Re: The ongoing saga of Oberheim

[Tom Spaulding <tspauldi@gibson.com>]

Well Andre, thanks for the public flogging. As I have shared with you in private e-mails, I am all too well aware of the task I have been given - fixing Oberheim. I have admitted and apologized for all of the past mistakes, untruths, lies and poor service of the past. I asked for everyone's patience and understanding as we continue to improve the situation here at Oberheim. But despite our efforts, it is apparent that we have erred again. I guess our latest mistake was agreeing to push your unit to the top of our priority list, ahead of all of the other patient users you feel so sorry for.

Given your position - that speaking to others = speaking for others - I believe it best to say it will be 3-4 months until we are fully operational. We will not ship any Echoplex products until we are fully staffed. Good-faith quick fixes like installing updates will no longer be attempted. I realize that this policy will likely further annoy our customers who have certainly suffered enough, but it will preclude any misunderstandings or premature shipments on our part. We do not want a repeat of your scenario, so we will be more vigorous in our testing proceedures. The recent visit by Kim Flint has been invaluable to us and should speed the process along, but we will definitely take the side of caution from now on. Just don't confuse it with lethargy. My sincere apologies to all for the continued delays.

Message to Andre: You were given an entirely new Echoplex board and software. It was our intetion to fix any problem you may have been having by replacing your entire board. It was our expectation that any specific problems that your unit had would be fixed by replacing the total circuit board. We were well aware of your notes on what the problem was, but rather than attempt to fix an old unit, we thought it would be best to essentially give you a new one. (Apparently the last batch of boards we received from our vendor had a mixture of pots with different shaft lenghths and widths. We will, of course, replace with different pots once we are fully operational).

We left your check uncashed on purpose, and if my memory is correct, we still owe you an additional sum, for which I told you I would write you a personal check for if need be. Please e-mail me (publicly or privately) with the amount due and I will send the check.

Message To All Echopex Users: I will keep you informed of the status of Oberheim and the Echoplex as the details become available. Forgive me for any past or future transgressions. It is my nature to try to help our existing users first, even as I was hired to sell to new ones. It is my belief that you and your Echoplex-derived music are the best sales team we could possibly have.

Thank you.

Tom (not Tim) Spaulding

At 10:15 PM 10/28/97 -0600, you wrote:
>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
>
>
>
>
>