From bruce@ashbysolutions.com Wed May 29 13:19:50 2002
Subject:Re: Bass pedals on the organ

Ken,

I don't think the earlier post was referring to the high cost of parts. I think the issue is that the BX-3 is not really a "new" instrument; it's a re-design of the CX-3. It re-uses most of the CX-3's electronics, and most of its mechanical parts. The CX-3 didn't include bass pedal emulation, so adding it to the BX-3 would have been a bigger effort, and development costs are much higher than parts costs. It's not just a matter of adding the ability to trigger bass notes -- at least, not if you want to get it 100% right. Unlike the keyboard notes, the pedal tones of the B-3 are not sine-like; they are complex waves with a different timbre. Unless the BX-3 was expected to sell tens of thousands of units -- and I'll bet that it's not -- then the cost of developing, testing, and manufacturing a new design to support pedals would be a high-risk proposition.

Before a B-3 clone can make the short list of products to develop, the first question that comes up is, "How much money will we make, and how sure are we about the sales?" Compared to more mainstream products -- workstations, DJ boxes, and such -- I'll bet that the expectations for a B-3 clone fall a bit short. Hammond replacements are already a niche market, and time only works against them: Each year, fewer B-3's and their kind are around to generate interest in new players; while current players get older, give up regular gigging, etc. and thus buy less gear. The situation only gets worse if the addition of bass pedal support raises the costs (it does), while many users don't need the feature (they don't).

The next question is, "Didn't we just release a Hammond clone? Why do we need another one?" Starting a BX-3 project takes developers away from other opportunities to make new products. The only good reason is, "because there's a huge market out there for a complete B-3 clone, and we're not addressing it." I'll bet that this is simply not the case. I'd really like to see the sales figures for the VK-77, which are probably low. As stages get smaller, "house band" gigs dry up, and musical tastes change, the need for a double-manual organ falls off, in favor of something smaller and more portable. Bands rarely have "organists" anymore; they have "keyboard players," who cart around a variety of sounds. Even on this list, which professes to love all things 'Hammond,' the size, weight, and flexibility virtues of the Nord Electro have caused several members to give up their other instruments for their new red "friend."

There is a certain class of musician who would buy a mid-priced near-100% Hammond clone, but the development and costs would be rather high, and the sales would be small to moderate.

At 02:01 P 5/29/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>I must repectfully disagree with the thread that says that a manufacturer
>doesn't add bass pedal capability into an organ because of high costs. The
>inclusion of the tone generation is essentially a small circuit which, by
>now, all manufacturers have fully developed. Allowing the musician to
>select whether or not to add midi or other dedicated-connection pedals
>would be very inexpensive (perhaps around $5-$10 cost) and would only
>modestly impact the selling price ($50 or so). Musicians could then decide
>for themselves to purchase the pedal unit (13, 18, or 25 pedals) at the
>appropriate cost if they wanted the bass. That way, the cost of such an
>addition would also be manageable - just the cost of the pedal unit and
>cable.
>
>Thats my opinion ($.02)
>
>Ken

Regards,

-BW

--
Bruce Wahler
Design Consultant
Ashby Solutions™ http://consult.ashbysolutions.com
CloneWheel Support Group and HiNote moderator
978.386.7389 voice/fax
bruce@ashbysolutions.com