Post by: Chuck P Cheney on December 08, 2009, 11:37:46 AM
http://prosoundnewseurope.com/index.php?option=com_content&a mp;task=view&id=1466&Itemid=1
Of course, there had been murmurings for quite a while, but I doubt whether many people thought Behringer would be the eventual purchaser.
Well, what does everyone think? What effect is this going to have on the console market?
Post by: Bruce Pritchard on December 08, 2009, 11:45:57 AM
Post by: Bradford "BJ" James on December 08, 2009, 11:52:53 AM
Post by: Klaus {nojunk} Zimmermann on December 08, 2009, 11:54:38 AM
| Bradford "BJ" James wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 17:52 |
You're f....n' kidding me. |
NO, it looks it's through...http://www.music-group.net/
Post by: Duncan McLennan on December 08, 2009, 11:58:23 AM
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 08, 2009, 12:06:57 PM
All markets are like pyramids... the view is better from the top, but the mass is in the base...
JR
Post by: Shane Presley on December 08, 2009, 12:08:28 PM
The best and worst collide
Post by: A Man on December 08, 2009, 12:08:37 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:06 |
And this is surprising to whom? All markets are like pyramids... the view is better from the top, but the mass is in the base... JR |
Exactly.
It's a simple business fact, go where the $ is.
Post by: Arthur Skudra on December 08, 2009, 12:09:19 PM
"Robert Mulatz, senior VP of Bosch Communications Systems, admits that the brands did not really fit comfortably within the Bosch portfolio: "Midas and Klark Teknik have always epitomised the highest possible performance and reliability in the mixing console and signal processing markets. Within the professional audio business of Bosch this niche market has not been defined as a core business area due to its size and specific requirements. We believe that in the Music Group we have found both the passion and the financial ability needed to grow Midas and Klark Teknik. Among all potential buyers that have been screened, we have selected the Music Group as the best fit.""
So if mixing consoles and signal processing are not a good fit within the Bosch portfolio, then what's next on the cutting block? And one has to wonder, what the screening process was?
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 08, 2009, 12:10:20 PM
just askin'
Uli has done very well for himself selling "reverse engineered" Chinese manufactured gear really cheap.
He also, in the distant past, demonstrated that he does know how to make quality gear.
He just didn't do so very successfully.
This WILL be interesting.
Post by: Mike Smith on December 08, 2009, 12:24:07 PM
Post by: Chuck P Cheney on December 08, 2009, 12:33:08 PM
Post by: Bradford "BJ" James on December 08, 2009, 12:34:06 PM
| Mike Smith wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:24 |
I'm going to pre-order my UltraVenice. |
Make mine an UltraVenicePro.
Post by: Adam Whetham on December 08, 2009, 12:39:18 PM
| Bradford "BJ" James wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 11:34 | ||
Make mine an UltraVenicePro. |
With the optional KT UltraSQ1D Feedback destroyer!
Post by: Brian Bolly on December 08, 2009, 12:50:11 PM
| Mike Smith wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:24 |
I'm going to pre-order my UltraVenice. |
Apparently you already can.
Post by: Brian Wynn on December 08, 2009, 01:03:19 PM
| Arthur Skudra wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 11:09 |
From the article: "Robert Mulatz, senior VP of Bosch Communications Systems, admits that the brands did not really fit comfortably within the Bosch portfolio: "Midas and Klark Teknik have always epitomised the highest possible performance and reliability in the mixing console and signal processing markets. Within the professional audio business of Bosch this niche market has not been defined as a core business area due to its size and specific requirements. We believe that in the Music Group we have found both the passion and the financial ability needed to grow Midas and Klark Teknik. Among all potential buyers that have been screened, we have selected the Music Group as the best fit."" So if mixing consoles and signal processing are not a good fit within the Bosch portfolio, then what's next on the cutting block? And one has to wonder, what the screening process was? |
Bosch is making a lot of changes. I just found out that they are moving the accounting dept. from Minnesota to New York in March of 2010. This means job loses for some Bosch Accounting employee's
I'm sure Uli will kill the product line just like he did Behringer years ago. It's sad but it makes good business since for him.
Maybe they won't change anything. LOL Yeah right!
Post by: Jeff Foster on December 08, 2009, 01:10:03 PM
Post by: Al Limberg on December 08, 2009, 01:11:35 PM
"Sell to the classes, live with the masses, sell to the masses, live with the classes"
?;o)
Al
Post by: Jason Dermer on December 08, 2009, 01:13:18 PM
Heh heh heh Beavis. He said anus.
Post by: Ken Freeman on December 08, 2009, 01:25:19 PM
Ken
Post by: Jonathan Goodall on December 08, 2009, 01:26:05 PM
| Shane Presley wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 06:08 |
Well I guess the BEH***** word morphing will have to include KLA***** and MIDA* from now on.. lol The best and worst collide |
Lots of possible combinations there, some not so complamentory
(edit, never mind)
Post by: Stuart Pendleton on December 08, 2009, 01:31:01 PM
Post by: Eric Dodson on December 08, 2009, 01:37:13 PM
If your going to provide a Midas H3k, XL8, Pro6, ect.... Please make sure it's "pre" Behringer!!
Yikes......
Eric Dodson
Post by: Paul Bell on December 08, 2009, 01:45:14 PM
A new age is upon us...
Post by: A Man on December 08, 2009, 01:50:11 PM
Nothing is going to change.
Midas will still be "Midas" as we know it, all of the U.K. folks are still in charge of Midas, David Cooper will still be the brains of Midas (he built the XL4/XL8/PRO6) and they will continue to build products worthy of the Midas name. (no Legend cracks..OK?)
All this chicken little "the sky is falling!, the sky is falling!" is really unwarranted.
The bottom line is: Midas was just a drop in a very large ocean that was Bosch and with the new investment will be able to move ahead without the bottom line regulations that may have been in place with Bosch. I'm sure the blokes in Kidderminster thought long and hard about this decision and I'm sure the implications were well thought out.
As much as we like demonize Uli, he is a very sharp guy and also a musician himself. (gasp! did he just say that??)
Find me some Behringer compressors that say "Made in Germany" on the back and I'd put them side by side with the higher end competition's compressors.
Audio wise you'd be hard pressed to dismiss them as "crap".
Post by: Bob Lee (QSC) on December 08, 2009, 01:52:47 PM
Post by: Brad Weber on December 08, 2009, 01:55:17 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:06 |
And this is surprising to whom? All markets are like pyramids... the view is better from the top, but the mass is in the base... |
True, but with an up to now very different market focus and distribution model it is an odd pairing. I don't see many people impulse buying current Midas or KT models because they are part of a "Midas and KT Blow Out" sale at the local store.
Post by: Mark Walter on December 08, 2009, 01:56:35 PM
| Bradford "BJ" James wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:34 | ||
Make mine an UltraVenicePro. |
LMAO, you beat me too it.....
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 08, 2009, 02:03:26 PM
| Jon Martin wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 10:50 |
As much as we like demonize Uli, he is a very sharp guy and also a musician himself. (gasp! did he just say that??) Find me some Behringer compressors that say "Made in Germany" on the back and I'd put them side by side with the higher end competition's compressors. Audio wise you'd be hard pressed to dismiss them as "crap". |
+1 on that. I stated earlier in this thread that Uli DOES know how to make quality audio components. He just didn't make much money doing it compared to his current business plan.
I have one the "made in Germany" headphone amps and one of the single ended noise reduction units and they both work, year on, very well.
They also each weigh about three times as much as the only other Behringer component I own, the nearly ubiquitous 8 channel mic pre expander for my O1V-96.
And if the guys in Kidderminster remain involved I'm not worried very much at all. Besides I STILL can't afford an XL of any vintage
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 08, 2009, 02:09:55 PM
| Brad Weber wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:55 | ||
True, but with an up to now very different market focus and distribution model it is an odd pairing. I don't see many people impulse buying current Midas or KT models because they are part of a "Midas and KT Blow Out" sale at the local store. |
Waiting for the "Trade up program"... OR... the "Behringer with the Midas- Sound Preamps"
Seriously, if they don't screw things up, it could be a learning, and profitable experience for them.
Good Luck to them on this venture....time will tell
Hammer
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 08, 2009, 02:11:51 PM
| Mike Smith wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 18:24 |
I'm going to pre-order my UltraVenice. |
I'm sure they're kicking themselves for taking the time to reverse engineer the Venice when they could have waited until now and just gone down to archives and gotten the blueprints
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 08, 2009, 02:15:48 PM
I don't buy the "nothing's gonna change." It has to, that's the nature of commerce and capitalism. Presumably Midas/KT wasn't sufficiently profitable to justify it's place on the Bosch roster and for them to be profitable on the Music Group line card will probably require changes in design, manufacturing, distribution and marketing. In other words, pretty much aspect of Midas/KT will be up for evaluation and changes that result in greater profitability for the new owners. What Music Group also attains is Brand Respectability.
The open question is what manner and type of change will take place, and when.
I suppose the best thing that can be said of this is "at least the buyer wasn't Sun Capital/LOUD.
Have fun, good luck.
Tim Mc
Post by: Stuart Pendleton on December 08, 2009, 02:18:47 PM
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 08, 2009, 02:20:34 PM
| Tim McCulloch wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 11:15 |
Hi Jon- I don't buy the "nothing's gonna change." It has to, that's the nature of commerce and capitalism. Presumably Midas/KT wasn't sufficiently profitable to justify it's place on the Bosch roster and for them to be profitable on the Music Group line card will probably require changes in design, manufacturing, distribution and marketing. In other words, pretty much aspect of Midas/KT will be up for evaluation and changes that result in greater profitability for the new owners. What Music Group also attains is Brand Respectability. The open question is what manner and type of change will take place, and when. I suppose the best thing that can be said of this is "at least the buyer wasn't Sun Capital/LOUD. Have fun, good luck. Tim Mc |
FWIW - Fiat has owned Ferrari since 1993. They have been happy to own a prestige
car company with a great engineering heritage and have kept their noses out for the most part.
I wish I was as optimistic about them running what's left of Chrysler though :-0.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 08, 2009, 02:44:08 PM
| Lee Brenkman wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 13:20 | ||
FWIW - Fiat has owned Ferrari since 1993. They have been happy to own a prestige car company with a great engineering heritage and have kept their noses out for the most part. I wish I was as optimistic about them running what's left of Chrysler though :-0. |
Fiat and Chrysler... oh man, don't get me started (because the Fiat won't...)
I think the hints of what is to come can be found here:
| Music Group CEO Michael Deeb said: |
“MIDAS and KLARK TEKNIK are at the very pinnacle of their market segment. They address a very unique client base and have a different sales channel from our current core business. The brands will continue to operate autonomously under the leadership of John Oakley while benefiting from the synergies of our combined efforts. All brands will take advantage of the MUSIC Group’s extensive resources and industry-leading competencies including product development, lifecycle management, supply chain and logistics. |
And here:
| Alex Cooper, MIDAS Director of Console Engineering said: |
“For over twenty years I have devoted my life to designing the finest quality audio products possible. It has always been our goal to achieve the very best performance while continuing to broaden our market presence and expand our customer base. I am convinced that working with the MUSIC Group will provide us with advantages that will help us maintain our high standards and grow the business for the long term.” |
The devil is in the details, but I *do* see a line of mixers and outboard that claim a Midas or KT ancestry. This purchase is about acquiring intellectual property as well as purchasing a running (and presumed profitable, cash-flow-positive) business that doesn't fit the current owner's plans.
It is what it is; we'll have to wait and see what it becomes.
Have fun, good luck.
Tim Mc
Post by: Randy Frierson on December 08, 2009, 02:48:28 PM
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 08, 2009, 02:50:36 PM
| Lee Brenkman wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 13:20 | ||
FWIW - Fiat has owned Ferrari since 1993. They have been happy to own a prestige car company with a great engineering heritage and have kept their noses out for the most part. I wish I was as optimistic about them running what's left of Chrysler though :-0. |
Not to be contrary.. but it is orders of magnitude harder to be successful making a fiat, than a ferrari... One just takes passion and deep pockets, the other much more skill.
Not to praise Sun Capital, but they brought some much needed cash and discipline to Mackie. The brand management since then seems more productive (IMO), ignoring personal opinions about the actual brands themselves.
At the end of the day this is all a business... contrary to the excuses we may make to ourselves for our life choices.
JR
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 08, 2009, 02:56:20 PM
| Tim McCulloch wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 11:44 |
Fiat and Chrysler... oh man, don't get me started (because the Fiat won't...) The devil is in the details, but I *do* see a line of mixers and outboard that claim a Midas or KT ancestry. This purchase is about acquiring intellectual property as well as purchasing a running (and presumed profitable, cash-flow-positive) business that doesn't fit the current owner's plans. It is what it is; we'll have to wait and see what it becomes. Have fun, good luck. Tim Mc |
Again, FWIW my wife's daily driver is the 1980 Fiat 2000 Spider that she bought new. It has never failed to start. The engine and other running gear are top notch. Things like the door handles and seat back handles on the other hand...
And as for cheaper products claiming higher ancestry I think that any of us who can read through "British EQ" or "we make the Vertec so the JRX is the best speaker for you because the big tours use our stuff" can deal with that. Actually, as I recall, KT did some of that already with a more "affordable" line of signal processing
As long as the "flagship" Midas and KT stuff remains of a high quality and they use the bigger buying power of the new ownership to get better prices on GOOD component parts I don't care what the guys in marketing do to sell the cheaper stuff.
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 08, 2009, 03:03:37 PM
Not to be contrary.. but it is orders of magnitude harder to be successful making a fiat, than a ferrari... One just takes passion and deep pockets, the other much more skill.
Not to praise Sun Capital, but they brought some much needed cash and discipline to Mackie. The brand management since then seems more productive (IMO), ignoring personal opinions about the actual brands themselves.
At the end of the day this is all a business... contrary to the excuses we may make to ourselves for our life choices.
JR
[/quote]
Actually I made, I think, that point earlier in the thread. It's IS harder to make a useful product in large quantities at an affordable price, with all of the compromises that entails, than it is to make a few "cost no object" products for the elite few.
If ANY of the "Ferrari" or "Midas" engineering improvements filter down to the "Fiat" or "Behringer" product the end users at that end of the food chain benefit.
And yes, things at Mackie DO seem more settled since Sun Capital got involved.
People in sound AND cars who spend most of their time serving artists and producers with the pull and budget to pay for the highest possible performance sometimes forget about the people who just need a reliable car to get to work every day or make the principal audible in the high school auditorium.
Post by: Craig Leerman on December 08, 2009, 03:24:53 PM
| Jon Martin wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 10:50 |
Nothing is going to change. Midas will still be "Midas" as we know it |
For how long? Is Crest still the old pre Peavey Crest? What about EAW? In fact, is Mackie even still the same after LOUD? How many "Mackoids" (Mackies term for their employees) were fired when Mackie moved production overseas?
I predict that Uli will follow his current successful business model and reduce costs where he can in production by using cheaper components, and overseas labor. As you and others have mentioned, Behringer used to make quality items (I still have 3 German Comps I use), but changed their business model for bigger profits. Why do you think he stopped making quality products? It was all about the money.
| Quote: |
all of the U.K. folks are still in charge of Midas, David Cooper will still be the brains of Midas (he built the XL4/XL8/PRO6) and they will continue to build products worthy of the Midas name. (no Legend cracks..OK?) |
For how long? I'm going to bet that as soon as Uli gets a good look at the books, he will start weeding out some of the talent to save dough (First to go will be any designers and R+D). Then as soon as Uli starts using crappy components in the Midas gear, I'm sure many of the rest of the staff will flee, not wanting to be associated with crappy products.
I predict that Behringer will be using the Midas and KT brand names, and introduce lower priced products in those lines (think Behringer guts in a KT or Midas case) to try and sell those good names to markets that probably could not afford them (like smaller churches, schools, installs and local musos) When Behringer sees that the profit from the low end stuff far outperforms the real Midas and KT, those high end products will be discontinued, as "NEWER and BETTER" (read as CRAPPY) models replace them.
The biggest problem with large corporations is that no matter how great the intention, it all comes down to the money. Sam Walton, who I believe was probably a good man with good intentions, and who probably really cared about his workers and the quality of his merchandise when they were a small company, grew his company into what many, including myself believe to be a large evil empire. Some of it fueled by consumer greed to have products at the lowest cost, some fueled by manufacturers and suppliers greed (think of all the toys with lead paint recalls), but many of it fueled by Wal-Mart's desire to keep generating more profits.
Last year I worked for a large AV company. Because the economy was down, so was their revenue. Instead of thinking, "Hey, we are still making MILLIONS OF DOLLARS even in the bad economy when many of our competitors and other businesses are going belly up, all I heard was "WE ARE NOT DOING GOOD ENOUGH NUMBERS!" When you base you business on profit, the quality of services always suffers. That's one of the reasons why I left there. And thats how most large businesses operate.
Midas and KT may or may not be profitable now, but with some changes (cheaper engineers, overseas labor, lower cost components) Uli can reap more profit from them, even if they are what I call profitable right now.
Post by: Iain_Macdonald on December 08, 2009, 03:33:18 PM
Hmmm interesting.
A while ago I posted(now zapped)a link to a quiet announcement by Behringer, that they were starting a pro division. This would be a separate entity, and possibly under a different name. Uli and Michael are doing exactly what the Chinese have been doing for the last few years. Namely, making a pile of cash from low cost high volume products. Then they are buying up brand names and any associated value. CADAC is a recent Chinese purchase. Their owners (Sun King) also bought the Studiomaster brand name, and CADAC are also designing product for that market sector. They are also the high end design centre for the Chinese parent company. The great thing about having a pile of cash, is that you can buy in IP and talent. Something that the Chinese are becoming adept at doing. Of course this is something that Behringer did when starting the company. Whilst you Americans have been laughing at all these foreign companies, it seems that they might have the last laugh. Having met both Uli Behringer and Michael Deeb, I can tell you that they are sharp cookies. I do not expect them to crash Midas/KT.
I see that this thread continues the cliched Behringer bash. Whilst they have had their 'problems', those who have worked for manufacturers far and wide, will also know of some major American companies that have received a quiet word from a competitors legal team, regarding products that are too close for comfort.
Best wishes.
Iain.
Post by: Ken Freeman on December 08, 2009, 04:17:20 PM
Ken
Post by: Mike Smith on December 08, 2009, 04:27:34 PM
I buy yogurt at Wal Mart because it is a good-tasting product priced far lower than the competition's.
I don't buy Behringer gear although I understand why people do.
Both corporations are admired for their ability to cover a market and be profitable. Both are despised for ruthlessness and an apparent lack of humanity/decency/ethics/whatever.
I think a forum like this one reminds us how much we are influenced by our passions and our personal opinions.
Yay for choices.
PS Maybe Wal Mart will start selling Behringer products?
Post by: Greg Cameron on December 08, 2009, 04:27:48 PM
| Ken Freeman wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 13:17 |
I am all good until I have to go to GC to get parts for a $70,000.00 mixer. |
$70,000 mixer?? My dear Ken, the Heritage 3000-48TP will be available at GC for a mere $500. If it breaks, you throw it in a dumpster (a big one) and get another one.
Greg
Post by: Stuart Pendleton on December 08, 2009, 04:31:55 PM
| Mike Smith wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 16:27 |
PS Maybe Wal Mart will start selling Behringer products? |
At this point, chances are they may sell KT and Midas...
Post by: Ernie Bellamy on December 08, 2009, 04:44:52 PM
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 08, 2009, 05:22:54 PM
| Mike Smith wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 15:27 |
After thirty years of challenges and arguable "success" in pro audio, I remain connected to the trade because I love it: the art, the technology, and the tests of my skills and ability to deliver. I buy yogurt at Wal Mart because it is a good-tasting product priced far lower than the competition's. I don't buy Behringer gear although I understand why people do. Both corporations are admired for their ability to cover a market and be profitable. Both are despised for ruthlessness and an apparent lack of humanity/decency/ethics/whatever. I think a forum like this one reminds us how much we are influenced by our passions and our personal opinions. Yay for choices. PS Maybe Wal Mart will start selling Behringer products? |
edit- not lab worthy... sorry I only try to inform not inflame- /edit
Post by: Greg Cameron on December 08, 2009, 05:55:01 PM
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/view/
But I can't lay all the blame on Wallmart. Corporations generally speaking appear to operate in a psychopathic manner. Nature of the beast. Some more so than others. We all contribute to some degree.
Greg
Post by: Craig Leerman on December 08, 2009, 06:15:07 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 14:22 |
I have a little bit different perspective on this topic than most, and I see a huge difference between Walmart and Behringer. The interesting question Walmart begs is what is wrong about being so good at what they do? They have eliminated unneeded cost from the entire supply chain while delivering merchantable commodity products to end users. They are so good at it average competitors don't have a chance. No doubt their size gives them remarkable power, but I don't see them abusing it (yet). Some may remember the old Montgomery Ward, and how they would build up then squeeze their vendors on price to the point they put many of them out of business. Perhaps Walmart is just smart enough to not kill their vendors. I for one would like to see Walmart's take on healthcare delivery... not so much Behringer's, while I can already guess Behringer's approach for reducing patent drug expenses. |
My wife and I recently watched 2 documentaries on Wal-Mart. In both of them, it was mentioned that to do business with Wal-Mart, you MUST MEET THEIR TERMS, or they will simply not carry your products. For many companies, not having their product at a Wal-Mart is certain death. It was also mentioned in both that because Wal-Mart requires a large number of items delivered (and that number is always increasing as they grow their evil empire) many suppliers (especially those overseas where labor laws and environmental concerns are lax) resort to breaking laws, and abuse labor. As Wal-Mart gets bigger, their reach and demands get bigger as well.
Yes, Wally World DOES squeeze their vendors, not only on price, but delivery.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 08, 2009, 06:22:36 PM
On the Uncle Tim Reading List (look out, Oprah) is E.F. Schumacher's Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered.
Have fun, good luck.
Tim Mc
Post by: Rick Stansby on December 08, 2009, 06:25:50 PM
| Craig Leerman wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 12:24 | ||
For how long? Is Crest still the old pre Peavey Crest? |
+1
When Peavey bought Crest people said that Crest would stay in New Jersey and continue to do what they do. Now they have moved to Meridian, and they are selling lower end equipment (I've never even seen their newer VCA board, I don't think they are selling many). Crest isn't dead, and they still make some very useful products, but they have changed a lot. It is hard to place the blame on anyone but Peavey.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 08, 2009, 06:30:20 PM
There are many corporations I consider worse world citizens than walmart, but they do have their detractors.
JR
Post by: Rick Stansby on December 08, 2009, 06:36:31 PM
| Brian Bolly wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 09:50 | ||
Apparently you already can. |
I'm sure Uli is designing Midas logos for that mixer as we speak. Why keep the Midas Factory open, when you can just throw a midas logo on a Behringer mixer. The credibility of the Midas name will suffer severely, but not before Uli makes millions of dollars selling thousands of the new, reduced-price "Midas" Venice.
Just wait until you see how much smaller the XL8 is when it is built on the chassis of a DDX3216
Post by: Mike Smith on December 08, 2009, 06:45:09 PM
Post by: Jonathan 'JP' Peirce on December 08, 2009, 06:46:47 PM
| Craig Leerman wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 18:15 |
Yes, Wally World DOES squeeze their vendors, not only on price, but delivery. |
FWIW So does WHOLE FOODS...
Opposite ends of the spectrum, same business practice...
JP
Post by: Dick Rees on December 08, 2009, 06:53:23 PM
Message #4444.........nice milestone.
Post by: Jonathan 'JP' Peirce on December 08, 2009, 06:53:58 PM
And before you bash FIAT check out the Punto S2000!
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 08, 2009, 07:20:33 PM
| Rick Stansby wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 00:36 | ||||
I'm sure Uli is designing Midas logos for that mixer as we speak. Why keep the Midas Factory open, when you can just throw a midas logo on a Behringer mixer. The credibility of the Midas name will suffer severely, but not before Uli makes millions of dollars selling thousands of the new, reduced-price "Midas" Venice. Just wait until you see how much smaller the XL8 is when it is built on the chassis of a DDX3216 |
I just thought of this after my last post on the subject... It wouldn't surprise me if Behringer, as a part of pre-purchasing negotiations, was allowed to use the design and layout of these mixer as a trial to see how the Midas technology would do when sold as Behringer.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 08, 2009, 07:21:27 PM
| Jonathan 'JP' Peirce wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 00:53 |
....Chinese bashing.... , IMO we Americans, (and people from other 'western' nations) better wake up soon... |
+1
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 08, 2009, 08:46:42 PM
You see... I have been collecting and storing handmade baskets, carved wood panels, screens, boxes, etc... from around the World. Example: Ten years ago a decorative reed basket...about $12., now... $49.
Hand made craft work will go the route of a Scottish Wool sweater.... (very pricy) if you'll be able to find it.
Cheers,
Hammer
Post by: Mike Butler (media) on December 08, 2009, 08:49:12 PM
| Bruce Pritchard wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 11:45 |
I fully expected to click the link and be directed to The Onion... |
Ditto.
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 08, 2009, 09:01:34 PM
Regardless, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I had narrowed my next small format mixer choices to Midas and a Yamaha LS9-16. So thank you Uli, you've made the choice for me and look forward to entering the digital world with a brand new spanking clean LS9.
Let's not be silly here. The fact is that Uli and his crew could leave Midas and KT alone, modernize the plants, and keep the team intact. But facts speak much louder than words. The components will be cheapened, the assembly will be Chinese, and as has been said, Midas and KT will suffer from the Behringer stigma as do all of Uli's products German made or not.
I have worked side by side both Chinese mainland and Taiwanese workers, Vietnamese workers, and Japanese workers. By far the hardest working most quality conscious people I have EVER worked with have been the Japanese. And by far, the worst and most careless manufacturing methods I have ever observed have been in mainland China or Taiwan. Slam it out as cheaply as possible, thank you GI.
I am sure that as the Chinese become more and more westernized the quality of workmanship and materials will improve to a point where there is no question regarding quality and durability. However, I'll be taking a dirt nap by then, and Midas and KT will be another GC special item, if they exist at all.
Post by: Jonathan 'JP' Peirce on December 08, 2009, 09:59:48 PM
| Bob Leonard wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 21:01 |
Hello world, Uli speaking..... Regardless, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I had narrowed my next small format mixer choices to Midas and a Yamaha LS9-16. So thank you Uli, you've made the choice for me and look forward to entering the digital world with a brand new spanking clean LS9. Let's not be silly here. The fact is that Uli and his crew could leave Midas and KT alone, modernize the plants, and keep the team intact. But facts speak much louder than words. The components will be cheapened, the assembly will be Chinese, and as has been said, Midas and KT will suffer from the Behringer stigma as do all of Uli's products German made or not. I have worked side by side both Chinese mainland and Taiwanese workers, Vietnamese workers, and Japanese workers. By far the hardest working most quality conscious people I have EVER worked with have been the Japanese. And by far, the worst and most careless manufacturing methods I have ever observed have been in mainland China or Taiwan. Slam it out as cheaply as possible, thank you GI. I am sure that as the Chinese become more and more westernized the quality of workmanship and materials will improve to a point where there is no question regarding quality and durability. However, I'll be taking a dirt nap by then, and Midas and KT will be another GC special item, if they exist at all. |
Seriously Bob, the good ole USA don't make (much of) anything anymore. Keep bashing them, (or blaming NAFTA), but there are MAJOR 21st century factories and infrastructure being built in the East, meanwhile, we can't get a train over 100MPH.
Not sure when you were working there, but things are changing fast...
Post by: trace knight on December 08, 2009, 10:47:39 PM
tk
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 08, 2009, 11:11:34 PM
| trace knight wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 21:47 |
Hammer, cookies and now baskets, what else are you hiding? tk |
Cookies? No Cookies....Pizza & Subs... but, Cookies are probably more profitable...
Cheers,
Hammer
Post by: Dave Stevens on December 09, 2009, 01:07:03 AM
Guess not...
Midas had some of the same issues that brought down Cadac and forced the sale. (no, not that they were both Brits...
) They were slow to move to digital and like Cadac held their own analog products in high regard even when the market was clearly moving to digital they missed the curve by dissing digital when it was clear that larger analog consoles were in a rapidly diminishing position in the market. It didn't happen overnight. Doyler and Webby left almost 10 years ago for Digico. You can be certain that if Midas were selling PM5D or M7 numbers (or even D5 D1 or SD numbers)Bosch would never have kicked them loose. Instead they chose to enter that market with and ultra expensive product that was in some ways less capable than lower priced offerings and took far too long to get into the middle part of the market. Frankly I'm surprised they didn't cut them loose sooner. So things may stay the same, at least for now. AFAIK Music Group has no marquee pro audio brands. I might be a good thing but it may also be a bad thing. While Sun may have saved the Loud brands, it did so at the cost of a marquee pro audio brand. Uli Behringer has a lot more audio manufacturing experience than any of those empty suits from Sun that control Loud right now. At least the Smaart product was able to be saved by people that know the product and more importantly, know how to market it. Time will tell if this is a good move long term. But like anything else perception is reality and the perception is that Behringer makes low end crap. Rightfully or wrongly so, perception is reality and the real work for Music Group isn't making good product, it's convincing the users they have to ability to do more than just knock off crap sold in music stores.
Good luck. They're going to need it...
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 09, 2009, 07:22:59 AM
All nations will have citizens with good qualities and bad. Judging a nation of over 1.300.000.000 (that's 1,300,000,000 to you) based on the few you have worked with doesn't speak greatly of you or the nation YOU represent (have you thought about that?).
I try to buy products based on the merits of the products, not the people who make them. The only exception is if the products are known to be made by slaves/children (some lines of clothes, for instance) or if they clearly are copies (like 3 USD "Oakley" glasses in tourist shops).
If you were really thorough about this ideology you'd keep track of exactly who runs the main offices of the companies who make any one of the zillion products most of have in our homes, throw away your things one by one as you find that their workers don't "meet the expectations of your ideology" and buy a new product, until that company sells enough stock to be owned by someone else that you don't like. If you can afford it, it'd probably keep your home looking real nice and new, but of course, you'd produce a lot of waste and keep the cycle going, and thereby helping the factories you don't like stay in business, too.
Post by: Dave Dermont on December 09, 2009, 08:03:40 AM
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 09, 2009, 08:57:45 AM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 07:22 |
Bob. All nations will have citizens with good qualities and bad. Judging a nation of over 1.300.000.000 (that's 1,300,000,000 to you) based on the few you have worked with doesn't speak greatly of you or the nation YOU represent (have you thought about that?). I try to buy products based on the merits of the products, not the people who make them. The only exception is if the products are known to be made by slaves/children (some lines of clothes, for instance) or if they clearly are copies (like 3 USD "Oakley" glasses in tourist shops). If you were really thorough about this ideology you'd keep track of exactly who runs the main offices of the companies who make any one of the zillion products most of have in our homes, throw away your things one by one as you find that their workers don't "meet the expectations of your ideology" and buy a new product, until that company sells enough stock to be owned by someone else that you don't like. If you can afford it, it'd probably keep your home looking real nice and new, but of course, you'd produce a lot of waste and keep the cycle going, and thereby helping the factories you don't like stay in business, too. |
Kristian,
I think you're out of line here. My statements concern workmanship and quality, and having lived, worked and fought in those countries for a period of almost 6 years, and recently traveling to Tiawan, I beleive I have a slight insight into the mentality behind Asian production processes and craftsmanship, old and new. I have to leave for the day job now, and it's snowing and cold here so I'll put on the Columbia coat I bought 3 days ago. The one with the label that say's "Made in Vietnam".
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 09, 2009, 10:05:01 AM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 06:22 |
Bob. All nations will have citizens with good qualities and bad. Judging a nation of over 1.300.000.000 (that's 1,300,000,000 to you) based on the few you have worked with doesn't speak greatly of you or the nation YOU represent (have you thought about that?). I try to buy products based on the merits of the products, not the people who make them. The only exception is if the products are known to be made by slaves/children (some lines of clothes, for instance) or if they clearly are copies (like 3 USD "Oakley" glasses in tourist shops). If you were really thorough about this ideology you'd keep track of exactly who runs the main offices of the companies who make any one of the zillion products most of have in our homes, throw away your things one by one as you find that their workers don't "meet the expectations of your ideology" and buy a new product, until that company sells enough stock to be owned by someone else that you don't like. If you can afford it, it'd probably keep your home looking real nice and new, but of course, you'd produce a lot of waste and keep the cycle going, and thereby helping the factories you don't like stay in business, too. |
As the resident apologist for things contrary, I have defended China more than attacked them, but there is often some truth in stereotypes. That said, it is sloppy production management to rely upon factory workers or line supervisors to arbitrate fit and finish decisions. They are unlikely to have a clue about customer expectations.
I ran into similar issues in US factories, trying to run very high finish quality recording studio products down production lines shared by "hide in a dark closet" install products. It can be confusing for line workers to hear that a minor cosmetic flaw acceptable on one product is not acceptable on another.
The solution is to completely document the process and define what is acceptable ahead of the questions, so distant line workers or supervisors never have to make that call.
The day of craftsman factory line workers, who have the experience to make final calls on such things are gone for any remotely mass market product. No matter where it's built.
I submit that any product, can be built anywhere, to any level of quality, with proper process controls and management. Doing so profitably is another matter, and right now China is in the fat part of the curve, but all to soon, they will be replaced by Africa, or who knows.
It will be interesting in a hundred years or so, when we run out of developing countries, to attract marginal manufacturing, and it comes home to roost. By then "stuff" will probably be built by robots, so maybe a good field of study for young kids is robotics. Until the robots start building robots.
JR
Post by: Paul Bell on December 09, 2009, 10:10:30 AM
Post by: Roland Clarke 1964 on December 09, 2009, 10:20:56 AM
| Dave Stevens wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 00:07 |
When I first saw that this morning I was hoping that the winery had taken an interest in pro audio. Guess not... Midas had some of the same issues that brought down Cadac and forced the sale. (no, not that they were both Brits... ) They were slow to move to digital and like Cadac held their own analog products in high regard even when the market was clearly moving to digital they missed the curve by dissing digital when it was clear that larger analog consoles were in a rapidly diminishing position in the market. It didn't happen overnight. Doyler and Webby left almost 10 years ago for Digico. You can be certain that if Midas were selling PM5D or M7 numbers (or even D5 D1 or SD numbers)Bosch would never have kicked them loose. Instead they chose to enter that market with and ultra expensive product that was in some ways less capable than lower priced offerings and took far too long to get into the middle part of the market. Frankly I'm surprised they didn't cut them loose sooner. So things may stay the same, at least for now. AFAIK Music Group has no marquee pro audio brands. I might be a good thing but it may also be a bad thing. While Sun may have saved the Loud brands, it did so at the cost of a marquee pro audio brand. Uli Behringer has a lot more audio manufacturing experience than any of those empty suits from Sun that control Loud right now. At least the Smaart product was able to be saved by people that know the product and more importantly, know how to market it. Time will tell if this is a good move long term. But like anything else perception is reality and the perception is that Behringer makes low end crap. Rightfully or wrongly so, perception is reality and the real work for Music Group isn't making good product, it's convincing the users they have to ability to do more than just knock off crap sold in music stores. Good luck. They're going to need it... |
I think you've hit it on the head! The market has changed so radically over the last few years that names typically synonymous with top quality kit have been caught napping. Obviously you mentioned Cadac (who have not long released their digital offering, IMHO too little, too late,) but others such as Studer.
On another well known web forum, the same sort of comments were passed about Studer, but the point I would make is the same I did there, who amongst us is buying the current range of Midas or Klark Technik products? When people rave about Midas they are usually talking about the analogue consoles, but how many people are buying these now? Digital live sound consoles are getting really common place these days and there are plenty of XL4's, XL3's in peoples hire inventory that there really isn't any call to buy new ones. I'm not for one trying to get into the debate of sound quality as there are plenty of people on each side of the debate, however, cost and weight do factor for many shows, particularly the vast majority of regional (and some national) suppliers and with budgets what they are.....
Personally I'm not particularly bothered in business terms as to whether Midas/KT survive or get down traded to some mass market trash, IMHO at present they don't really figure as a major player, at least with their current ranges.
Regards
Roland
Post by: Marty Bilecki on December 09, 2009, 10:54:12 AM
It didn't happen overnight. Doyler and Webby left almost 10 years ago for Digico. You can be certain that if Midas were selling PM5D or M7 numbers (or even D5 D1 or SD numbers)Bosch would never have kicked them loose.
Right on Dave.. Big plus One!!
Post by: Marty Bilecki on December 09, 2009, 10:55:46 AM
Post by: Dana Sampson on December 09, 2009, 10:56:17 AM
Post by: Tom Reid on December 09, 2009, 10:58:08 AM
Add a poll to see how many Labsters are now deciding to buy something else, or had major purchases planned in the next 3 yers that they have to 'rethink'.
My bet is most are purchasing parts, and hiring people to keep the present stock working until the industry picks up.
This is the industry that kept Midas/KT in business. If we all were buying the stuff they wouldn't need to sell. But we're not. So it's Ch.11 or sell to the mass producer.
We create the market and the demand for product.
Post by: Noah Waldron on December 09, 2009, 11:51:29 AM
| Brian Bolly wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 10:50 | ||
Apparently you already can. |
Have you guys taken a look at this Behringer Console? Its layout and everything is the same as a Midas Venice! Pretty Funny.......
We have bought into perceived values, and Behringer is going to capitalize on it. Todays consumer is more interested in wearing brand names, than a quality product that will last. Amazing that we would go buy a t-shirt with a companies logo and pay that company to do their advertising! I would dare to say that todays consumer is no longer interested in quality, but a good deal, that would allow them to consume more crap!
Post by: Caleb Dick on December 09, 2009, 12:26:38 PM
| Tom Reid wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 07:58 |
Out of 4 pages of rants and counter rants, not one person has indicated that this deal has fubarred thier purchase of Midas/KT this year or next. Add a poll to see how many Labsters are now deciding to buy something else, or had major purchases planned in the next 3 yers that they have to 'rethink'. |
Bob Leonard mentioned how this has decided for him Venice vs LS9-16.
As was also mentioned - how many were planning on buying a Midas in the first place, now? Not many. So the very few currently planned purchases have been made even 'more few', and the few possible future purchases are in jeopardy.
For our specific (church) needs, the future console will likely be Profile, Vi6, or SD8; Midas wasn't in that list, and now definitely won't be.
Caleb
Post by: Charlotte Evans on December 09, 2009, 12:51:35 PM
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 09, 2009, 01:03:23 PM
The market for new high end analog consoles is saturated and shrinking, and if any of the majors are selling more than 30% of 2006 numbers I'd be surprised. I suspect that APB Dynasonics will be the last craftsman purveyor of large frame analog mixers left standing.
Have fun, good luck.
Tim Mc
Post by: Bob Lee (QSC) on December 09, 2009, 01:05:28 PM
Post by: John Norris on December 09, 2009, 01:20:49 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 10:05 | ||
As the resident apologist for things contrary, I have defended China more than attacked them, but there is often some truth in stereotypes. That said, it is sloppy production management to rely upon factory workers or line supervisors to arbitrate fit and finish decisions. They are unlikely to have a clue about customer expectations. I ran into similar issues in US factories, trying to run very high finish quality recording studio products down production lines shared by "hide in a dark closet" install products. It can be confusing for line workers to hear that a minor cosmetic flaw acceptable on one product is not acceptable on another. The solution is to completely document the process and define what is acceptable ahead of the questions, so distant line workers or supervisors never have to make that call. The day of craftsman factory line workers, who have the experience to make final calls on such things are gone for any remotely mass market product. No matter where it's built. I submit that any product, can be built anywhere, to any level of quality, with proper process controls and management. Doing so profitably is another matter, and right now China is in the fat part of the curve, but all to soon, they will be replaced by Africa, or who knows. It will be interesting in a hundred years or so, when we run out of developing countries, to attract marginal manufacturing, and it comes home to roost. By then "stuff" will probably be built by robots, so maybe a good field of study for young kids is robotics. Until the robots start building robots. JR |
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html
Post by: David Morison on December 09, 2009, 02:07:45 PM
| Noah Waldron wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 16:51 | ||
Have you guys taken a look at this Behringer Console? Its layout and everything is the same as a Midas Venice! Pretty Funny....... |
Yup, it was slagged off here (perhaps in the Basement) for exactly those reasons a couple or three months ago.
Cheers,
David.
Post by: Gus Housen on December 09, 2009, 02:10:55 PM
+1
Just like mackie uses the "designed by EAW" I think the "Designed by midas/KT" will be very profitable.
Both Midas and KT Are great products, but these lines could bennefit launching a value line along the same pricing as Allen and heath/Mackie or Rane and dbx.
I was suprised when Peavey launched their line Array they didnt use the Crest Branding, Seems like It would have had better market street cred.
Post by: Bennett Prescott on December 09, 2009, 02:14:05 PM
| Charlotte Evans wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 12:51 |
Jesus, some of the comments on here.......a good analogy would be like the french fries/freedom fries issue a few years back |
You mean like "Liberty Steaks" during and after both World Wars?
Post by: Dave Stevens on December 09, 2009, 03:20:17 PM
| Tom Reid wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 07:58 |
Out of 4 pages of rants and counter rants, not one person has indicated that this deal has fubarred thier purchase of Midas/KT this year or next. Add a poll to see how many Labsters are now deciding to buy something else, or had major purchases planned in the next 3 yers that they have to 'rethink'. |
We would be in the rethink boat. You'd have to be foolish not to be concerned regarding a potential quarter million dollar purchase regardless of who purchased the company. With the reputation that Uli Behringer has I think it is prudent to show some restraint. This isn't a thousand dollar desk for doing five hundred dollar gigs. They are part of a show that will generate millions of dollars in revenue and the serviceability and sustainability of the product is a concern. As I said in the previous post, perception is reality and the reality is that they have a great deal of brand finessing to do make those that might buy one of these high end units comfortable.
Dave
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 09, 2009, 04:32:23 PM
| Gus Housen wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 13:10 |
+1 I was suprised when Peavey launched their line Array they didnt use the Crest Branding, Seems like It would have had better market street cred. |
I didn't know that crest had any reputation in the speaker business? I did a nice 2 way plastic box for a crest speaker model using Charlie's quadratic horn. It was actually a sweet box but as usual was underestimated by customers because of the dubious heritage.
EDIT_ FWIW we were also kicking the tires on at least one speaker company (I think more than one) that were on the block around that same time... but didn't buy one. That would have been the better candidate to front higher end speakers. /edit
----
I tried desperately to get the crest marketing guys to embrace the peavey Mentor, the DSP based feedback locater, that wasn't working in PV distribution because PV customers would just buy a graphic EQ with the FLS build in for a few bux more.. IMO this product could have done OK in the Crest distribution where customers liked their non-PV eqs. But I couldn't get the marketing types to drink the kool-aid (what could I possibly know about Crest customers?), and I couldn't make them so I ended up obsoleting the Mentor despite a hardcore base of users.
Wouldn't be the first or last time people ignored my advice.
It is difficult for such marriages to share a common vision, below the highest levels, if they even exist there.JR
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 09, 2009, 05:54:41 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 22:32 | ||
I didn't know that crest had any reputation in the speaker business? I did a nice 2 way plastic box for a crest speaker model using Charlie's quadratic horn. It was actually a sweet box but as usual was underestimated by customers because of the dubious heritage. EDIT_ FWIW we were also kicking the tires on at least one speaker company (I think more than one) that were on the block around that same time... but didn't buy one. That would have been the better candidate to front higher end speakers. /edit ---- I tried desperately to get the crest marketing guys to embrace the peavey Mentor, the DSP based feedback locater, that wasn't working in PV distribution because PV customers would just buy a graphic EQ with the FLS build in for a few bux more.. IMO this product could have done OK in the Crest distribution where customers liked their non-PV eqs. But I couldn't get the marketing types to drink the kool-aid (what could I possibly know about Crest customers?), and I couldn't make them so I ended up obsoleting the Mentor despite a hardcore base of users. Wouldn't be the first or last time people ignored my advice. It is difficult for such marriages to share a common vision, below the highest levels, if they even exist there.JR |
Mentor: That's the FLS display with no EQ, right?
That would have been really nice if it was tied onboard to the PFL-bus of a console!
Post by: Jamie Taylor on December 09, 2009, 07:17:47 PM
If ANY company owner here is buying a brand name just FOR the brand name, rather than more important requirements (ROI, build quality, rider acceptance, suitability etc. etc.) then they will find very soon that they don't have a company.
While your statement might represent 16 year-old females, I don't think audio professionals are anything like this.
Post by: Gene Pink on December 09, 2009, 08:13:19 PM
> Heh heh heh Beavis. He said anus.
The astronomist's society is presently considering a name change for that planet due to all those jokes.
The new proposed name:
Urectum.
* Plagiarized from the show Futurama.
Post by: Gus Housen on December 09, 2009, 08:56:34 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 21:32 | ||
I didn't know that crest had any reputation in the speaker business? JR |
No but Crest has/had enough of a reputation for being rider friendly. Don't get me wrong I think peavey is one of the most under-rated brands out there, But The peavey branding was pretty much a automatic no for many people based on past rider acceptance. Qsc Better known for amplifiers has been resonably successful with their speaker lines. I think @ the price point the Versaray was launched at many people would have given it a 2nd look coming from a non-speaker company, with the Crest reputation, with the Peavey branding it was completly off the list for many without even a listen.
Post by: Brandon Blakeney on December 09, 2009, 09:44:45 PM
Post by: Caleb Dick on December 09, 2009, 10:20:27 PM
Couldn't find Behringer and Midas, but this is close enough
Caleb
Post by: Moby (Mike Diack) on December 09, 2009, 10:25:01 PM
| Dave Stevens wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 09:20 |
As I said in the previous post, perception is reality and the reality is that they have a great deal of brand finessing to do make those that might buy one of these high end units comfortable. Dave |
Amazingly, It worked for Skoda.
(some brilliant advertising and real engineering / QC improvements were involved)
M
Post by: Greg Cameron on December 10, 2009, 12:29:36 AM
| Brandon Blakeney wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 18:44 |
However the QW and Versarray lines sound as good or better than alot of high end EAW and JBL stuff I've heard recently. |
While the QW line is decent bang for the buck, you must have been listening to some very poorly deployed rigs. The QW series doesn't compete with high end EAW or JBL.
Greg
Post by: Brandon Blakeney on December 10, 2009, 01:12:36 AM
Post by: Tony Ly on December 10, 2009, 01:25:05 AM
| Brandon Blakeney wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 06:12 |
I didn't mean QW competes with huge line arrays. However, it holds its own with its SRX/KF counterparts. |
It maybe be close to the SRX series but no way near the KF 650/850.
Post by: Brandon Blakeney on December 10, 2009, 01:39:08 AM
Post by: Marjan Milosevic on December 10, 2009, 06:11:31 AM
right?
Post by: Roland Clarke 1964 on December 10, 2009, 07:14:43 AM
| Brandon Blakeney wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 20:44 |
You are absolutely right Peavey is the MOST underrated brand! I used to hate peavey because I worked with some of their "value-based" products in highschool and was not impressed. However the QW and Versarray lines sound as good or better than alot of high end EAW and JBL stuff I've heard recently. I will admit Behringer is not the most reliable especially their most recent lines. However, a small sound company like mine would benefit from a 40x8 Midas in the $6-8K range. |
But when players like Yamaha, and alike can't make a desk for that kind of money, how would Midas? Unless you are talking about a Behringer offering badged with the Midas name?
At the sort of money you are talking you already have things like the LS9 and for a bit more A&H I-live and M7. Granted these are not Digico, Venue or Soundcraft VI6's, but they do offer smaller companies the opportunity to delve into the digital world with decent quality products, at an affordable price.
My take has always been, forget the name on the surface, with digital it's been all change. If you had said 15 years ago that Yamaha, Digidesign and Digico would be the major players in the live console market, no one would have believed you! However, when you look at it cold and dispassionately, it makes sense, the one thing all these companies have is a long term involvement with digital sound developement. Companies like Cadac, Midas don't have this heritage, so they either have to buy it in or they have a lot of catch-up to do. Yamaha's R&D budget is likely more than many other companies turnover.
Regards
Roland
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 10, 2009, 10:26:02 AM
| Moby (Mike Diack) wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 04:25 | ||
Amazingly, It worked for Skoda. (some brilliant advertising and real engineering / QC improvements were involved) M |
Don't forget, Skoda was a luxury car in the 1920s so that had a good ancestry, at least.
Post by: Jeff Babcock on December 10, 2009, 12:58:52 PM
| Brandon Blakeney wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 01:12 |
I didn't mean QW competes with huge line arrays. However, it holds its own with its SRX/KF counterparts. |
Ummmm, NO.
QW is actually very decent, Charlie's horn design is smart. Sure it easily competes against SRX. KF, not so much.
The most commonly encountered KF point source models (ie 650, 850) are not similar products, and excel in output, pattern control, and a number of other important issues. Power handling is an almost meaningless statistic which marketing departments love to exploit.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 10, 2009, 02:46:03 PM
I recall from one past run at a serious higher end loudspeaker box, that the drivers have to be very tightly specified to match each other (a lot more expensive), so the voicing wouldn't vary at all from box to box. This is very important when arraying multiple cabinets, and not much of an issue in single box applications.
I have seen serious (PV) dealers who wanted to sell to the more professional customers, but refused to accept that these "more professional" boxes could possibly cost as much as they needed to, even from Peavey with their value oriented profit margins.. The customer never gets to hear what Peavey could do if the dealers don't believe in and support the more professional product effort.
Perhaps under a higher end brand the real world cost wouldn't result in the same knee jerk resistance. This is just one of several such considerations, but I can't think of many examples where low and and high end products coexist within a single brand.
JR
PS: IMO it is possible to alter a brands image (think Sony). There are new customers being born every day, so it just takes time and effort. What is not possible is to hold both the high ground and low ground at the same time. Nobody wants to give up the low ground, because in this case, that is where the money is, so attempts to take the high ground "too", are ultimately doomed to failure .
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 10, 2009, 03:36:53 PM
| Bob Leonard wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 14:57 | ||
Kristian, I think you're out of line here. My statements concern workmanship and quality, and having lived, worked and fought in those countries for a period of almost 6 years, and recently traveling to Tiawan, I beleive I have a slight insight into the mentality behind Asian production processes and craftsmanship, old and new. I have to leave for the day job now, and it's snowing and cold here so I'll put on the Columbia coat I bought 3 days ago. The one with the label that say's "Made in Vietnam". |
Did it keep you warm and dry on your way to work?
Post by: Art Welter on December 10, 2009, 03:44:15 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 12:46 |
Not to speak ill of my old alma mater, there are several factors that separate the wheat from the chaff in more professional applications. This has little or nothing to do with design engineering chops. As I have argued before it's harder to design a successful volkswagen than ferrari... but there are features that cost real money that broader market dealers/customers aren't willing to pay for. I recall from one past run at a serious higher end loudspeaker box, that the drivers have to be very tightly specified to match each other (a lot more expensive), so the voicing wouldn't vary at all from box to box. This is very important when arraying multiple cabinets, and not much of an issue in single box applications. I have seen serious (PV) dealers who wanted to sell to the more professional customers, but refused to accept that these "more professional" boxes could possibly cost as much as they needed to, even from Peavey with their value oriented profit margins.. The customer never gets to hear what Peavey could do if the dealers don't believe in and support the more professional product effort. Perhaps under a higher end brand the real world cost wouldn't result in the same knee jerk resistance. This is just one of several such considerations, but I can't think of many examples where low and and high end products coexist within a single brand. JR PS: IMO it is possible to alter a brands image (think Sony). There are new customers being born every day, so it just takes time and effort. What is not possible is to hold both the high ground and low ground at the same time. Nobody wants to give up the low ground, because in this case, that is where the money is, so attempts to take the high ground "too", are ultimately doomed to failure . |
The one exception to your rule that low end and high end products can not coexist, or that you can’t hold both the high ground and low ground at the same time, is perhaps the most ubiquitous player in the sound world, (and damn near everything else from motorcycles to canned goods) Yamaha.
Though they don’t go quite as cheap as Behringer, they certainly cover a wide swath in price and quality.
If Behringer is able to combine the aspects that made KT and Midas well respected with their more cost effective mass manufacturing and distribution, the plan may work well.
I agree with Bob Lee that there may be more income potential in putting the Midas name on Behringer technology, and also agree with Dave Stevens that the reputation that Behringer product has may cause concern regarding a potential quarter million dollar console purchase.
I think the new purchase may end up with some decent Midas and KT technology finding it’s way to the small/ midrange digital console range, which will be good for us audio consumers, but not so good for the competition.
Art Welter
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 10, 2009, 04:55:05 PM
They are generally neither the very lowest, nor very highest end. They are large enough to enjoy the economies of scale and ability to fund technology, but they often buy or partner outside to gain technology
So I see them in MI/PA as lower middle positioned. Their big consoles area bit of a contradiction and some might argue a loss leader, while their lower cost digital consoles certainly are making money now.. they didn't for years.
------
The whole deal about old brands under new management is it often comes down to what have you done lately. So it depends on how they treat their new customers. I doubt they could survive on what was left of their old customers.
JR
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 10, 2009, 06:21:39 PM
I think there are a number of companies who have been able to embrace both the high end market and the low end market successfully. However, the ability to do so has historically been because the company has, in most cases, started as a manufacturer of quality and well made goods.
In the early 70's, well before the Japanese stereo invasion many of us stationed in Japan were well aware of the quality products available to the Japanese, but not yet available outside of the country. Most of us returned with Yamaha, Sansui, JVC and Akai components that were the rival of almost anything made in the US then, and in some cases even now. I even purchased a guitar amplifier with speaker in it shaped like the human ear. I sold that amplifier, and have never seen one like it since. These products were a far cry from the cheap tin toys any of us had as a child. The toys and goods rejected by the US as far inferior to our own. The Japanese learned quickly.
In the case of Japanese products we are all aware of their capabilities and attention to detail. We also know that Japanese products generally have a price tag equal to products of similar design and craftsmanship manufactured here, in England, and in other European counties.
The one key fact I recall is that unlike today, poorly made products were rejected by the public almost regardless of price. However, today cheaply made products abound and are accepted by the masses, a fact of life in a world where disposable income (until recently) was readily available, and in a world where standards are not held as high as they were in the past. All to often you hear the words "Good enough for now, if it fails I'll buy another, they're cheap enough.".
Good enough to many companies is money in the bank and a return customer a second thought. Uli has built his reputation. Yes, there were products manufactured in Germany that are in many cases acceptable for use, but to me that is the equal of saying a $100 Gibson knock off from China is "good enough for use". For what? Fire wood? Or how about any of the products such as line arrays, amplifiers, cables, mixers, microphones, etc.? Are they "good enough for use"? Maybe, but by who and for what?
It's more than perception at this point it's procedural fact. Fact, poor component handling, lower rated components and sloppy assembly lead to premature failures, something most if not all of us want nothing to do with.
I have not spent the past 58 years under a bed, so in light of that I will concede that there are many well made and quality products produced in China, Taiwan and now Vietnam. But, I will not turn a blind eye and except the majority of those goods as equal to the goods manufactured in the US, England and Europe. The fact remains that a few tall building don't make for an industrialized nation and proving that point might be a simple as pointing to dog food, baby's milk or toy's.
I will certainly be willing to purchase goods from any manufacturer who has proved to me in the past they are capable of producing quality goods. Midas and KT have made these points through out the history of their being. However, Behringer has proved the opposite. I hope I am wrong here, but I doubt that Uli will will do anything less than pull the manufacture of these products overseas eventually denigrating the quality and reputation of these two proud firms to that of slightly better than that of the Behringer of today.
Yes the Vienamese Columbia jacket keeps me warm. But having paid $127 for it I expected nothing less.
Post by: Paul Bell on December 10, 2009, 08:21:39 PM
It's already been said by several that he is a sharp businessman.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 10, 2009, 09:17:50 PM
| Paul Bell wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 19:21 |
Surely you all realize that Uli Behringer is lurking here and keeping tabs on reactions/comments/thoughts. It's already been said by several that he is a sharp businessman. |
I hope he is here and listening, and supports KT and Midas so they can be the best they can be.
I have my personal opinions but never said he isn't a successful businessman. That would just be ignoring reality.
IMO the highest return from KT and Midas Badges will not be from (their) business as usual.
JR
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 10, 2009, 10:58:13 PM
| Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 17:21 |
John, I think there are a number of companies who have been able to embrace both the high end market and the low end market successfully. However, the ability to do so has historically been because the company has, in most cases, started as a manufacturer of quality and well made goods. In the early 70's, well before the Japanese stereo invasion many of us stationed in Japan were well aware of the quality products available to the Japanese, but not yet available outside of the country. Most of us returned with Yamaha, Sansui, JVC and Akai components that were the rival of almost anything made in the US then, and in some cases even now. I even purchased a guitar amplifier with speaker in it shaped like the human ear. I sold that amplifier, and have never seen one like it since. These products were a far cry from the cheap tin toys any of us had as a child. The toys and goods rejected by the US as far inferior to our own. The Japanese learned quickly. In the case of Japanese products we are all aware of their capabilities and attention to detail. We also know that Japanese products generally have a price tag equal to products of similar design and craftsmanship manufactured here, in England, and in other European counties. The one key fact I recall is that unlike today, poorly made products were rejected by the public almost regardless of price. However, today cheaply made products abound and are accepted by the masses, a fact of life in a world where disposable income (until recently) was readily available, and in a world where standards are not held as high as they were in the past. All to often you hear the words "Good enough for now, if it fails I'll buy another, they're cheap enough.". Good enough to many companies is money in the bank and a return customer a second thought. Uli has built his reputation. Yes, there were products manufactured in Germany that are in many cases acceptable for use, but to me that is the equal of saying a $100 Gibson knock off from China is "good enough for use". For what? Fire wood? Or how about any of the products such as line arrays, amplifiers, cables, mixers, microphones, etc.? Are they "good enough for use"? Maybe, but by who and for what? It's more than perception at this point it's procedural fact. Fact, poor component handling, lower rated components and sloppy assembly lead to premature failures, something most if not all of us want nothing to do with. I have not spent the past 58 years under a bed, so in light of that I will concede that there are many well made and quality products produced in China, Taiwan and now Vietnam. But, I will not turn a blind eye and except the majority of those goods as equal to the goods manufactured in the US, England and Europe. The fact remains that a few tall building don't make for an industrialized nation and proving that point might be a simple as pointing to dog food, baby's milk or toy's. I will certainly be willing to purchase goods from any manufacturer who has proved to me in the past they are capable of producing quality goods. Midas and KT have made these points through out the history of their being. However, Behringer has proved the opposite. I hope I am wrong here, but I doubt that Uli will will do anything less than pull the manufacture of these products overseas eventually denigrating the quality and reputation of these two proud firms to that of slightly better than that of the Behringer of today. Yes the Vienamese Columbia jacket keeps me warm. But having paid $127 for it I expected nothing less. |
Name a few brands that can simultaneously occupy high and low end markets. if they come to mind so easily... I am still having trouble coming up with one...
JR
Post by: Winston Gamble on December 10, 2009, 11:11:58 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 03:58 | ||
Name a few brands that can simultaneously occupy high and low end markets. if they come to mind so easily... I am still having trouble coming up with one... JR |
How about Yamaha? Maybe not quite the highest, but pretty close.
Winston
Post by: Andrew Broughton on December 11, 2009, 03:05:55 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 20:58 |
Name a few brands that can simultaneously occupy high and low end markets. if they come to mind so easily... I am still having trouble coming up with one... JR |
Sony, Sennheiser, Soundcraft (sort of), Midas, IBM, Cisco, Motorola, just off the top of my head - I'm sure there's lots more. Unless of course I've misunderstood your meaning.
Post by: John Norris on December 11, 2009, 03:46:32 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 22:58 |
Name a few brands that can simultaneously occupy high and low end markets. if they come to mind so easily... I am still having trouble coming up with one... JR |
JBL comes to mind, from JRX up to VP & VT.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 11, 2009, 03:47:23 AM
| Andrew Broughton wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 09:05 | ||
Sony, Sennheiser, Soundcraft (sort of), Midas, IBM, Cisco, Motorola, just off the top of my head - I'm sure there's lots more. Unless of course I've misunderstood your meaning. |
Most cell phone companies, many airlines and some car manufacturers would be on my list. Again, if I understood the meaning correctly, also.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 11, 2009, 04:00:00 AM
I agree with many of your points. It's just that scrapping Midas as even a contender for a small mixer purchase just because of a corporate takeover seems a bit extreme. So does scrapping several fully functioning QSC amps you have been totally happy with, just because you found out they were made in China.
What I will agree on is that the "good enough" attitude is a bad one, and the "I'll buy another later, 'cause it's so cheap anyway" likewise.
I have for many years tried to buy quality brand name items both privately and in business. Sometimes you just can't afford to, but in those cases I try to wait until I can or just pass on owning an item in that category.
I firmly believe if anyone "did it to us" it's ourselves, by always wanting more, more, more and not accepting that the neighbour might have something nice that you can't afford yourself. Possibly some blame could be put on the big corporations for "fooling us" with clever advertising of the sweet life, and possibly some blame could be put on government for "letting them". But at the end of the day we're the ones buying crap until we run out of money, then we start loaning to buy more.
I think that we have in the past fooled ourselves regarding the "real" cost of shipping. In the future, it wouldn't surprise me if there is a 10$ shipping tax on a 10$ plastic item from China. In which case consumers might choose the 40$ item over the 20$ to make paying the tax worthwhile. After not too long there will be a lot more 40$-quality-level items in the stores than 20$-quality-level items. So your idea of taxing items made overseas might become closer to reality than most people would like to admit.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 11, 2009, 08:48:55 AM
| Winston Gamble wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 22:11 |
How about Yamaha? Maybe not quite the highest, but pretty close. Winston |
I guess you haven't been following the discussion. Yamaha has already been suggested by Art.
IMO Yamaha as a brand is a low-mid MI brand, with a few isolated SKUs that are hi-mid.. They apparently do an adequate job of servicing those hi-mid customers, BTW to be perceived as high end, while servicing the low end is the holy grail of brand positioning, that I argue is internally inconsistent.
The ideal is to see the gear used on stage, while selling it to the people in the audience. There's more people in the audience.
JR
Post by: Tim Morin on December 11, 2009, 08:51:50 AM
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 11, 2009, 08:56:58 AM
| Andrew Broughton wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 02:05 |
Sony, Sennheiser, Soundcraft (sort of), Midas, IBM, Cisco, Motorola, just off the top of my head - I'm sure there's lots more. Unless of course I've misunderstood your meaning. |
All of those brands strike me as neither very low end or very high end..
Sony is my go to brand, for redefining themselves, around their old (now) trinitron TV tube technology. Prior to that rebranding they were cheap crappo, and they re-entered several notches higher end.
Cisco is a serial acquirer of companies/brands, so ends up absorbing higher end brands, IBM does not strike me as remotely low end. The entire PC compatible industry grew up under their price point umbrella.
JR
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 11, 2009, 09:10:26 AM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 02:47 |
Most cell phone companies, many airlines and some car manufacturers would be on my list. Again, if I understood the meaning correctly, also. |
The airline selling fist class, and cattle car tickets for the same flight is clearly one company selling product to two level customers, but one could argue that first class service is a sub brand of those airlines with a following independent of the main carrier. For a given flight it becomes a relative thing, like buying the best meal offering while stuck in a lousy restaurant.
My premise is that success in the low, entry level market, taints a brand for being simultaneously perceived as high end. This doesn't mean that companies won't always try with varying degrees of success to occupy high visibility niches with line leader products, Most companies have artist relations departments and varying degrees of lubrication, to get line leader products into high profile uses, hoping to get some marketing halo effect.
Of course maybe I'm all wet, and customers don't stereotype brands...
JR
Post by: Andrew Broughton on December 11, 2009, 02:53:43 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 06:56 |
All of those brands strike me as neither very low end or very high end.. |
Post by: Jonathan Goodall on December 11, 2009, 03:00:26 PM
| Andrew Broughton wrote on Sat, 12 December 2009 08:53 | ||
|
I think you could just about say similar for AKG.
Post by: Art Welter on December 11, 2009, 03:37:34 PM
| Andrew Broughton wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 12:53 | ||
|
Still, JR's comments make sense, looking at the audio range.
Behringer has low end baby mixers for around $50 street price, the Midas XL8 rollout street price was $289,000.
The top mixer cost 5780 times more than the bottom one!
It will be interesting to see what happens in the middle range under the new ownership.
Art Welter
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 11, 2009, 03:44:12 PM
My reference to selling to both high end and low end customers was not specific to a product line but more relevent to a corporation overall.
Leveraging a name known for quality is easy. If I were to use Cisco a brand I am intimately familiar with, then I would ask you to note it is not uncommen for me to work with quarter million dollar router in the morning, and a sub $50 router in the afternoon, all at the same company. If I ask the customer why they bought the $50 router they will invariably tell me they bought the router because it filled the need and because it was a Cisco.
Now based on perception, right or wrong, if I were to own an array from any known and respected manufacturer, Meyer, JBL, etc., then I would also be willing to buy their $50 speakers for my TV or Ipod. Why? Because I would feel that I was purchasing a low cost but quality low cost product based on the manufacturers reputation. That by the way, is why I bought a Columbia jacket even though the tag said "Made in Vietnam."
Behringer has never enjoyed the benefit of producing a first class quality piece of hardware that most if not all of us "Just had to have." They have catered to the low dollar masses, made their niche, and are happy with their volume sales. I believe that Uli's touch will and already has tainted the names of two respected manufacturers. I also think the unless Uli changes his approach to sales, then these manufacturers will suffer the same reputation as Behringer now.
Perhaps if Uli isolates KT and Midas from the Behringer name by creating a professional group, using higher end components, better service, support and better guarantees he may overcome this obstacle. He's done this with his Bugera line of guitar amps, and just not seeing the name Behringer seems to help, but he has a long row to hoe, and I doubt he'll ever finish. Look for Midas and KT lines to start appearing at your local Guitar Center in mass soon.
Post by: Matt Sum on December 11, 2009, 04:09:22 PM
Interesting topic.
I must say my initial reaction was aargh, oh no, etc. However, I guess ultimately time will tell and we'll just have to see what happens to the Midas and KT products.
As previously mentioned, it kind of wouldn't surprise me if people specify pre-Behringer Midas, pre-Behringer KT on riders; even without hearing and seeing the post-Behringer gear.
Guess I may never own a good Midas console.
Matt
P.S. Do people reckon this is a win (i.e. less competition) for APB Dynasonics? If so, will prices go up?
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 11, 2009, 04:11:16 PM
| Andrew Broughton wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 13:53 | ||
|
I learned long ago that you can't argue with customers about their perception...
Well you can always argue... just never win. IIRC Sony bought MCI and tried to make a run at professional higher end, but later backed away. I recall some very expensive Sony consoles, that I haven't seen in a while. I think we may have even hired one of their ex-engineers to work at PV years ago.
JR
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 11, 2009, 04:28:42 PM
| Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 14:44 |
John, My reference to selling to both high end and low end customers was not specific to a product line but more relevent to a corporation overall. Leveraging a name known for quality is easy. If I were to use Cisco a brand I am intimately familiar with, then I would ask you to note it is not uncommen for me to work with quarter million dollar router in the morning, and a sub $50 router in the afternoon, all at the same company. If I ask the customer why they bought the $50 router they will invariably tell me they bought the router because it filled the need and because it was a Cisco. |
If you are intimately familiar with Cisco, you know that $50 router is probably a rebadged Linksys. A compnay brand that Cisco bought so they could capitalize on consumer side of their general networking business. I'm not sure but I suspect the Linksys brand is still stronger on consumer side. but there is benefit to putting both names on it for commercial customers.
| Quote: |
Now based on perception, right or wrong, if I were to own an array from any known and respected manufacturer, Meyer, JBL, etc., then I would also be willing to buy their $50 speakers for my TV or Ipod. Why? Because I would feel that I was purchasing a low cost but quality low cost product based on the manufacturers reputation. That by the way, is why I bought a Columbia jacket even though the tag said "Made in Vietnam." |
Selling down off an established brand is always an easy lay, and no doubt the easy path for the subject of this thread. This does little to help the brand image for people only exposed to the computer speakers.
| Quote: |
Behringer has never enjoyed the benefit of producing a first class quality piece of hardware that most if not all of us "Just had to have." They have catered to the low dollar masses, made their niche, and are happy with their volume sales. I believe that Uli's touch will and already has tainted the names of two respected manufacturers. I also think the unless Uli changes his approach to sales, then these manufacturers will suffer the same reputation as Behringer now. |
Behringer did have some history before they nicked Greg's 8 bus and turned to the dark side. While not uber high end, not disposable crap.
| Quote: |
Perhaps if Uli isolates KT and Midas from the Behringer name by creating a professional group, using higher end components, better service, support and better guarantees he may overcome this obstacle. He's done this with his Bugera line of guitar amps, and just not seeing the name Behringer seems to help, but he has a long row to hoe, and I doubt he'll ever finish. Look for Midas and KT lines to start appearing at your local Guitar Center in mass soon. |
He is learning as he goes... I don't underestimate his ability to make money.
JR
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 12, 2009, 06:46:32 PM
| Art Welter wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 12:37 |
[ The top mixer cost 5780 times more than the bottom one! |
treading on the potentially forbidden "politics" thin ice.
That 5,780 to one ratio is something like the 2005 ratio of annual compensation to the CEOs etc. of many companies compared to the lowest paid employee.
That was up from something like a 380 to one difference between the CEO and the entry level employee in the 1960s.
And only includes US resident employees, not the offshore ones.
And may well represent nowhere near the difference between what Uli makes and what's paid to the workers who live in those nice clean dorms in the "Behringer City" pictured in the video.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 12, 2009, 08:14:07 PM
oops..deleted
no johnny rants (about governance, not politics) on the LAB
Even I have standards and try to keep it downstairs
JR
Post by: Robin Parker on December 12, 2009, 08:29:47 PM
While I’m not a fan or supporter of the “budget” lines of equipment (either), even I have to concede the fact that every customer of mine is simply not capable of buying the platinum version of the best of the best of the best. Budgets prevail. Those little pictures of dead white men contribute more ‘input” to the design of most systems than most of us are possibly willing to admit.
I bear my chest to the Gods of audio are proclaim that even I own and sometimes use a Peavey CS-800 – I have TRIED to blow it up and failed. I found the (dare I say “cute”?) Behringer RX1202FX mixer and have installed it in a number of small sound reinforcement applications – with 100% success – and 200% customer satisfaction. I even keep one in a small “emergency” rack with – are you ready for a real laugh – two Rane ME-30’s and an Altec (you heard me right, Altec Lansing) 9444 power amp for that late night “restaurant” call. They have never failed me.
We sometimes fail to recognize, or worse, forget, that “sound” is highly subjective. I like to refer to this as the “anchovy / olive” theory. I like pizza with anchovies – most people don’t. Most people like olives on their pizza - I don’t. Question; who’s “right”? Personally, I don’t like excess bass (+30db or more above everything else – making my bowels jump around) but most “professionals” I’ve heard mixing do. Again, showing my conservative roots, when I’m exposed to something I don’t like, I get up and leave.
No, the sky isn’t falling and the world isn’t going to come to an end – at least not because of this – Obama is going to take care of that himself. Those of us that consider themselves as true professionals, in addition to applying the mastery of our trade and craft, should also learn to be humble. The only constant in this universe is change. But yes, if you want to, go ahead and bitch. Makes for great reading!
Post by: Greg Cameron on December 12, 2009, 11:26:32 PM
Post by: Robin Parker on December 13, 2009, 01:28:42 AM
Post by: Robin Parker on December 13, 2009, 01:34:33 AM
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 13, 2009, 08:47:20 AM
| Robin Parker wrote on Sun, 13 December 2009 00:34 |
1000 pardons.... |
Not laughing at you Robin... just, that Mr. Cameron's "reminder" was a bit late in this thread.Cheers,
Hammer
ps. never apologize for how you feel... only apologize if you dismiss someone else's feelings...
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 13, 2009, 09:56:27 AM
And FWIW some people dislike both olives and anchovies.
JR
Post by: Robin Parker on December 13, 2009, 11:00:56 AM
Recently I read an article regarding (guitar) amp modelers vs. the real thing (cabinet/mic). Six (+/-) “experts” were asked to identify the real thing from the modeled version…. (Sorry for not remembering all of the details, I didn’t know there was going to be a test) in a blind comparison listening test. Long story short, they were wrong in their assessments approximately 65% of the time….
Did you see the Penn & Teller (BS) episode about bottled water? Same thing. I’d love to line up every person in professional audio and conduct the same sort of test – there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that there would be a mass percentage leaving the table with their tails tucked between their legs. There are a bazillion things we could compare… Shure vs. Audix – Crown vs. QSC – BBS vs. DBX… you could go on for days….hell, centuries. You’re either a Chevy or a Ford person - the reasons are unknown and never will be - and that’s ok….
The Behringer/Midas issue is simply the beginning of another chapter – and more fodder to rant about!
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 13, 2009, 11:51:29 AM
| Robin Parker wrote on Sun, 13 December 2009 10:00 |
My point exactly! I do so enjoy listening to the rants of those that proclaim “golden hearing” – “this is crap – this is great” – sort of like watching a tennis match, sitting near the net. Recently I read an article regarding (guitar) amp modelers vs. the real thing (cabinet/mic). Six (+/-) “experts” were asked to identify the real thing from the modeled version…. (Sorry for not remembering all of the details, I didn’t know there was going to be a test) in a blind comparison listening test. Long story short, they were wrong in their assessments approximately 65% of the time…. Did you see the Penn & Teller (BS) episode about bottled water? Same thing. I’d love to line up every person in professional audio and conduct the same sort of test – there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that there would be a mass percentage leaving the table with their tails tucked between their legs. There are a bazillion things we could compare… Shure vs. Audix – Crown vs. QSC – BBS vs. DBX… you could go on for days….hell, centuries. You’re either a Chevy or a Ford person - the reasons are unknown and never will be - and that’s ok…. The Behringer/Midas issue is simply the beginning of another chapter – and more fodder to rant about! |
Ok, since this is remotely on topic.
It is not completely fair, but perhaps appropriate to speculate about possible sonic changes to post-Behringer KT and Midas SKUs. Behringer versions of other classic products tended to substitute cheaper magnetics and components, so a truly Behringer version of a KT/Midas design might be different. But one would expect such significant component downgrades to only be done in Behringer branded versions, while models built under the old badge would at least attempt to use similar quality components, taking advantage of the less sonically intrusive cost savings (like labor). There may be some fraction of components now sourced in the west, that just won't be the same when sourced from the east (I have had to deal with this before), but this will be the job of the remaining KT/Midas engineering staff to try to specify and maintain original performance levels for components.
I am not smart enough to predict the actual future, so only time will tell how this plays out. Interesting times.
JR
Post by: Greg Cameron on December 13, 2009, 08:30:28 PM
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sun, 13 December 2009 05:47 |
| Not laughing at you Robin... just, that Mr. Cameron's "reminder" was a bit late in this thread. |
Technically no. While the discussion has been heavily laden with opinions on economics, commerce, and the economy, it hadn't veered into talk of personal party/political affiliation and bashing of leaders of parties/political affiliations. Granted economics, commerce, and the economy can be closely related to politics, but they're not synonymous and there is a distinction. Directly political talk tends to inflame and is often done on purpose in online forums. I'm assuming that's why it's not allowed here, same with religion.
Greg
Post by: Christoph Tiefenthaler on December 14, 2009, 07:05:05 PM
Post by: gerald winkler on December 15, 2009, 03:50:21 PM
as far as i know is the so beloved Venice not made bei midas, but (at least) assembled by dynacord!
u. behringer is apparentely so successfull in his productionlines - I can not imagine, that he will "sacrify" that brand for using it for his silvereared devices.
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 15, 2009, 04:46:30 PM
| gerald winkler wrote on Tue, 15 December 2009 12:50 |
...seems to be, as a lot of owners of midas consoles are to be found here... as far as i know is the so beloved Venice not made bei midas, but (at least) assembled by dynacord! u. behringer is apparentely so successfull in his productionlines - I can not imagine, that he will "sacrify" that brand for using it for his silvereared devices. |
I might question the "beloved" description of the Venice. It's peculiarities of channel count and aux send layout have been well discussed in here. As has it's Dynacord manufacture.
Now that Midas is no longer part of Bosch but EV/Dynacord, as far as I know, still is that connection may be severed and the future Venice level consoles will be made in China instead of by Dynacord.
Here in the US Mercedes Sprinter Vans have been sold by the Dodge Division of Chrysler. Now that Fiat controls Chrysler they will soon be badged differently and sold through other channels.
Post by: Dick Rees on December 15, 2009, 04:48:34 PM
| Lee Brenkman wrote on Tue, 15 December 2009 15:46 | ||
I might question the "beloved" description of the Venice. It's peculiarities of channel count and aux send layout have been well discussed in here. As has it's Dynacord manufacture. Now that Midas is no longer part of Bosch but EV/Dynacord, as far as I know, still is that connection may be severed and the future Venice level consoles will be made in China instead of by Dynacord. Here in the US Mercedes Sprinter Vans have been sold by the Dodge Division of Chrysler. Now that Fiat controls Chrysler they will soon be badged differently and sold through other channels. |
I'd trade my Venice for a Sprinter any day.......
Post by: Lee Brenkman on December 15, 2009, 04:52:41 PM
| Dick Rees wrote on Tue, 15 December 2009 13:48 |
[ |
I'd trade my Venice for a Sprinter any day.......[/quote]
I don't have a Venice but I'll trade any audio gear I own of equivalent value for a Sprinter.
Don't think Daimler Benz or their eventual US truck distributors would go for the deal though
Post by: gerald winkler on December 15, 2009, 05:03:38 PM
maybe the Dynacord-line goes to china ... despite their very good price for a venice-console...
maybe the new behringer-made midas are excellent in audioquality and more companies can afford it, to by...?
as long as we have to discuss about every cent of the costs of productions - we don't have to wonder!
Post by: drewgandy on December 15, 2009, 07:18:27 PM
| Lee Brenkman wrote on Tue, 15 December 2009 15:46 |
Now that Midas is no longer part of Bosch but EV/Dynacord, as far as I know, still is that connection may be severed and the future Venice level consoles will be made in China instead of by Dynacord. |
This is something that I'm surprised we haven't talked about yet... EV, Dynacord and Telex didn't apparently go along as part of the deal. (That would be kind of like buying a blender and getting the fridge, range and central air for free). There are some relationships there (synergies?) that will probably have to change.
And, I think the behringer console mentioned earlier in the thread might count as the Chinese Venice, at least for now.
Most of the other Behringer gear that I've seen has not looked so similar to it's cloning ancestor as this one. Impressive. Thing is it looks like it has all of the hang ups of the real thing with none (very few?) of the advantages. Of course I've not heard it or turned its knobs yet. hmm.
drew
Post by: Vince Emondi on December 15, 2009, 07:27:31 PM
Post by: Vince Emondi on December 15, 2009, 07:29:13 PM
Post by: Ian Hunt on December 19, 2009, 09:56:44 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 10 December 2009 21:58 | ||
Name a few brands that can simultaneously occupy high and low end markets. if they come to mind so easily... I am still having trouble coming up with one... JR |
Mercedes Benz (from the smart to the maybach)
Edit: because I can
Ian
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 19, 2009, 10:56:01 AM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 08:56 |
Mercedes Benz (from the smart to the maybach) Edit: because I can Ian |
Well that's 15 minutes I'll never get back...
I've never seen one so I had to google it, and it appears they are trying to sell them here.
A couple $k more than rice burner entry level, for a car that looks like it would be blown off the road by a passing vehicle or strong gust of wind. Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn?
I won't debate other peoples perceptions of brands. My thesis is success in the low end, erodes high end panache, and is probably harder to do. Didn't Mercedes already cut and run from one attempt at the larger mid-low end with Chrysler? I guess that failure was Chryslers fault?
I recall past efforts from Mercedes for cute smaller cars, but they always struck me as cars for rich people to buy their college kids (or mistress), not cars for kids to buy themselves. This looks like a run at that market so good luck.
JR
Post by: Caleb Dick on December 19, 2009, 11:41:33 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 07:56 | ||
I've never seen one so I had to google it, and it appears they are trying to sell them here. A couple $k more than rice burner entry level, for a car that looks like it would be blown off the road by a passing vehicle or strong gust of wind. Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? -snip- |
I've seen a few of those 'pregnant roller skate' Smart cars around. In addition to passing breezes, I bet a couple solid linebackers could scare it.
I would agree that there are very few, if any, brands that can cover the very-cheap and very-high end well. Basic business - you can't be all things to all people, all better than the competition, and profitable at the same time.
For the Mercedes example - I would argue they are essentially independent brands under a common umbrella. If the same engineers designed everything from Smart to Maybach, then yes one company has the breadth required. Just like I will assume Behringer will use different engineers for their Behringer branded gear vs Midas - not ignoring some cross-pollination.
Caleb
Post by: Ian Hunt on December 19, 2009, 11:43:44 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 09:56 | ||
Well that's 15 minutes I'll never get back... I've never seen one so I had to google it, and it appears they are trying to sell them here. A couple $k more than rice burner entry level, for a car that looks like it would be blown off the road by a passing vehicle or strong gust of wind. Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? I won't debate other peoples perceptions of brands. My thesis is success in the low end, erodes high end panache, and is probably harder to do. Didn't Mercedes already cut and run from one attempt at the larger mid-low end with Chrysler? I guess that failure was Chryslers fault? I recall past efforts from Mercedes for cute smaller cars, but they always struck me as cars for rich people to buy their college kids (or mistress), not cars for kids to buy themselves. This looks like a run at that market so good luck. JR |
You probably have seen the maybach, looks exactly like every other nondescript large car, but big enough to sling a couple of smarts off the side, like lifeboats.
Ian
Post by: Ian Hunt on December 19, 2009, 11:49:51 AM
| Caleb Dick wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:41 | ||||
I've seen a few of those 'pregnant roller skate' Smart cars around. In addition to passing breezes, I bet a couple solid linebackers could scare it. I would agree that there are very few, if any, brands that can cover the very-cheap and very-high end well. Basic business - you can't be all things to all people, all better than the competition, and profitable at the same time. For the Mercedes example - I would argue they are essentially independent brands under a common umbrella. If the same engineers designed everything from Smart to Maybach, then yes one company has the breadth required. Just like I will assume Behringer will use different engineers for their Behringer branded gear vs Midas - not ignoring some cross-pollination. Caleb |
The Maybach is merely (merely!) one of the big S class Mercedes with a new frock and extra toys, so that counts, the Smart is an inhouse design also (the A class first showed some smart technology a few years prior). Germany has very tough safety laws and the Smart complies fully, but I wouldn't want to get in an accident in one, I wouldn't want to get in an accident in a Suburban either.
Ian
Post by: Ian Hunt on December 19, 2009, 11:59:33 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 09:56 | ||
Well that's 15 minutes I'll never get back... I've never seen one so I had to google it, and it appears they are trying to sell them here. A couple $k more than rice burner entry level, for a car that looks like it would be blown off the road by a passing vehicle or strong gust of wind. Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? I won't debate other peoples perceptions of brands. My thesis is success in the low end, erodes high end panache, and is probably harder to do. Didn't Mercedes already cut and run from one attempt at the larger mid-low end with Chrysler? I guess that failure was Chryslers fault? I recall past efforts from Mercedes for cute smaller cars, but they always struck me as cars for rich people to buy their college kids (or mistress), not cars for kids to buy themselves. This looks like a run at that market so good luck. JR |
Apologies if you don't like the answer but I thought the question was show me a company selling product in the lo, mid & hi end of their market. Mercedes meet that definition with the cars mentioned, all of which are successful in many Mercedes markets, the Smart has only recently come on sale here, time will tell if there is sufficient volume for the USA to stand amongst the successful Smart markets.
The Maybach costs a fortune and by the standards of the over 400K class sells well enough.
Then there is the Mercedes Benz line, I think they have been successful in the 121 years they've been making cars.
Ian
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 19, 2009, 01:25:43 PM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:43 |
You probably have seen the maybach, looks exactly like every other nondescript large car, but big enough to sling a couple of smarts off the side, like lifeboats. Ian |
I've heard of the Maybach(?) on that effete BBC car show. I'd heard of the Smart also, in passing, but not as a serious commercial venture. I stand informed that the Smart is a serious attempt, but I fear it is a zero sum game, as success there will come out of their other pockets.
or not...
JR
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 19, 2009, 01:31:48 PM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:49 |
The Maybach is merely (merely!) one of the big S class Mercedes with a new frock and extra toys, so that counts, the Smart is an inhouse design also (the A class first showed some smart technology a few years prior). Germany has very tough safety laws and the Smart complies fully, but I wouldn't want to get in an accident in one, I wouldn't want to get in an accident in a Suburban either. Ian |
The Smart branding effort involved input from Swatch (I learned in my lost 15 minutes), a decidedly different, more nouveau fashion conscious mindset. The Maybach is probably just mercedes on steroids, perhaps with a hint of Italian design, depending on who they are trying to appeal to.
JR
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 19, 2009, 01:52:43 PM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:59 |
Apologies if you don't like the answer but I thought the question was show me a company selling product in the lo, mid & hi end of their market. Mercedes meet that definition with the cars mentioned, all of which are successful in many Mercedes markets, the Smart has only recently come on sale here, time will tell if there is sufficient volume for the USA to stand amongst the successful Smart markets. The Maybach costs a fortune and by the standards of the over 400K class sells well enough. Then there is the Mercedes Benz line, I think they have been successful in the 121 years they've been making cars. Ian |
Again, I won't argue about your perception, and will try not to weasel the definition of my thesis too much.
Mercedes is no doubt successful (if we ignore Chrysler), but in my mind are still an upper to upper-mid positioned car brand. Many companies have tried to be all things to all people and some in head scratching ways. I recall one series of advertisements from Ford, including all of their sundry car badges in one ad, (several sold or retired now). My response was WTF are they trying to accomplish? IMO such an ad will impress maybe 10% of the audience, and confuse or diminish the image of the other brands positioned above the Ford badge, which is all of the other brands. Kind of like shooting yourself in your wallet.
Sorry if I hijacked this away from an Uli bashing rant... but I have been a student of brand management ever since it was a day job (among others), and I think the brands involved are what he bought to exploit, because they aren't Behringer and locked into that Behringer place in the consumer's perception. It would be far cheaper and easier to just copy the successful KT and Midas SKUs, if he could do that and succeed in their market niche.
JR
Post by: Ian Hunt on December 19, 2009, 01:57:52 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 12:52 | ||
Again, I won't argue about your perception, and will try not to weasel the definition of my thesis too much. Mercedes is no doubt successful (if we ignore Chrysler), but in my mind are still an upper to upper-mid positioned car brand. Many companies have tried to be all things to all people and some in head scratching ways. I recall one series of advertisements from Ford, including all of their sundry car badges in one ad, (several sold or retired now). My response was WTF are they trying to accomplish? IMO such an ad will impress maybe 10% of the audience, and confuse or diminish the image of the other brands positioned above the Ford badge, which is all of the other brands. Kind of like shooting yourself in your wallet. Sorry if I hijacked this away from an Uli bashing rant... but I have been a student of brand management ever since it was a day job (among others), and I think the brands involved are what he bought to exploit, because they aren't Behringer and locked into that Behringer place in the consumer's perception. It would be far cheaper and easier to just copy the successful KT and Midas SKUs, if he could do that and succeed in their market niche. JR |
I agree, Mercedes brand perception is upper to middle class, I think they are hoping that the cachet will trickle down and make the Smart more desirable. I looked up the sales figures, since it went on sale in the US (mar 08) 38,553 have been sold, no idea what MB need to make it work though.
Ian
Post by: Jason Dermer on December 19, 2009, 02:14:21 PM
You wouldn't see me in one, there are far better cars for the price that also beat it for MPG and what not, and the half of the design theory behind it is invalid in the US market. However, the SMART is actually a very well built little bugger.
Post by: Bob Lee (QSC) on December 21, 2009, 05:25:55 PM
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 21, 2009, 07:07:59 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 16:56 | ||
Probably OK for driving to the train station or local market. I wonder how these do on the autobahn? JR |
You'd probably be surprised to hear that they do very, very well in crash tests against stationary objects. Their low mass gives them less energy to crumple the "cage" surrounding the passengers as well as making it easier for the vehicle to be deflected to one side or the other upon impact.
Against other vehicles? It depends, the low mass is working against you in a head-on, but then again - unless you're driving a big-rig there is always someone bigger around. The big SUVs that some of us are so enamoured with are a lot less safe than might be expected, particularly due to their tendency to roll over.
Post by: Christian Tepfer on December 21, 2009, 07:09:07 PM
| Bob Lee (QSC) wrote on Mon, 21 December 2009 23:25 |
Smart is co-owned by MB, but it doesn't bear the Mercedes Benz name, roundel, et al. |
The smart brand is strongly associated with Mercedes Benz, event though they disconnected it from MB.
Good work of the marketing guys I think, they built a whole new line of cars, not all very good (mileage is still a laugh, they should go with less than 3l/100km for a car that tiny) but whatever, everybody knows, MB is involved in this, nobody really draws negative conclusions regarding actual MB models.
I liked the smart roadster very much, nice little fun car, drove it as a rental a few times, sadly it was discontinued.
What does that mean for UB? I think he knows what he does. So he might well have a strategy for Midas and KT. He knows about good engineering (everybody who owns older "black face" gear knows) and he knows about lowering cost to the minimum needed to still have a product to sell.
I can think of stretching the brands, Midas can have some lower end products (like a digital desk for the rest of us, mid range club gear), Behringer can stretch up (and have digital consoles like the DDX and one higher end model, still sufficient for bigger bars and smaller clubs). If he can really close the gap I don't know but he can try.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 21, 2009, 07:09:59 PM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 15:56 | ||||
Mercedes Benz (from the smart to the maybach) Edit: because I can Ian |
Both MB and Toyota (amongst others) give their top models another brand name, which kinda proves JR's point in my opinion.
What's so cool about MB is that they make trucks, agricultural vehicles and military vehicles, as well.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 21, 2009, 07:45:27 PM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Mon, 21 December 2009 18:07 |
You'd probably be surprised to hear that they do very, very well in crash tests against stationary objects. Their low mass gives them less energy to crumple the "cage" surrounding the passengers as well as making it easier for the vehicle to be deflected to one side or the other upon impact. Against other vehicles? It depends, the low mass is working against you in a head-on, but then again - unless you're driving a big-rig there is always someone bigger around. The big SUVs that some of us are so enamoured with are a lot less safe than might be expected, particularly due to their tendency to roll over. |
Why would I be surprised about the crash cage,,, I said i googled these and mercedes is well know for their engineering.
One minor point about selling cars or brand, it is all about perception... So these could be as safe as that futuristic car Stallone crashed in "Demolition Man". Betty house wife is just going to feel safer in her SUV (AKA a pickup truck with a car body). No matter what the reality is.
My Autobahn question was really about high speed stability and such. It doesn't look very aerodynamic, and some of the reviews complained about side winds affecting them. I don't think i'd want to be in one getting passed at speed, by a huge truck, in the rain at night. But I am speculating, it may be fine.
I recall driving my M151A1 (Army jeep) on the Autobahn back in 1970 and even though I wound the speedometer all the way around to zero again, i had people flashing their high beams and cursing me, when I tried to pass slower trucks at merely 85-90 MPH.
JR
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 21, 2009, 08:21:49 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Tue, 22 December 2009 01:45 | ||
Why would I be surprised about the crash cage,,, I said i googled these and mercedes is well know for their engineering. One minor point about selling cars or brand, it is all about perception... So these could be as safe as that futuristic car Stallone crashed in "Demolition Man". Betty house wife is just going to feel safer in her SUV (AKA a pickup truck with a car body). No matter what the reality is. My Autobahn question was really about high speed stability and such. It doesn't look very aerodynamic, and some of the reviews complained about side winds affecting them. I don't think i'd want to be in one getting passed at speed, by a huge truck, in the rain at night. But I am speculating, it may be fine. I recall driving my M151A1 (Army jeep) on the Autobahn back in 1970 and even though I wound the speedometer all the way around to zero again, i had people flashing their high beams and cursing me, when I tried to pass slower trucks at merely 85-90 MPH. JR |
Your autobahn comment seemed to be safety-oriented, hence the presumed surprise.
Having a German-born mother who learned to drive in Germany in her youth I have heard quite few stories about how aggressive the autobahn motorists used to be until the Police did some heavy cleaning up regarding bad attitudes.
In general the Autobahn isn't as fast as they are rumored to be. Many places have restrictions in general, others have restrictions under certain conditions (like rain) and others are just congested.
Trucks are always restricted to the right hand lane (and I believe 100 km/h). This includes all vehicles over 3500Kg, not just big-rigs.
Post by: Ian Hunt on December 21, 2009, 08:25:59 PM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Mon, 21 December 2009 18:09 | ||||||
Both MB and Toyota (amongst others) give their top models another brand name, which kinda proves JR's point in my opinion. What's so cool about MB is that they make trucks, agricultural vehicles and military vehicles, as well. |
While that is true not one of them go to any lengths to disguise the parent brand, indeed in most of the world there is no Acura or Infiniti, just expensive Honda and Nissan vehicles, is a Honda NSX any less capable because of it's badge?
Post by: drewgandy on December 21, 2009, 09:15:02 PM
| Caleb Dick wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 10:41 |
I've seen a few of those 'pregnant roller skate' Smart cars around. In addition to passing breezes, I bet a couple solid linebackers could scare it. Caleb |
I would take one if it could tow a 6x12 trailer.
I was interested in these a few years ago before they had a US version. I'm a bit baffled at how low the MPG rating is for it.
drew
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 21, 2009, 09:18:55 PM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Mon, 21 December 2009 19:21 |
Your autobahn comment seemed to be safety-oriented, hence the presumed surprise. Having a German-born mother who learned to drive in Germany in her youth I have heard quite few stories about how aggressive the autobahn motorists used to be until the Police did some heavy cleaning up regarding bad attitudes. In general the Autobahn isn't as fast as they are rumored to be. Many places have restrictions in general, others have restrictions under certain conditions (like rain) and others are just congested. Trucks are always restricted to the right hand lane (and I believe 100 km/h). This includes all vehicles over 3500Kg, not just big-rigs. |
I'll still prefer a more serious ride for autobahning.
I noticed the addition of speed limit signs around cities on later visits. I always admired the concept of no speed limits and personal responsibility to guide your decisions.
Bad attitude? opinions vary.. I like velocity within reason. A good car, on a good road sounds very appealing. Driving a fast car slow, is using the wrong tool for the job, and makes nobody very happy.
JR
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 21, 2009, 09:37:20 PM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Mon, 21 December 2009 19:25 |
While that is true not one of them go to any lengths to disguise the parent brand, indeed in most of the world there is no Acura or Infiniti, just expensive Honda and Nissan vehicles, is a Honda NSX any less capable because of it's badge? |
The cheaper Honda/Nissan models may indeed be less capable at the country club. The badge is there to tell the world, I spent this much more money than others did.
That was a very clever response from the Japanese when we tried to lock them out of our auto market with a huge price disadvantage. They turned the price difference into a positive via upscale brand positioning, and laughed all the way to the bank.
JR
Post by: John Chiara on December 21, 2009, 10:23:59 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sun, 13 December 2009 09:56 |
The CS800 is hard to kill (but not impossible), by design. And FWIW some people dislike both olives and anchovies. JR |
Me..
Olives smell and taste like perfume to me and anchovies...well....
Post by: John Chiara on December 21, 2009, 10:27:23 PM
| Robin Parker wrote on Sun, 13 December 2009 11:00 |
My point exactly! I do so enjoy listening to the rants of those that proclaim “golden hearing” – “this is crap – this is great” – sort of like watching a tennis match, sitting near the net. Recently I read an article regarding (guitar) amp modelers vs. the real thing (cabinet/mic). Six (+/-) “experts” were asked to identify the real thing from the modeled version…. (Sorry for not remembering all of the details, I didn’t know there was going to be a test) in a blind comparison listening test. Long story short, they were wrong in their assessments approximately 65% of the time…. |
It could be that the modelers are getting very good. I hear a lot of guitar amps...and usually a lot of less than stellar tone...subjectively. I can make a Sans Amp pedal sound better than 75% of the live rigs I hear.
Post by: John Chiara on December 21, 2009, 10:34:25 PM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 13:25 | ||
I've heard of the Maybach(?) on that effete BBC car show. I'd heard of the Smart also, in passing, but not as a serious commercial venture. I stand informed that the Smart is a serious attempt, but I fear it is a zero sum game, as success there will come out of their other pockets. or not... JR |
I have a few HipHop clients that mention Maybachs in their lyrics.
Post by: John Chiara on December 21, 2009, 10:36:55 PM
| Ian Hunt wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 13:57 | ||||
I agree, Mercedes brand perception is upper to middle class, I think they are hoping that the cachet will trickle down and make the Smart more desirable. I looked up the sales figures, since it went on sale in the US (mar 08) 38,553 have been sold, no idea what MB need to make it work though. Ian |
I am already seeing them used around here.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 22, 2009, 06:53:11 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Tue, 22 December 2009 03:18 | ||
Bad attitude? opinions vary.. I like velocity within reason. A good car, on a good road sounds very appealing. Driving a fast car slow, is using the wrong tool for the job, and makes nobody very happy. JR |
I was referring to other aspects of inter-motorist interaction than just velocity.
Post by: Callan Carnahan on December 22, 2009, 08:46:35 AM
| Jon Martin wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 13:50 |
As much as we like demonize Uli, he is a very sharp guy and also a musician himself. (gasp! did he just say that??) Find me some Behringer compressors that say "Made in Germany" on the back and I'd put them side by side with the higher end competition's compressors. Audio wise you'd be hard pressed to dismiss them as "crap". |
+1 to Jon. I've got some early/mid 90's Behringer comps (with the "Made In Germany" sticker) though I'm not sure exactly what year that really do perform pretty well. And just to convince myself that they really aren't as bad as I thought they were, I recorded some stuff with them and they really do sound similar to most other low-end comps out there. And I snagged 2 of them for $40 on Craig's List
Can't beat that. Uli had to know how to do something in the way of sound, whether it was entreprenuering in the business or actually the logistics of sound....he ended up doing something right
God help Midas and KT though. I hope they don't fall into the China stranglehold that everyone else has. I hope they just use this as an oppurtunity to build some revenue while keeping their products the same (for the most part!).
Post by: Bob Lee (QSC) on December 22, 2009, 12:38:08 PM
Post by: Andy Peters on December 22, 2009, 12:57:28 PM
It is not intended to be a highway machine.
It is designed for use in crowded cities where maneuverability and the ability to park in tiny spaces are more important than 0 to 60 time or highway MPG.
Of course, it's really not much smaller than a Miata or an S2000, and has similar trunk space, so I really don't see the point.
-a
Post by: Art Welter on December 22, 2009, 01:24:42 PM
| Andy Peters wrote on Tue, 22 December 2009 10:57 |
I think everyone is missing the point of the Smart car. It is not intended to be a highway machine. It is designed for use in crowded cities where maneuverability and the ability to park in tiny spaces are more important than 0 to 60 time or highway MPG. Of course, it's really not much smaller than a Miata or an S2000, and has similar trunk space, so I really don't see the point. -a |
Actually, comparing the Smart to a Mazda Miata, which many in the USA consider a small car, really brings home your point.
2009 Mazda Miata...External dimensions: overall length is 157.3” 13.1 feet (4 m).
The second generation Smart for two's length is 8 ft 10 in (2.69 m), 51 inches (1.31m) shorter than the Miata, almost half the length of the Smart car.
The Ford Expedition EL is 17.2 feet long (5.29m), almost double the length of a Smart car...
Art Welter
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 22, 2009, 02:18:23 PM
JR
PS: It might be interesting to explore sub-brands (like amp series) within QSC and how they interact, but not at Christmas. Merry Christmas REL
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 22, 2009, 02:24:54 PM
| Andy Peters wrote on Tue, 22 December 2009 11:57 |
I think everyone is missing the point of the Smart car. It is not intended to be a highway machine. It is designed for use in crowded cities where maneuverability and the ability to park in tiny spaces are more important than 0 to 60 time or highway MPG. Of course, it's really not much smaller than a Miata or an S2000, and has similar trunk space, so I really don't see the point. -a |
I don't believe I missed that when I questioned it's suitability for the autobahn, but this was a discussion about brand management, not city cars. Or at least that's what I was discussing and it appeared (to me) this thread was about.
While I am not beyond a good motorhead veer...
Did I mention I pumped up my tires the other day..(Gotta keep my CO2 low). They were down in the low 20's. Those low profile tires are hard to eyeball.
JR
Post by: Bob Lee (QSC) on December 22, 2009, 06:50:33 PM
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 22, 2009, 09:24:52 PM
| Bob Lee (QSC) wrote on Tue, 22 December 2009 17:50 |
I've seen them quite often on the Autobahn. They'll do about 145 kph or so. |
That is moving along "smartly" but I went over 160 kph driving home from the gym tonight.
JR