Jason Stoddard
Sponsor: Schiit Audio
2016, Chapter 14:
Why You Can’t Always Get What You Want
Whenever we introduce new products, there’s the inevitable “ah hell, why didn’t you do XYZ?” comments.
Why didn’t you add a third balanced input, why didn’t you include a 12V trigger, why didn’t you make the default color black, why didn’t you put the power switch on the front?
The implication being, of course, that (a) the addition of this feature (or features) would make the product absolutely perfect in every way (at least for the person who wrote the comment), and (b) it would mean another immediate sale (or sales), and sometimes (c) Schiit ain’t the brightest light in the firmament for overlooking this obvious and easy addition.
And, literally every day, we get emails from people who would like to have just one little change, like two additional Toslink inputs, or a digital pass-through output, or a Jotunheim that takes both phono and DAC cards at the same time, or a Ragnarok with no speaker output at all, or a Bifrost with balanced output, or a red chassis, or a knob with a more prominent indicator (that lights up) or variable LED intensity, or maybe even a full custom design to the person’s specifications.
Now, I’ll be the first to admit that (c) we may not be the brightest people on the planet, but it also sometimes seems like people have this crazy idea that the Schiit production floor is something like a cross between Willie Wonka’s Chocolate Factory and Doc Smith’s Krazee Kreations Lab, where we can just whip up an infinite variety of fun and exciting stuff on a whim, anytime we’d like.
Or, alternately, maybe they think that our factory simply has infinite capacity—that there are hundreds of skilled technicians standing by to build something exactly like what they’d like, from raw chassis on up.
Unfortunately, neither of these scenarios is anywhere close to the truth. So, it is with a heavy heart that I embark on a chapter that might be somewhat akin to telling a kid that there really ain’t no Santa Claus, and give you a look at how modern mass production really works, or Why You Can’t Always Get What You Want.
Mass Production in Two Steps
Okay. Let’s cut to the chase. This is how literally all mass production works, in every company on the planet, in two steps:
Wrong.
Market research is guesswork. Market research cannot tell you what the next breakthrough product will be. Market research is not even all that well correlated to success. Something like 1 in 120 new food products make the grade after introduction. Every single one of them tested well.
Focus groups are guesswork. Or worse. The number of ways a focus group can go offtrack is uncountable. All it takes is one loudmouth, and the whole shebang is invalid. The original iPhone concept would have never survived a focus group, especially one comprised of the “correct” “target audience”—that is, smartphone users.
Use case testing is guesswork. Not only can you not account for crazy use cases you haven’t foreseen, but there’s no way to predict how other factors will influence users to find workarounds.
So yes, other companies have more guesswork. But in the end, step 1 is still step 1: We guess what might be a good product for you.
And note the most important word of Step 2: lots.
“Lots” does not mean, “ten thousand variations of 10 pieces each.” “Lots” does not mean “each one individually customizable for cosmetics and feature set.” “Lots” does not mean “a total run of 75 pieces.”
Also note the second most important word of Step 2: efficiently.
“Efficiently” does not mean, “each one hand-carved out of a single sustainably-sourced log of Egyptian Amberwood,” or “each one CNCd from a solid block of virgin aluminum” or even “each one made ready to paint and finish to the exact specifications of the customer.”
Yes, I know. Not very sexy. But there are good reasons for this focus on functionality, which I’ll get into later. Because I know there’s at least one guy out there saying, “But that ain’t right! I heard ‘mass customization’ is the wave of the future.”
Yes, that may be. But it certainly ain’t the wave of today.
The Fallacy of “Mass Customization”
There have been any number of articles about what a wonderful world it would be when companies start having the ability to make highly custom things for each individual customer (usually enabled by various half-baked or pie-in-the-sky ideas like 3D printing or full-bonkers nanotechnology.*)
*Before I am eviscerated for this, let me remind you that (a) I was involved in marketing several 3D printing technologies, starting in the dim dark days of stereolithography, and (b) I am a science fiction writer who is familiar with nanotech-as-it-exists-today. 3D printing is half-baked, period. The finish is (largely) crap, and the physical properties are not congruent with modern consumer expectations, to put it politely. Also, it’s expensive. Nanotech, as in the fantasy 2058 Popular Science article “Nanoassemblers Make Everything You Want for Free” simply ain’t real enough to discuss. Nor may it ever get much beyond, say, plant life. Look at the energy densities involved, say, in “growing” a gun out of scrap car parts.
However, despite this half-baked nature, the idea that “mass customization” might be a good thing has taken hold in some minds. And yes, I understand the allure. It’s really tempting to imagine a day when you can simply tweak a product to your needs, and still expect it to show up in two days via Amazon Prime.
But we’re a long way from there.
How long? All it takes is a quick look at the iPhone. Here’s a consumer product that’s made by one of the largest and most valuable companies on the planet, using some of the highest technology on the planet.
And, last year, Apple sold (roughly) 230 million of them. That’s nearly one quarter billion devices.
And they made them in how many variations? Twelve.
Yes, 12.
Two sizes, three colors, two memory sizes. (IIRC) That means, roughly, about 20 million devices per variation. Or, in other terms, Apple makes about the same number of iPhones per variation per year as there are cars sold worldwide, in total, from all manufacturers.
And let me know what happens when you ask them for a headphone jack.
Yeah. Thought so.
Bottom line: if one of the most advanced devices, from one of the largest companies, made in numbers that are absolutely mind-boggling, cannot offer customization beyond a couple sizes, colors, and memory capacities, well, we are one hell of a long way from true mass customization.
(And yeah, I know, oversimplifying, there are carriers and such to force the need for other variants, and yeah, now they have five colors, but yeah, still, let me know what they say about that headphone jack. Or a button that actually clicks.)
Annndd…the trend in most things is actually towards less customization, rather than more.
Skeptical? Look at cars. Today, a popular car may have 3-4 interior colors and 8-10 exterior colors, maximum. And by “interior colors,” I mean. “Change the seats and door panel inserts, leave the rest alone.”
Contrast this with a vintage Mustang, which had 16-20 exterior colors and 10-12 interior colors. And by “interior colors,” that meant, “Every frigging piece hosed down in turquoise, if that’s what you want.”
So, yes, we’ve actually lost customization options.
Why? Well, when your industry has gone from vertically integrated to one that works with sub-suppliers, and when any significant change might trigger the need to re-certify the car with all the various government testing agencies…well, it’s not as easy to make as many variations.
On the other hand, cars today usually have many more features, are much more pleasant to drive, are beyond-the-pale more reliable, and don’t cost that much more (a 1965 base Mustang, in constant dollars, was about $18,600—and that’s for a 3-speed, inline-6, no-power-steering, no-power-brakes, no-power-nothing, no-air-conditioning, no-seatbelts coupe.)
“But why?” you might ask. “I want my mass customization! Someone must be able to do this!”
Well, yes, of course. Hell, they were doing it in the middle ages. When someone went to get a set of armor made for themselves, they didn’t go to the Ye Olde Mart of Wal and pick a size 40 long. The suits were made exactly to the person’s individual measurements and body vagaries.
Of course, they cost as much as a Ferrari.
But this isn’t the only downside to mass customization. Consider:
*This is not a hint. Mike and I aren’t bored. Not by a loooooonnggg shot.
The Nuts and Bolts of Mass Production
The reality is that modern mass production is the end-result of a lot of research, design, engineering, purchasing, subcontracted assembly, and internal procedures. By the time we get to making a single product, we’ve burnt thousands of hours and invested tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
And, when we make that product, it is well-specified and understood. It has gone through several rounds of prototyping. Production testing has been defined. Pass/fail guidelines have been established.
And…that’s also why we need to make them all the same.
If we had to prototype each variation—and adjust testing for each variant—and do it on the fly, according to customer request…we simply wouldn’t be able to do it. At least not in today’s volumes and at today’s prices.
Consider that when we’re making something, we have:
All of this is what allows us to make a Magni 2 at $99, or a Saga at $349, or a Modi Multibit at $249.
Aaannnd…repeating for effect…this is for each product, and each variation. And yes, that includes variations like Bifrost 4490 vs Multibit, or Jonada vs Jono bs Jodac (Jotunheim alone, Jotunheim Phono, or Jotunheim DAC). And we also have some black chassis from time to time.
Or, in other words, this is already a lot of variation.
Can you imagine what it would be if we allowed even more customization? It would be, to be frank, complete and utter insanity. We’d need double the staff. Prices would have to go up.
Hell, I can already make a very strong case for culling the line.
Before you panic, let me say this: no plans are in place for a cull. We’re watching sales in the aftermath of the Jotunheim intro, but that’s all we’re doing. Waiting and seeing. So far, every product has its fans, and there are no real stinkers. We’ll see what happens next year.
“But I’m not interested in variations, I’m interested in you adding (this particular feature here) to all of your products,” you might say.
Cool. Got it.
Unfortunately, the same rules apply. Note the statement above about “once we start production, the blueprint is already in place, parts are already made, etc.” In other words, the ship has left the dock. We’re not going to be able to turn it around.
And, once we’re running, we don’t really want to turn it around. Making changes on a production device—no matter how seemingly small—can have devastating ramifications on production. Oops, that change accidentally moved a hole, and all the new chassis are unusable. Now we’re 12 weeks out from shipping. Oops, that change actually had a negative impact on the product performance and it doesn’t meet spec. Ah crap, that may mean scrapping the boards—with a ton of expensive parts on them. Oops, the new and old metal got mixed, some of it kinda-sorta fits, and some of it doesn’t. Production pandemonium!
That’s why we usually eschew running changes for measured change—in the case of the amps, add a “2” and include a bunch of features people have been asking for, or which we think are now a good idea. In the case of the DACs, announce an upgrade. But not every month. And not every decade. And make sure there’s a smooth process in place for the upgrade.
The reality of modern mass production is that there are a lot of moving parts...for every individual product. So that makes change difficult, painful, or impossible.
And the other reality is that we don’t guess right all the time. Which makes for feature sets you may not consider ideal. I understand. We are not perfect.
However, we do listen, and we do get better. Look at an Asgard, an Asgard 2, and a Jotunheim. Personally, I think that’s real progress.
And, we’ll also continue to improve processes. It’s possible that we should look at some more vertical integration, at least in some very limited areas. That might happen. That might increase our flexibility. But that flexibility doesn’t mean more variations. More likely, it means “less time spent out of stock” and “more rapid product development.”
(Of course, that last one also means “more products,” which, well, is “more variations.” Ah well.)
How To Improve Your Chances of Getting What You Want
“Okay, so if we can’t have mass customization, and the ship already sailed on your current product features, how do I get what I want?” you may ask.
Well, I wish I had a better answer for you, but it comes down to: adapt or wait.
“Adapt!” you yell. “I’m not here to accommodate you! I’m here to get the thing best suited to my needs!”
Yes. I understand. And if some other product is more suited to your needs, you should absolutely buy it. That simply makes sense. Blind brand loyalty—to anyone—makes no sense.
However, if you love how a product sounds, how it works, how it looks, you may just find a way to make it work for you. Even if it is not 100% perfect. And especially if it’s a small fraction of the cost of the competition.
Alternately, you can let us know what you’re looking for, and you can wait. If you’ve noticed, our updated products usually address the things that people most wanted in the design, within the limits of the chassis, of course. (Changing an upgradable DAC to have different inputs/outputs, for example, is more challenging, because it necessitates a chassis change.) We do listen, and we do respond, especially to good arguments.
Unfortunately, there are some things that are difficult to make happen. These are usually due to sound engineering reasons. For example, the home theater bypass mode on the preamps. Yes, we could actually add an “invisible” home theater bypass mode that is enabled by holding down one of the buttons for 2 seconds, like the Ragnarok output selection switch. But this has several problems:
Yeah. Kludgy. I only added the same kind of kludgy mode switch on Ragnarok because it seemed like a good idea at the time. I can guarantee you that the next generation of Ragnarok* will show what’s connected (speakers, headphones, both, neither) on the front panel, and that it will have a front-panel button for it, and that it will have remote control. All of these are kinda “like duh” stuff that we missed the first time around…
…because we guessed wrong.
*No guesses on when this will happen. My plate is really full. Let’s get Vidar perfected, produced, and shipped. And a couple of other things. Then we’ll see.
So let us know what you need. I can’t guarantee that we can accommodate every request (and I can’t guarantee that my obstinate attitude won’t kick in when I read another hyperbolic screed about what a massive tragedy it is to have the switches on the back, or that I’m blinding your unborn child with the LEDs on the front), but we do listen…and we do change.
And, who knows? You may absolutely Get What You Want.
Why You Can’t Always Get What You Want
Whenever we introduce new products, there’s the inevitable “ah hell, why didn’t you do XYZ?” comments.
Why didn’t you add a third balanced input, why didn’t you include a 12V trigger, why didn’t you make the default color black, why didn’t you put the power switch on the front?
The implication being, of course, that (a) the addition of this feature (or features) would make the product absolutely perfect in every way (at least for the person who wrote the comment), and (b) it would mean another immediate sale (or sales), and sometimes (c) Schiit ain’t the brightest light in the firmament for overlooking this obvious and easy addition.
And, literally every day, we get emails from people who would like to have just one little change, like two additional Toslink inputs, or a digital pass-through output, or a Jotunheim that takes both phono and DAC cards at the same time, or a Ragnarok with no speaker output at all, or a Bifrost with balanced output, or a red chassis, or a knob with a more prominent indicator (that lights up) or variable LED intensity, or maybe even a full custom design to the person’s specifications.
Now, I’ll be the first to admit that (c) we may not be the brightest people on the planet, but it also sometimes seems like people have this crazy idea that the Schiit production floor is something like a cross between Willie Wonka’s Chocolate Factory and Doc Smith’s Krazee Kreations Lab, where we can just whip up an infinite variety of fun and exciting stuff on a whim, anytime we’d like.
Or, alternately, maybe they think that our factory simply has infinite capacity—that there are hundreds of skilled technicians standing by to build something exactly like what they’d like, from raw chassis on up.
Unfortunately, neither of these scenarios is anywhere close to the truth. So, it is with a heavy heart that I embark on a chapter that might be somewhat akin to telling a kid that there really ain’t no Santa Claus, and give you a look at how modern mass production really works, or Why You Can’t Always Get What You Want.
Mass Production in Two Steps
Okay. Let’s cut to the chase. This is how literally all mass production works, in every company on the planet, in two steps:
- We guess what might be a good product for you.
- We make lots of them, as efficiently as possible.
Wrong.
Market research is guesswork. Market research cannot tell you what the next breakthrough product will be. Market research is not even all that well correlated to success. Something like 1 in 120 new food products make the grade after introduction. Every single one of them tested well.
Focus groups are guesswork. Or worse. The number of ways a focus group can go offtrack is uncountable. All it takes is one loudmouth, and the whole shebang is invalid. The original iPhone concept would have never survived a focus group, especially one comprised of the “correct” “target audience”—that is, smartphone users.
Use case testing is guesswork. Not only can you not account for crazy use cases you haven’t foreseen, but there’s no way to predict how other factors will influence users to find workarounds.
So yes, other companies have more guesswork. But in the end, step 1 is still step 1: We guess what might be a good product for you.
And note the most important word of Step 2: lots.
“Lots” does not mean, “ten thousand variations of 10 pieces each.” “Lots” does not mean “each one individually customizable for cosmetics and feature set.” “Lots” does not mean “a total run of 75 pieces.”
Also note the second most important word of Step 2: efficiently.
“Efficiently” does not mean, “each one hand-carved out of a single sustainably-sourced log of Egyptian Amberwood,” or “each one CNCd from a solid block of virgin aluminum” or even “each one made ready to paint and finish to the exact specifications of the customer.”
Yes, I know. Not very sexy. But there are good reasons for this focus on functionality, which I’ll get into later. Because I know there’s at least one guy out there saying, “But that ain’t right! I heard ‘mass customization’ is the wave of the future.”
Yes, that may be. But it certainly ain’t the wave of today.
The Fallacy of “Mass Customization”
There have been any number of articles about what a wonderful world it would be when companies start having the ability to make highly custom things for each individual customer (usually enabled by various half-baked or pie-in-the-sky ideas like 3D printing or full-bonkers nanotechnology.*)
*Before I am eviscerated for this, let me remind you that (a) I was involved in marketing several 3D printing technologies, starting in the dim dark days of stereolithography, and (b) I am a science fiction writer who is familiar with nanotech-as-it-exists-today. 3D printing is half-baked, period. The finish is (largely) crap, and the physical properties are not congruent with modern consumer expectations, to put it politely. Also, it’s expensive. Nanotech, as in the fantasy 2058 Popular Science article “Nanoassemblers Make Everything You Want for Free” simply ain’t real enough to discuss. Nor may it ever get much beyond, say, plant life. Look at the energy densities involved, say, in “growing” a gun out of scrap car parts.
However, despite this half-baked nature, the idea that “mass customization” might be a good thing has taken hold in some minds. And yes, I understand the allure. It’s really tempting to imagine a day when you can simply tweak a product to your needs, and still expect it to show up in two days via Amazon Prime.
But we’re a long way from there.
How long? All it takes is a quick look at the iPhone. Here’s a consumer product that’s made by one of the largest and most valuable companies on the planet, using some of the highest technology on the planet.
And, last year, Apple sold (roughly) 230 million of them. That’s nearly one quarter billion devices.
And they made them in how many variations? Twelve.
Yes, 12.
Two sizes, three colors, two memory sizes. (IIRC) That means, roughly, about 20 million devices per variation. Or, in other terms, Apple makes about the same number of iPhones per variation per year as there are cars sold worldwide, in total, from all manufacturers.
And let me know what happens when you ask them for a headphone jack.
Yeah. Thought so.
Bottom line: if one of the most advanced devices, from one of the largest companies, made in numbers that are absolutely mind-boggling, cannot offer customization beyond a couple sizes, colors, and memory capacities, well, we are one hell of a long way from true mass customization.
(And yeah, I know, oversimplifying, there are carriers and such to force the need for other variants, and yeah, now they have five colors, but yeah, still, let me know what they say about that headphone jack. Or a button that actually clicks.)
Annndd…the trend in most things is actually towards less customization, rather than more.
Skeptical? Look at cars. Today, a popular car may have 3-4 interior colors and 8-10 exterior colors, maximum. And by “interior colors,” I mean. “Change the seats and door panel inserts, leave the rest alone.”
Contrast this with a vintage Mustang, which had 16-20 exterior colors and 10-12 interior colors. And by “interior colors,” that meant, “Every frigging piece hosed down in turquoise, if that’s what you want.”
So, yes, we’ve actually lost customization options.
Why? Well, when your industry has gone from vertically integrated to one that works with sub-suppliers, and when any significant change might trigger the need to re-certify the car with all the various government testing agencies…well, it’s not as easy to make as many variations.
On the other hand, cars today usually have many more features, are much more pleasant to drive, are beyond-the-pale more reliable, and don’t cost that much more (a 1965 base Mustang, in constant dollars, was about $18,600—and that’s for a 3-speed, inline-6, no-power-steering, no-power-brakes, no-power-nothing, no-air-conditioning, no-seatbelts coupe.)
“But why?” you might ask. “I want my mass customization! Someone must be able to do this!”
Well, yes, of course. Hell, they were doing it in the middle ages. When someone went to get a set of armor made for themselves, they didn’t go to the Ye Olde Mart of Wal and pick a size 40 long. The suits were made exactly to the person’s individual measurements and body vagaries.
Of course, they cost as much as a Ferrari.
But this isn’t the only downside to mass customization. Consider:
- What are the workflow ramifications? If you intend to do mass customization, how is it done? Do you stock a whole lot of different panels, each with different holes, or in different colors, or both? Do you have PC boards assembled to a point, then fill them in on the order? Or do you have a complete machine shop and plating facility in house and do stuff to order? Do you do the same with boards?
- What is the time cost? How long does it take to do the customization? Certainly longer than pulling a closed box off a shelf. If you’re starting from scratch with each order, how long does it take to produce a final product? How do you cost out each variation? What do you do if the raw materials aren’t available? What happens when you have 350 purple knobs, but you only need 10 silver?
- What do you do about testing? Variation implies changes in specifications and capabilities. Are all variants fully qualified and certified by all applicable agencies? Are test procedures established for all variations? Are you expected to make it up as you go along?
- What do you do about returns? While you may love the idea of a green Mjolnir 2 with pink knobs and a limited-edition 1973 Rolling Stones litho in white across the entire chassis, what happens if you don’t love the sound, and it comes back to the shop? Are we supposed to find a buyer for this unicorn? Or are we expected to repurpose it to meet the next customization request? What effect does this have on price?
- How do you provide service? Multiple variations also imply changes in Bill of Materials (that’s what goes into the product), schematics, specifications, capabilities, ATE scripts, etc. Is all of this documented for every variation? How are the documents stored and tracked? Will the technicians have the docs easily at hand when it comes time for service? What impact will that have on warranty length and out-of-warranty cost?
- Who deals with the future? So Bob of Bob’s Amp Shack (Proudly Making Whatever You Want For Money Since 1986) decides to hang up his shingle. Does that mean you’re hung out to dry on your custom product? On the other hand, a large company with documented designs will (at worst) be acquired if the founders lose interest, which means there’ll still be support.*
*This is not a hint. Mike and I aren’t bored. Not by a loooooonnggg shot.
The Nuts and Bolts of Mass Production
The reality is that modern mass production is the end-result of a lot of research, design, engineering, purchasing, subcontracted assembly, and internal procedures. By the time we get to making a single product, we’ve burnt thousands of hours and invested tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
And, when we make that product, it is well-specified and understood. It has gone through several rounds of prototyping. Production testing has been defined. Pass/fail guidelines have been established.
And…that’s also why we need to make them all the same.
If we had to prototype each variation—and adjust testing for each variant—and do it on the fly, according to customer request…we simply wouldn’t be able to do it. At least not in today’s volumes and at today’s prices.
Consider that when we’re making something, we have:
- Hundreds to thousands of chassis from an external supplier in-house—all the same. Per product.
- Hundreds to thousands of PC boards assembled by an external supplier in-house—also all the same. Some programmed and tested too. Also per product.
- Innumerable small parts—tens of thousands of knobs, setscrews, hundreds of thousands of binned screws.
- Tools to do the programming, testing, and assembly.
- A standardized programming procedure (if the product needs it.)
- A standardized assembly procedure.
- A standardized test procedure.
- A standardized burn-in time.
- A standardized re-test procedure.
- Hundreds to thousands of boxes and inserts to pack the product into.
- Space allocated for packaged goods that allow for efficient packing and shipping of orders.
All of this is what allows us to make a Magni 2 at $99, or a Saga at $349, or a Modi Multibit at $249.
Aaannnd…repeating for effect…this is for each product, and each variation. And yes, that includes variations like Bifrost 4490 vs Multibit, or Jonada vs Jono bs Jodac (Jotunheim alone, Jotunheim Phono, or Jotunheim DAC). And we also have some black chassis from time to time.
Or, in other words, this is already a lot of variation.
Can you imagine what it would be if we allowed even more customization? It would be, to be frank, complete and utter insanity. We’d need double the staff. Prices would have to go up.
Hell, I can already make a very strong case for culling the line.
Before you panic, let me say this: no plans are in place for a cull. We’re watching sales in the aftermath of the Jotunheim intro, but that’s all we’re doing. Waiting and seeing. So far, every product has its fans, and there are no real stinkers. We’ll see what happens next year.
“But I’m not interested in variations, I’m interested in you adding (this particular feature here) to all of your products,” you might say.
Cool. Got it.
Unfortunately, the same rules apply. Note the statement above about “once we start production, the blueprint is already in place, parts are already made, etc.” In other words, the ship has left the dock. We’re not going to be able to turn it around.
And, once we’re running, we don’t really want to turn it around. Making changes on a production device—no matter how seemingly small—can have devastating ramifications on production. Oops, that change accidentally moved a hole, and all the new chassis are unusable. Now we’re 12 weeks out from shipping. Oops, that change actually had a negative impact on the product performance and it doesn’t meet spec. Ah crap, that may mean scrapping the boards—with a ton of expensive parts on them. Oops, the new and old metal got mixed, some of it kinda-sorta fits, and some of it doesn’t. Production pandemonium!
That’s why we usually eschew running changes for measured change—in the case of the amps, add a “2” and include a bunch of features people have been asking for, or which we think are now a good idea. In the case of the DACs, announce an upgrade. But not every month. And not every decade. And make sure there’s a smooth process in place for the upgrade.
The reality of modern mass production is that there are a lot of moving parts...for every individual product. So that makes change difficult, painful, or impossible.
And the other reality is that we don’t guess right all the time. Which makes for feature sets you may not consider ideal. I understand. We are not perfect.
However, we do listen, and we do get better. Look at an Asgard, an Asgard 2, and a Jotunheim. Personally, I think that’s real progress.
And, we’ll also continue to improve processes. It’s possible that we should look at some more vertical integration, at least in some very limited areas. That might happen. That might increase our flexibility. But that flexibility doesn’t mean more variations. More likely, it means “less time spent out of stock” and “more rapid product development.”
(Of course, that last one also means “more products,” which, well, is “more variations.” Ah well.)
How To Improve Your Chances of Getting What You Want
“Okay, so if we can’t have mass customization, and the ship already sailed on your current product features, how do I get what I want?” you may ask.
Well, I wish I had a better answer for you, but it comes down to: adapt or wait.
“Adapt!” you yell. “I’m not here to accommodate you! I’m here to get the thing best suited to my needs!”
Yes. I understand. And if some other product is more suited to your needs, you should absolutely buy it. That simply makes sense. Blind brand loyalty—to anyone—makes no sense.
However, if you love how a product sounds, how it works, how it looks, you may just find a way to make it work for you. Even if it is not 100% perfect. And especially if it’s a small fraction of the cost of the competition.
Alternately, you can let us know what you’re looking for, and you can wait. If you’ve noticed, our updated products usually address the things that people most wanted in the design, within the limits of the chassis, of course. (Changing an upgradable DAC to have different inputs/outputs, for example, is more challenging, because it necessitates a chassis change.) We do listen, and we do respond, especially to good arguments.
Unfortunately, there are some things that are difficult to make happen. These are usually due to sound engineering reasons. For example, the home theater bypass mode on the preamps. Yes, we could actually add an “invisible” home theater bypass mode that is enabled by holding down one of the buttons for 2 seconds, like the Ragnarok output selection switch. But this has several problems:
- How do we indicate it’s in HT bypass mode? There’s no light on the front panel for this. I guess I could have all the LEDs on the front panel blink on and off, but that might be slightly irritating.
- Will you accept you can’t trigger it from the remote? I’m not sure we can determine what is a long button press on the remote from a single press.
- What happens when your kid triggers it and passes full volume Rammstein through to your 2500W Class D amps, and you’re dodging voice coils?
Yeah. Kludgy. I only added the same kind of kludgy mode switch on Ragnarok because it seemed like a good idea at the time. I can guarantee you that the next generation of Ragnarok* will show what’s connected (speakers, headphones, both, neither) on the front panel, and that it will have a front-panel button for it, and that it will have remote control. All of these are kinda “like duh” stuff that we missed the first time around…
…because we guessed wrong.
*No guesses on when this will happen. My plate is really full. Let’s get Vidar perfected, produced, and shipped. And a couple of other things. Then we’ll see.
So let us know what you need. I can’t guarantee that we can accommodate every request (and I can’t guarantee that my obstinate attitude won’t kick in when I read another hyperbolic screed about what a massive tragedy it is to have the switches on the back, or that I’m blinding your unborn child with the LEDs on the front), but we do listen…and we do change.
And, who knows? You may absolutely Get What You Want.
