[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Clarifying the MAM-A gold comment



I am actually somewhat surprised that there isn't a large enough medical and mil-spec market for high-quality data storage that a manufacturer would have enough critical mass right there. Tack on archvies/institutions and the music "business" (in quotes because it is quickly becoming the opposite of a business model if business model = profitable and long-term) and it seems there's room for a quality niche. Why not?

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Richter" <mrichter@xxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Clarifying the MAM-A gold comment



Steven C. Barr(x) wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Richter" <mrichter@xxxxxxx>
Soon after, the company folded. They could not compete on price with schlock from the Orient; they could not compete on reputation with the high-end product. I fear that without supplement, the wanderings of Mitsui/MAM gold will continue until a cliff is encountered and quality audio media vanish.

IF the "free market" works the way it is supposed to in theory (and note
that I make my comment as a NON-fan of it...!) there should be the following
result:

1) There presumably exists (must, for this to happen) a body of users
(aka "demographic") to whom quality is of sufficient importance to
reduce the importance of price.

2) Given the truth of (1) above, there will arise a manufacturer who
specializes in making available discs of consistently very high quality
and predicted life span...in order to sell them at a higher price to
the above-defined demographic.

There are any number of products where there exists a minority demographic
who demand and require a higher quality and/or dependability than does the
average consumer thereof. In almost all cases, there arises a supplier who
can fill that/those need(s). What can happen, though, is that the general
public start purchasing these "high-end brands" based on their anecdotal
repuation; in many cases, the increased production leads to a decrease
in quality!

I have a personal example here. Among my posessions is a c.1946 E.H. Scott
800-B radio (the last model designed under the supervision of Mr. Scott).
These sets were intended to be as close to perfect as a commercially-sold
radio could be, and "hang the cost!" Mine has 24 tubes, chrome-plated
chassis, a 15" coaxial dual-driver speaker, a solid-mahogany cabinet
(veneered with decorative mahogany as well!) and cost over $1,500 at
a time when a new Chevrolet cost $1,200.

I don't know the history involved, but not too long after the 800-B was
introduced, E.H. Scott left his firm and it was sold to other owners,
who tried to use the name to market ordinary high-end sets and quickly went under...

I hope we're not belaboring this subject, but at the risk of that, let me add some notes.


Your first point is well taken, which is why I suggested medical media, where quality and longevity are mandated by the process and, in some cases, by law.

The second is less clear. If the market is not large enough to support reasonable cost - say ten times that of standard product - then there may well be no manufacturer. There was a time when RCA would press a custom disc if the customer had the high but standard price; that day is long gone, presumably because that price with all its overhead was excessive.

Your radio example is valid. Presumably, Scott built the 800-B as a proof of principle and as a personal indulgence. My guess is that its $1500 price did not mean profit for the company. At that price, there would have been too few purchasers to do great harm to the company.

But the CD-R manufacturer of whom I wrote was more comparable with a Haffler trying to work in a high-production environment. You can make a radio or a preamp by hand, but it takes massive capital investment to make CD-Rs. In fact, it takes ever more investment as the quality target rises regardless of how many units are sold. And there is another factor for the newcomer to the quality market: proof. You can prove many of the virtues of your Scott 800-B by listening and by measurement. But how does one prove the longevity of a CD-R? And how are claims made credible versus such established champions: T-Y and MAM?

Perhaps lining up with the few users of quality in quantity we will be able still to find archival media in several years. But the archival market alone is unlikely (IMHO) to suffice.

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/



[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]