Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
>
>At 02:52 PM 10/16/2001, Per Boysen wrote:
>>Maybe I've got strange
>>taste but to me the EDP looks really "cool". I guess mainly because the
>>design is somehow "un-cool". I mean, it really can't be sorted into any
>>certain decade - it's simply timeless. Ok, it could be something from the
>>early eighties just because the logo text says "Digital Pro", as if some
>>"magic words", more important to drop than other words describing what
>the
>>unit actually does. Typical 80s that is ;D
Hm... whats interesting about remembering an 80s style in the
beginning of the 90s if the brand is from the 60s and the idea of it
only goes fashion in the 00s ?
>Kim:
>glad somebody properly appreciates that touch. :-) To me the name is all
>about irreverence towards stupid traditions. I had a lot of fun with it.
>The fact that we had the audacity to use the name "Echoplex" still makes
>me
>smile. I love spearing icons like that.
For me it was about the worst shock in my life.
My first reaction was: Ah, ok, lets desing a digital Echoplex with
speed control an such, but my thing is different, new!
Really: some old Echoplex fans became frustrated about the EDP and
others probably did not look at it to see the future features.
Then I realized Gibson would not even discuss the subject with me.
They applied a simple marketing rule: Use a known brand.
Ok, it may be easier to sell retro than new stuff, but then the
product has to fit!
Imagine they had started the Steinberger guitars as "Telecaster
plastic pro" ;-)
Did any famous typewriter brands make success on computers?
Keith tried to explain the decision that probably was not his: To
call something a LOOP delay is like calling an amplifier a
"louder-bigger". I dont think so, "Repeater" would not be a good name
either.
I did not mean to insist on LOOP delay, but since LOOP is what was
new about it, I still think it would be great to have it in the name.
And the stupid "digital pro" made me blush... well, slowly the
emotions passed and I would love to live the expected impact on
sales...
What I try to say: Its not enough to have any strong design or brand.
Neither following rules nor breaking rules is a guarantee for success.
Why put an old and old sounding name on a new thing that is supposed
to iniciate a totally new form of creating music?
If you want to try to sell my distortion (which is also unlike any
product so far) with some cynical design, go ahead, there have been
many distortion boxes before, so I will be laughing with you.
Now, to iniciate the LOOP concept with a name that starts with Echo
(thats what we evolved away from), goes on with Plex (sounds like
plastic to me) and ends with Digital AND Pro (anything is digital and
41kHz is not pro... probably should suggest to be the digital version
of the Echoplex) is not audacy but marketing without considering the
product, a cruel distruction of real good intentions, chopping down
the advantages of the product.
Tell me if I am wrong!
--
---> http://Matthias.Grob.org