The ongoing saga of Oberheim

[Andre LaFosse <altruist@shoko.calarts.edu>]

The following information should be of interest to anyone curious as to
the current state of affairs at Oberheim in general, and the company's
customer service relations in particular. 

One week ago I recieved a phone message from Pat Murphy, stating that my
Echoplex was ready to be shipped back to me.  I called him shortly
thereafter and spoke to him in person.  He informed me that the repair
work had been completed, and that my unit had recieved a new circuit
board, as well as the software upgrade.  He also said that my initial
cashier's check for $35, sent to cover the initial repair and processing
costs, would be returned to me, and that the second check, for $45, which
I had sent directly to Pat on the instruction of Mike Lyon, would be
refunded. 

I then asked Pat if there had been any problem in tracking down the
malfunction which had prompted my sending the unit in the first place -- a
trace of digital noise present in the decay or fade-in of notes into or
out of silence, which appeared when the mix knob was set to an
intermediate position within the two extremes and disappeared when the
knob was at one extreme or the other. 

In spite of the fact that I had previously outlined this problem, both in 
e-mail to Dean Fouts (who had initially handled my repair job when I 
first sent the unit to Oberheim in mid-July) and in a typed note which 
was taped directly to the cashier's check which had been in the box with 
the unit, Pat didn't seem to know what I was referring to.  He did say, 
however, that due to the current state at Oberheim, there had not been 
time to run an exhaustive check on the unit, and he added that with the 
new circuit board and upgraded software, I essentially had a brand-new 
Echoplex, specifically citing the fact that the record and overdub 
functions worked.  Of course, since both of those functions had been 
working when I had sent in the unit in the first place, this did not 
speak volumes about the efficacy of the repair work.

Today (Tuesday the 28th of October, one week after my conversation with
Pat Murphy), I recieved my Echoplex via UPS.  Upon opening the unit, the
first thing I noticed was that the very note I had written, explaining the
technical problem I was encountering, was sitting atop the Echoplex, still
taped to the cashier's check just as it had been when I sent it in July. 
 
The second thing I noticed was that the four main control knobs on the
left-hand side of the unit are considerably further-out from the face of
the unit than they had been before I sent the unit in.  The feedback knob
seems to be more or less the same, but each knob to the left is
progressively further out along the shaft extending from the pot on the
outside of the unit; this is taken to an extreme on the input kob, which
is actually detached from the main shaft of the pot itself and can be
easily slipped on and off of the pot.  Although the pot still seems to
work, the knob itself is completely loose of the shaft. 

The input knob had been firmly affixed to the pot when I sent my unit in
to Oberheim three months ago. 

I then plugged the Echoplex in.  Sure enough, the upgraded version of the
software was intact.  I then began recording a loop; I faded in a note and
then let it die out. 

The exact same problem, which I had sent my unit in a fourth of a year ago
to have fixed, was and is still very much in evidence.  The same digital
noise is present at the fade-in or fade-out of notes into or out of
silence.  The noise disappears when the mix selector is turned to either
one extreme or the other. 

The analogy I would draw to the current situation is that of taking a car
in to have brake work done, being deprived of the vehicle for far longer
than I had been quoted, and then finally getting the car back with a new
transmission and polished exterior, but with the same brake problem firmly
intact and the previously undamaged rear-view mirror dangling by a thread
from the side of the car door.  In neither case does this sort of
treatment fall under what I would characterize as acceptable behavior. 

I appreciate the fact that Oberheim replaced the circuit board.  Since it
obviously made absolutely no difference in solving my problem, I would
have appreciated even more their taking some steps which would have
corrected the malfunction. 

Given that an account of the problem I had been experiencing had been both
sent to the customer service representative via e-mail and contained in
the very package itself, I have to wonder exactly why it was that this
problem was not addressed. 

Pat Murphy said that there had not been time to run as in-depth of an
analysis as would have been possible.  I don't know how long it took
Oberheim to replace the circuit board, swap the software, and break the
knob on the input pot of my unit, but it seems to me that actually reading
the instructions I had provided with the unit and checking for the
specific problem I had detailed therein might have been a more effective
solution than arbitrarily replacing scads of internal electronics and
hoping that the problem (which they did not seem to be aware of, nor
capable of discerning from carefully written and provided information)
would be solved. 

The irony for me is that I had originally sent my Echoplex in to the
company because I felt that the esoteric nature of the device was such
that the repair work would be best left to the very company which had
marketed and released the product.  The unit is now in worse condition
that when I had sent it in: in addition to the nebulous digital noise
problem, I now have to fix the detached input knob. 

There are a great many questions and allegations running through my head
at the moment, but they all fall under the banner of one general issue,
which is: What exactly is the problem at Oberheim, and what is it which
seems to be preventing the company from being able to function in an
intelligent manner? 

Message to Tim Spaulding, Pat Murphy, and all others at Oberheim: If you
want to undo the exhaustive self-inflicted damage done to your company,
start by actually taking the time to make sure that your repair jobs
actually repair the items you recieve, and avoid causing any further
damage than was originally present.  I waited over twelve weeks for my
unit to be recieved.  I certainly would not have minded waiting a bit
longer if that extra time had been taken to ensure that the device had
been repaired; I do, however, take exception and offense to my item being
"serviced" in a sloppy, arbitrary, and ultimately ineffectual manner.  The
evidence before me is that no one at Oberheim even bothered to find out
what the specifics of my problem were. 

I feel sorry for Kim Flint, Matthias Grob, and the rest of the Echoplex
design team for having their vision entrusted to a company which seems
incapable of being able to function properly.  I feel sorry for the many
users who have been waiting all too patiently for Oberheim to get their
act together.  I feel sorry for myself for having spent three months
waiting in vain for a repair which was not done.  And I feel a bit sorry
for Oberheim itself, which seems oblivious to the damage it is exacting on
itself in any managerial form, and incapable of correcting the turn of
events. 

I wish any other Oberheim customers the best of luck in their efforts at 
dealing with the company.  Based upon my own personal experience over the 
last three months, they will most certainly need it.

--Andre LaFosse