NAMM - report

Re: NAMM - report

Preemptive strike against what? Yamaha? Midas? Soundcraft? Digico? Tapco maybe?

It's reassuring that they h ad to call in the head haunchos at Midas to help them "test" their sound console. Apparently the idiots at Behringer can't work a sound console to save their lives.
 
Re: NAMM - report

Jeff Babcock said:
Indeed. None of the demonstration videos have ever showed human interaction. I suspect announcing it approx a year before the likely release date was a form of "pre-emptive strike"
Click to expand...

IBM got in trouble for using vaporware to depress competitor sales a long time ago (60's?).

I don't know if Behringer is that clever, while it doesn't sound like something that would be beneath them.

caveat lector: I am not a fan...


JR
 
Re: NAMM - report

No that's exactly the definition of vaporware, while customers tend to apply it more broadly around even normal product delays.

I've seen several products, that while mostly real, never got finished, when dealer support at trade shows was lacking.

JR
 
Re: NAMM - report

Marjan Milosevic said:
And how is all this different from the Peavey IPR amps release? I am sure Behringer will eventualy release the product. Not so sure about Peavey's bigger IPR amps.
Click to expand...
Peavey's IPR amps are designed and working - just not all in mass production. The 4500 is due next month :) . Sweetwater is expecting them the week of 9/18.
 
Re: NAMM - report

Marjan Milosevic said:
And how is all this different from the Peavey IPR amps release? I am sure Behringer will eventualy release the product. Not so sure about Peavey's bigger IPR amps.
Click to expand...

The IPR seems notable for the delay between introduction and actual production. I have been outside the walls long enough that I have no special insight into this product other than a good sense of how the people involved think. Even Peavey who has been guilty of production start up delays before would never intentionally dangle such a desirable low cost amp in front of customers without satisfying that demand in a timely fashion. This promise of new/better/cheaper will surely erode Peavey's own value amp business as people hold off purchases waiting for the new improved amps.

I don't doubt that this isn't a parts availability problem as public statements suggest, but the time frame is long for simple standard components, so this is probably some combination of pushing the limits of what the technology is capable of. I recall one program years ago where a semiconductor manufacturer couldn't deliver on the thermal performance they predicted and the program crashed with a custom part tooled up that didn't work. I do not suggest that this is similar to that old program fail, but stuff happens when pushing the limits of technology.

Peavey's delay is tantamount to shooting off a toe or two, as they injured their own sales too. I am not close enough to the console market to know if Behringer's mixer announcement made strategic benefit to them or not. Something for you guys to decide.

These two product delays do not look like apples and apples to me.

JR
 
Re: NAMM - report

It is interesting that Behringer's "IPR clone" only goes up to the 3000w level that Peavey is already shipping. I'm pretty sure the iNuke NU6000 is two bridged NU3000's in the same box. So that would indicate that Behringer can't get the higher voltage parts either.
 
Re: NAMM - report

Justice C. Bigler said:
Preemptive strike against what? Yamaha? Midas? Soundcraft? Digico? Tapco maybe?
Click to expand...

My guess is pre-emptive in terms of sales of lower end offerings from Presonus, Yamaha, Soundcraft, and A&H mostly to school, church, theatre etc market. There are thousands upon thousands of old Mackie SR boards and similar lines due for replacement and few relatively high count digital offerings anywhere close to the cost of those analog predecessors. Behringer wants to convince these types of users to wait a little longer for their cheap new gizmo to replace that old analog desk. Even if they convince a small percentage of these users to wait, it is still a significant amount of money when you consider the size of that market.
 
Re: NAMM - report

Jeff Babcock said:
My guess is pre-emptive in terms of sales of lower end offerings from Presonus, Yamaha, Soundcraft, and A&H mostly to school, church, theatre etc market. There are thousands upon thousands of old Mackie SR boards and similar lines due for replacement and few relatively high count digital offerings anywhere close to the cost of those analog predecessors. Behringer wants to convince these types of users to wait a little longer for their cheap new gizmo to replace that old analog desk. Even if they convince a small percentage of these users to wait, it is still a significant amount of money when you consider the size of that market.
Click to expand...

That pretty much sums it up. MusicGroup builds demand for a particular feature set, form factor and price point. Even without a working demo they've set the bar for their competitors new products and forestalled purchases of existing products.
 
Re: NAMM - report

Marjan Milosevic said:
Demonstrated what? The IPR1600? Almost 2 years ago IIRC. Has anyone seen the 4500 or 6000 that were announced the same time?
I dont think so.
Click to expand...

We heard you the last time...

While I can't know for a fact, I know several of the people involved. I don't think Peavey showed this series of products knowing they wouldn't ship for years.

It is the nature of design engineers to be optimistic, the nature of marketers to take that optimism and run with it. But I recall small computer companies who killed themselves by literally showing a new product before they could deliver.

JR
 
Re: NAMM - report

Marjan Milosevic said:
Demonstrated what? The IPR1600? Almost 2 years ago IIRC. Has anyone seen the 4500 or 6000 that were announced the same time?
I dont think so.
Click to expand...

They were announced as "coming soon." Soon ain't here yet, but the baseline product was a working model, not a mock up under glass. The Crest version of smaller amp is also shipping, IIRC. Peavey doesn't have a history of "vaporware" announcements in the sense that they deliberately announce a product prematurely. I have no reason to disbelieve them when they claim parts supply issues.

In the software industry, vaporware is a common practice, often extending to rigged, limited function demos at trade shows or press conferences. Professional audio is much less so, but it does happen... and I'll stand by my assertion that MusicCorp deliberately showed a non-functional mockup and feature set designed to get potential customers to wait. People who need power amps won't wait 2 years, power amps are a commodity particularly at the low end of the price scale. People wanting the latest whiz-bang VALUE mixers will wait so long as their existing mixers work or client needs remain the same.

At any rate it will be interesting to see what finally comes out of UliCity.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
 
Re: NAMM - report

Marjan Milosevic said:
Don't get me wrong, i do use Peavey's amps (the gps series) and they do a great job, but the case while not quite the same it is very similar and it might actually give the idea to Uli.
Click to expand...
The only thing similar is long delay. Peavey doesn't benefit from announcing an amp that they cannot deliver... The promise of the new amps probably depressed Peavey's amp business as much as anybody's, as even diehard peavey customers wait for the new amps.

I am really glad I am not the amplifier product manager these days.

JR
 
Re: NAMM - report

Tim McCulloch said:
Peavey doesn't have a history of "vaporware" announcements ......
Click to expand...

Unless you look at the control software for the VSX26/VSX48, which never made it out of beta and never included the promised "live" control. They promised it before they had built it, ran in to problems, and poof!

Granted though, I agree this is not common practice for them.
 
Re: NAMM - report

Jeff Babcock said:
Unless you look at the control software for the VSX26/VSX48, which never made it out of beta and never included the promised "live" control. They promised it before they had built it, ran in to problems, and poof!

Granted though, I agree this is not common practice for them.
Click to expand...

With thousands of SKUs and decades of history, I'm sure there are many more examples.

I recall seeing products that never made it out of show prototype stage, but showing product too soon can be counter productive when more nimble competitors can copy your innovative features and beat you to market (seen that too).

I don't know the inside information on the VSX product, but it sure looks like a design that wasn't finished, because the design asset (the software coder) left the reservation, either literally if he was an employee or contractually, if an outside consultant, or maybe he was hit by lightning.

I am not making excuses for this, apparently it was an attractively priced product with a lot of demand. I do understand how difficult it is to get another coder to just pick up, where the first designer left off and finish.. who knows maybe the original designer bit off more than he could chew and couldn't deliver what he promised... It's easier to deliver on some basic functionality than the advanced features if the foundation isn't robust. I ran into that before with an old Peavey/AMR SMPTE machine synchronizer using an outside consultant. I still get angry thinking about that one, because i was the guy getting beat up at trade shows for his failure to deliver.

I could probably list more examples, but I don't see a pattern of trying to deceive the marketplace, more like trying too hard to deliver attractive value product and failing here and there from over reaching.

if it was easy to make them cheap and not suck, everybody would do it...

JR
 
Top Bottom