Re: The ongoing saga of Oberheim

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

On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Tom Spaulding wrote:

> Well Andre, thanks for the public flogging. 

First off I have to say that I really have been attempting to maintain a
level of civility throughout this.  Even in my posts from last night, I
made a very concerted effort to not be unjustly rude or callous.  Tom, 
you yourself thanked me for being polite to you when I first contacted 
you, and mentioned that you doubted you could have contucted yourself as 
calmly had you been in my position.  I have attempted to maintain that 
degree of civility throughout, and in reassessing my posts from last 
night, I see considerable potential for flaming, negativity, and insult, 
which I have not and do not wish to instigate.
 
I do think that I'm entitled to being somewhat distraught at the current
situation, but I have (and continue to) made every effort to prevent this
from becoming a personal issue between myself and anyone else.  I hope
that this has been understood; if not, I apologize, and I hope that it is
now. 

> 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. 

And as I have told you in private e-mails, I genuinely appreciate the fact
that someone is going about trying to fix things there. However, I also
feel entitled to voicing my reaction to these efforts.  Particularly when
they seem of an ill-advised variety. 

> I 
> have admitted and apologized for all of the past 
> mistakes, untruths, lies and poor service of the past.
 
I've also told you that I don't hold you personally accountable for all 
of the problems that have arisen -- the string of misinformation from 
Oakland, for instance.

I appreciate the apologies, but what I (and presumably many others) would
prefer even more than an admission or an apology is an EXPLANATION.  Why
were things allowed to be so poorly-handled for so long at Oberheim?  Why
was the head of California operations at Oberheim not informed of the fact
that the company he was in charge of was relocating 2,000 miles away until
the day that the move occurred?  Why did I have to find out about this
relocation through someone on this list rather than from someone at
Oberheim? 

> But despite our efforts, it is apparent that
> we have erred again. 

At the very least, failing to properly attach all four of the knobs on a 
dealer-repaired unit is not the best way to instill a new plateu of 
consumer respect.

However, given the fact that you have replaced all of the internal 
electronics, yet the anomaly persists, I am presently unconvinced that you 
were in fact unable to "repair" what may in fact not even be a 
malfunction.  It is for this reason that I issued two follow-up posts 
last night, which freely admit that if you have swapped the innards of 
the unit and the same problem is there, then it is possible there is in 
fact no problem other than a system-based ideosyncrasy.  It is also 
possible, as Kim Flint pointed out, that the anomaly resides in the 
chassis of the unit rather than in the circuitry.

> 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.

I recognize that this comment was intended in a somewhat sarcastic and
guilt-tripped light.  I don't know exactly what I find more disturbing: 
the snide tone of the comment, or the underlying implication that I was 
given unsolicited favoritism at the expense of other users.

If my unit was, as you say, "pushed to the top" of the priority list, then
I don't understand why I was given preferential treatment -- because I
subscribe to Loopers Delight and have been vocal on describing the
problems I've had?  Does that mean that people who *haven't* been as vocal
or persistent in following through on the repair work and reporting their
results, but have in fact waited longer for repair work to be completed
than I did, were pushed back in deference to one user in California with
an Internet account and a loud mouth? 

If there were units that had been waiting longer for service than mine
had, then perhaps putting my Echoplex at the top of the list was a
"mistake"  (to use your words).  If mine had the longest track record of
having been waiting without repair or work, then it deserved to be fixed
first.  If you were trying to make me feel either relieved or guilty via
your comment above, you have failed on both counts. 

> Given your position - that speaking <underline>to</underline> others =
> speaking <underline>for</underline> others - 

?!?!

I honestly have no idea where this comment comes from.  My position has 
nothing to do with "speaking to others = speaking for others."  I'm 
speaking strictly for myself, Tom.

> 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. 

I think that this is ABSURD in the extreme, as I will elaborate on shortly.

> Good-faith quick fixes like
> installing updates will no longer be attempted. 

I won't go into detail, but I will say that anyone who had looked at the
circuit board -- and more specifically, the software -- of my unit when it
was shipped to you should have realized that installing the upgrade would
not have alleviated any problems. 

In your first post to this list, Tom, you said that you were eager to be
informed of the Echoplex in detail.  My suggestion (and I in no way mean
this sarcastically, but given your immediately preceeding reference to the
installation of the shipping version of LOOP III in my Echoplex as a
"quick fix," it seems appropriate) is the following: familiarize yourself
with the upgrade in depth.  Find out what it fixes and what it doesn't
fix.  Find out what the bugs in the original software were and then check
their status in the new upgrade.  Then, find out how many, if any, of
these problems correspond to complaints associated with incoming units
being sent in for repair. 

In this manner, you may be able to avoid administering an unnecessary
treatment for a problem, as well as avoiding needlessly sending out extra
eproms.  "Good faith" (to use your words) doesn't identify or fix
technical problems.  Understanding the function and extent of the remedies
you prescribe, however, often does. 

> 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.  

Tom, WHAT ON EARTH does my situation have to do with shipping new
Echoplexes and software upgrades?!?!  Why is it necessary to hold back on
shipping these items out because of ONE REPAIR JOB on another unit?!  Why
is it necessary to postpone the shipment of Loop III and *new* Echoplex
units for three or four more months due to confusion over one repair job
on a two-year old unit?!?! 

> 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.

I'll say it again: What does "taking the side of caution" in repair work 
have to do with shipping out new Echoplexes and upgrades?!?!

A "repeat of my scenario" (your words again) will only happen if *I
personally* send *my unit* back into Oberheim.  If "taking the side of
caution" means making sure that you identify the problems in units which
are sent to you for repair, and then make sure that these problems have
been eliminated before being sent back, then I personally think that's a
step in the right direction, and I'm sorry to see that it's taken my
posting to instill this sensibility into your repair ethic. 

Tom, I in no way intend to become any sort of scapegoat for any further
delays in Oberheim releasing its product to the marketplace.  Rather than
cryptically imply that the service reports of an unknown struggling
musician will single-handedly impede for a third of a year the efforts of
a musical instrument company to release its product, why not *explain* to
us exactly what the situation is at Oberheim? 

> <bold>Message to Andre</bold>: 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. 

Thank you for making this clear.  I was uncertain as to exactly how much 
of the internal electronics had been replaced; I take it from your 
message that all of it has been.

> 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. 

Did you actually test the unit in the first place to attempt to identify
the problem?  Did you test the unit afterwards to see if the problem was
still there?  I honestly don't think it's a flame, or a display of
negativity, or an unjustified affront to you or anyone else to suggest
that these are two fairly significant elements of any repair process. 

When I talked to Pat on the phone a week ago, he didn't seem to 
understand my reference to the problem.  He did recall that I had shipped 
the unit without any screws in the upper plate, so I presume he had some 
hands-on experience with it.

Kim has suggested that the problem may have to do with the actual chassis 
of the unit.  If the problem had been checked for before and after 
installing new circuitry, the time and expense of shipping a whole new 
circuit board could have been spared.  

> (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).

Tom, please don't make a judgement about the contents of the last batch of
gear that your company recieved based upon what one user reports in his
specific unit.  And for God's sake, don't think that you have to go back
and replace all of the shafts on the units you're preparing to ship out!!! 

I determined what the problem was with the Input knob: There is a
translucent green sheath which fits along the shafts of the pots, which
holds the knobs in place.  On the Input knob, this shaft was crumpled into
the end of the knob, which prevented it from properly attaching to the
shaft.  I was able to fix this with minimal trouble once I determined what
the problem is.  The knob length on the INPUT control is now equal to that
of the OUTPUT control. 

I don't think the problem was inconsistency of shaft lengths, but rather
inconsistency of knob installation, and that as I've said, that the knob
had been improperly (I would have to use the term "carelessly") connected
to the shaft of the pot.  At the risk of beating this issue into the
ground, my dealings with this unit are the first impressions I have of the
actions of the new department at Oberheim.  And I've still got to say that
shipping a unit without making sure that each of four knobs is properly
attached is not a good route towards being taken seriously. 

> 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. 

I sent an additional check to Pat Murphy for $45.  Under the present
circumstances, and in light of the quantity of materials which were
replaced in my unit, I have to insist that you cash that check and apply
it towards expenses which were incurred during the work which was done on
my unit, as was the original intent. 

> <bold>Message To All Echopex Users</bold>: 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.

Tom (and I apologize for my error concerning your name -- no offense was 
intended), I have to say that I wouldn't be going to the lengths that I 
have been on this list if I wasn't passionately concerned about the 
future of the unit.  I want desperately to see this product succeed, and 
to be made available.  At the same time, I simply cannot sit back and 
leave circumstances such as those which have transpired go unreported.  I 
have too much respect for myself and for the other Echoplex users, past 
present and future, to try and mince words for the sake of watching out 
for the professional reputation of Oberheim.  

I understand that Oberheim is a small company.  I understand that you're
trying to do things in the fastest and most efficient way possible.  And
in spite of the problems I've had with my unit over the last 24 hours, I
still do believe that you're making deliberate, honest efforts towards
correcting things.  I also believe that some of these efforts, though
obviously generous and well-intended, are being executed somewhat
clumsily. 

In looking over this whole thread, I can't escape one recurring issue: 
COMMUNICATION.  We all appreciate your words of determination and purpose
(or perhaps I should say that I at least appreciate it, since I don't wish
to be accused once more of speaking for anyone other than myself), but I
would feel MUCH better knowing that there was some sense of in-depth,
specific information relayed.  Making your presense felt on this list is a
good first step.  But please *explain* to us what the specific problems
are, what they entail, and what we (if anything) can do to help alleviate
them. 

We've heard you say "The Echoplexes are coming!  Very soon!" for a little
while now.  What *exactly* is it about *my* situation that means that the
Echoplexes ad memory upgrades are apparently now coming no sooner than
three or four months down the road?!?! 

If anyone wishes to chastise me for apparently impeding the flow of 
product from Oberheim, they are free and welcome to do so in private or 
public.  I warn you, however, that any and all flames will recieve no 
similarly hostile response from me.

It is my sincere hope that this situation can be straightened out.  It is 
my sincere belief that, in spite of the present static and interference, 
the channels of communication and action are attempting to be cleared on 
both sides.  

--Andre