--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "feefer2" <feefer2@y...> wrote: > Hi Ed, > I wonder just how intent competitors are on truly doing something novel in terms of triggering: it's not like the only approach to transducer technology must involve the same old mono/dual piezo paradigm.... There ARE other cost-effective unique alternatives out there. Thank you, Chris. If it's any consolation, I've heard about, and talked with, not a few people over the years who brought such and such an idea to so and so and had every reason to believe that a deal was imminent, only to have it languish into oblivion. Frankly, even though times have certainly changed, the question seems to remain whether it is cost-effective for a company to work our some sort of financial settlement with an outsider or to hold the line and keep R&D in-house. After all, everyone is already paying Roland (grin). It is strange how few resources are used in electronic drums. Maybe it's because the various makers feel that they won't be regarded as alternatives to each other if they stray too far from the status quo, or maybe it's simply the reasonable inertia of a small market that needs tight mfg. standards, which is completely understandable. Well, these are just the ramblings of someone with the business sense of a hillside. Ed
Message
Re: Cymbal springs
2004-04-22 by emf
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.