SuperMacro V3.0!!!!!!!
Mar 11, 2005 at 10:52 PM Post #61 of 77

Jester

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Posts
640
Likes
20
Location
Austin, TX
Mar 11, 2005 at 11:03 PM Post #62 of 77

Jahn

Headphoneus Supremus Prolificus
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
21,333
Likes
37
amazing.
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 12:24 AM Post #64 of 77

goto2003

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Posts
569
Likes
10
Much more concise and cleaner than I expected! Can't wait to give it a trail.
orphsmile.gif
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 4:51 AM Post #67 of 77

goto2003

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Posts
569
Likes
10
To my ear, SM V2.0 is a huge step over SM V1.0. But I can' t imagine that SM V3.0 is another level compared to V2.0. Quote from Xin's:

"The configuration showing in the picture sounds much better than
V2. Now you really feel you are in the live concert and you don't miss a
single note."
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 5:22 AM Post #68 of 77

ProleArtThreat

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Posts
293
Likes
10
Does anyone know when Dr. Xin is going to have the V3 available for configuration and ordering? I was looking at getting a portable amp and had pretty much settled on either a Supermacro or an SR-71, but now it looks like I might as well wait until the V3 is available.
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 7:23 AM Post #69 of 77

e_dawg

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Posts
152
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by atx
Doesn't matter if the PPA is legendary.


It absolutely does make a difference. If you associate your product with a well-respected, higher-end, well-established brand, then you have just accelerated the adoption and establishment of your own brand.

Quote:

By giving the impression that the "Supermacro" is a PPA knock-off means diluting the brand. It loses its uniqueness as a product.


I know what you're saying, but uniqueness is not going to be lost in the association, and here's why:

First, you have to define what uniqueness is. I say it's the triple threat of super-portability, sound quality, and value. Everybody knows the SuperMacro is super-portable with good sound and good value.

Second, in order to evaluate the threat to uniqueness, you have to look at what the negative effects are of associating the SM with the PPA on those three characteristics.

If you think about it, Portability is the only characteristic that can be negatively impacted by association with the PPA. But since everyone can see that it is as small as ever, this will not jeopardize perception of its portability.

------------------

Look, you're focusing on the wrong target. You're stuck on possible threats to brand integrity when you should be focused on a more probable effect on brand equity. Association with the PPA increases the SM's credibility as a higher-end product and improves perception of the sonic qualities and value proposition (I'm getting PPA level sound on a SuperMacro budget? Damn son! Sign me up for two!). On a net basis, it strengthens the perception of the brand.

Perhaps the most important reason for Xin wanting to associate the SM with the PPA is area under the curve. The faster you can increase adoption and hit peak sales, the shorter your payback period and the higher your ROI. One shouldn't think so narrowly about preserving your brand integrity to the detriment of everything else. If you're running a business, the faster you can break-even and the shorter your payback period the better. That's undeniably on a higher level of importance than any minor effects on brand integrity.

Quote:

Imagine Toyota claiming their engine is like a Benz.


Ever heard of Lexus?
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 1:30 PM Post #70 of 77

goto2003

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Posts
569
Likes
10
Wow, Xin will learn a lot from the discussion here
orphsmile.gif
However, Xin's not a marketing guy and please keep this in mind.
biggrin.gif
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 4:23 PM Post #71 of 77

atx

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Posts
915
Likes
13
Quote:

It absolutely does make a difference. If you associate your product with a well-respected, higher-end, well-established brand, then you have just accelerated the adoption and establishment of your own brand.


I don't agree. Associating your product with another, especially that which is superior than yours, only makes your product the underdog. It's a step up only if your product was inferior to begin with.

Quote:

First, you have to define what uniqueness is.


It doesn't matter what it is. What matters is what people perceive of the product. Marketing is not about the truth, but manipulating people's perceptions.

What makes Bose speakers unique? Nothing. But a lot of people believe that Bose are good, unique speakers-- one of the best. Bose smartly manipulated people's perceptions to believe their hype.


Quote:

Ever heard of Lexus?


Yes, I hear from people who've driven both a Lexus and a Benz say that Lexus is a better car. Toyota never compared their lexus as "like a benz." The image that they're trying to project is that it's a better car, even though the engine may incorporate the same technology.
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 4:25 PM Post #72 of 77

TooNice

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Posts
713
Likes
10
Well, marketing is an important aspect in any business.

On a side note, how much does a PPA normally go for?

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx
I don't agree. Associating your product with another, especially that which is superior than yours, only makes your product the underdog. It's a step up only if your product was inferior to begin with.


Being the underdog at least make you the same class as the market leader, and is not unrealistic if it was once considered a class below. Would most people associate the SM withthe PPA, performance wise? If not, then this association is a step up.

Trying to establish a product as something a class above the leading product (well, I don't know where the PPA is positioned, but lets say "Legendary" at least), is going to draw lots of skepticism.
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 4:57 PM Post #73 of 77

HiWire

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Posts
2,401
Likes
103
I don't think there is a problem comparing with the PPA. The PPA is meant to be a home amp, from what I understand, and Dr. Xin is merely saying that his tiny amp is comparable in sound to the big boys. Plus, the PPA project is an open design, and therefore he's not comparing to a competing company, as such.
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 6:12 PM Post #74 of 77

erikzen

06 National Meet Co-Coordinator
100% THD and S/N = 0
Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Posts
4,543
Likes
35
Quote:

Originally Posted by some1x
But that would give Xin 6 full months to supercharge his design for a new amp
tongue.gif
tongue.gif



If you wait that long the amp will be discontinued altogether, as he will have moved onto the SuperMiniDualMacro V6 by that time.
tongue.gif
 
Mar 12, 2005 at 9:11 PM Post #75 of 77

Darwin022

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Posts
405
Likes
10
Fixup.net is down. Does anyone have the pictures saved? if so, e-mail them to me and I'll host them
smily_headphones1.gif


edit: nm, found them:
NOTE! these are XIN'S PICTURES, I'm just mirroring them on my site...
imgp0852s.jpg

imgp0858s.jpg

gallery: http://www.coronabeach.net/gallery/xin
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Xin
Make no mistake, for the size of barely two quaters, this baby has 3 separated and buffered (stackable) channels, like the PPA jant. If you don't know what this means, it is far better than dual mono architecture. The two caps are 1000uF each, super low ESR type. With all the sockets, you can swap opamps and add more buffers (up to 4x). Note, you don't have to have these sockets and the ICs will then be soldered on the back of the board; you'll have more caps and still have 2x buffers in all 3 channels.

Man, who wants to bid on this very first historical amp human ever made? Mavis from Japan suggested that I should give it a new name; I think this baby well deserves it. Name suggestions?

Sorry, I won't be able to response until tomorrow because I'll be snoring like a pig.



 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top