they are my reasons. Let the
> opinions
fly.
--LH--
OK, you asked for it, so I will speak up on the subject too. I feel
somewhat qualified to speak on the subject of marketing to this group since
Dave and I have probably sold more dollars worth of stuff to these great
customers that anyone but Paul. OK, Maybe John Blacet is running close.
This request for feedback is a lot like the last one where an overwhelming
number of those queried asked for larger knobs.
You do claim to have undisclosed reasons for going with the smaller knobs.
And, you admit they may not be good reasons. I would like to firm up your
suspicion that they are not good (enough) reasons.
If I have learned one thing from selling products to this list that is to be
successful you should listen to what this small niche market is asking for.
True, some people are so desperate for a frequency shift solution, they are
willing to "accept" smaller knobs with an unfriendly panel layout.
While no one expects you to exactly match any particular MOTM format, we
have become spoiled to a particular feel. IMO, small knobs do adhere to
that feel. Yes, it was essential in the UEG to allow the UEG to fit in 2U.
However, here it is not necessary.
So, listen to your potential customers and do two important things.
1. Give us a more friendly layout with larger knobs.
2. Supply copyrighted schematics. AFAIK, the fact that Paul and John B.
supply schematics with their products has not caused a problem with people
posting or otherwise violating copyright. It sure would be handy for future
trouble shooting. And, schematics would certainly be handy if you force you
customers to resort to Stooge panels because they cannot stand the small
knobs. Not supplying schematics is very "dot-com-ish." I have a specific
opinion of why Roger does not supply schematics (which I would gladly
discuss in private). However, I cannot understand why you have not.
I apologize if this sounds harsh. But, you have come to this group more
than once, asked for opinions and then promptly ignored the overwhelming
opinions without even offering a reasonable explanation of your reasons.
Even still, I may be in the market to purchase one in spite of this.
However, count me out if (like the UEG) schematics are not available.
Larry Hendry
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/