ilovefuzz.com

kbit wrote:I would agree that builders and consumers do have different perspectives, and it is an important distinction to be made. But, we are consumers gauging a products worth on the profit margins the builder, that's what this whole thread is about.

I didn't intend for it to seem like I was saying anyone was trying to make mega profits off of people.

My thought process was as so.

People see pedal X, people either love it or hate it then love it or hate it again based on the pricing. Pedal X will sell regardless but is it a reasonable price for most or do they think the pricing on things is taking a steep turn?

I guess I should have been far more specific in my initial post.

I'm more curious as to what other perceive as value for their buck.

When I see pedals coming out that are barely different than the last several years of releases, I guess I get kind of bored. Some companies push the envelope and offer unique new things or change it up a ton to make an existing idea better. Other release the same old same old in a new repacked box with a few added on tweaks for a few hundred more.




There's been a lot of good input in this thread and I'm glad I started it because it's helped the way I think of things hearing others (including builders) add their input.

Even if I do kind of want to eat that cake. LOL


Oh and I know Toneczar is a bad example. haha. I just couldn't think of a better one off the top of my head.

Jesus Was a Robot wrote: When I see pedals coming out that are barely different than the last several years of releases, I guess I get kind of bored. Some companies push the envelope and offer unique new things or change it up a ton to make an existing idea better. Other release the same old same old in a new repacked box with a few added on tweaks for a few hundred more.

Agreed. Entirely.

And for what its worth, almost everyone who works with/for us is both a consumer of gear and a builder/designer. The idea that we don't look at it from that perspective is just silly.

Oh man, I have some THOUGHTS and FEELS on this topic, but I'll try to be clear and concise, 'cause I could just rant about this all day.

Also, I didn't read the last 10 pages, so I'm just rudely inserting my opinions without context.

When I started Resonant Electronic Design with my best frenemy Wes Kuhnley, the pedal market was real weird (this was back in 2007). There were all the old-school brands (Boss/EHX/MXR/Ibanez, etc), and a handful of well-known boutique-y folks like Keeley, AnalogMan, Fulltone, Xotic, etc getting some attention, but most people barely even knew about those. Keep in mind in 2007, there few if any YouTube reviewers, and most music stores didn't carry "boutique" anything.

Wes and I had been working for Great River Electronics building high-end Pro Audio gear like preamps and EQs that cost over $1,000/channel, so when it came to design some guitar pedals, we decided to use really high quality parts (I think we were among the first companies to use Wima caps and 1% resistors in our pedals), make everything in the US, and charge whatever we had to charge. The Manifold Drive landed at $185 MAP. You wouldn't believe how much shit we got for that price. "A drive pedal for over $150? Why? The parts probably cost you $5!" (the parts (not including labor) cost us more like $45, but that's another story). But somehow, this was also the era of the Klon going for insane prices. Why? Was it built better? (no) Did it have more functionality? (no) Did it do something the Manifold couldn't do? (arguable, but I still say no). It was a cult of "mojo." At the time, people were seriously saying point-to-point pedals sounded better than PCB pedals. We struggled to move many pedals due to our pricing. Was it high? I don't think so, but compared to an $80 Boss pedal it was.

Cut to ten years later.

The most advanced and well-engineered pedals in the history of humanity are being released at a rapid-fire pace. I think everyone can agree that more features = more money, so I doubt those are the kinds of pedals you're talking about. Suffice it to say that for the advanced pedals, all they're doing is getting closer in functionality and price to the Pro-Audio tools that already cost thousands. If you want a simple/cheap pedal, buy a simple/cheap pedal.

It's the other kind that I think you're talking about - the kind that aren't much more advanced than stuff was 10+ years ago, but cost more simply because the market will take it. The exact same Manifold drive would feel like a good deal today for $185 because our financial compass has changed. Unfortunately, that also means that the Klons of today (or something like a well-known drive pedal with different diodes on a rotary switch offered up as a new idea) can be priced higher because the market will take it.

There's a solution though - don't buy dumb/shitty pedals. Pay for innovation and good engineering. Pay for functionality and cool new sounds. If you want a simple stand-by go buy a Boss pedal - they're just as good as they ever were. The market has to stop rewarding bullshit and instead reward the people making truly great stuff.


Ok, sorry, I went off a little.

Zeibek, Devi, etc are great examples of companies that didn't charge enough to support their business. Oz even admitted he never figured in his time to his pricing.

Boss, mxr, ehx and able to buy truckloads of parts, where dwarfcraft, CBA are able to buy only 100's or 1000's of parts at a time.

I forgot where I was going with this

I liked all that your wrote Peter. All you said makes a ton of sense.

I'll agree with Devi not charging enough even though I will say that most of her builds were pretty similar. Still, those 50 dollar fuzzes she used to build were stupid cheap.

Jesus Was a Robot wrote:Some companies push the envelope and offer unique new things or change it up a ton to make an existing idea better. Other release the same old same old in a new repacked box with a few added on tweaks for a few hundred more.

That can also be an issue of risk/reward.

You can be super innovative and not sell shit because people aren't used to it. Guitarists aren't really the most progressive when it comes to technology. 99% of guitarists still want tube amps designed in the 1960s and pedals designed in the 70s or 80s.

It's a lot safer and easier to sell familiar products. You might spend a couple hours "designing" a new tubescreamer and you can easily figure out how much you can make per pedal. There's already a market, even if it is oversaturated.
Coming up with a pedal that is unlike any other is not guaranteed success. You don't know how well it will sell, your margins will be tighter, you have to figure out how to market it. When you don't have investors, those risks don't seem smart. It honestly makes a lot more sense to make a Klone with a twist because people are familiar with it, know what to expect, and you've got built-in hype to build off.

Interesting take, Mr. Bregman.

Can this be the name of our Youth of Today cover band (with the only pedals used being Klons)?

PeterBregman wrote: Klons of today

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBIpdHsA_v0[/youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBIpdHsA_v0

I just Googled youth of today pedalboard and came up with a lot of photos of Sonic Youth's pedalboards. LOL. No surprises there.

Of course, here I am looking at the new Boss $1k multifx....

aens_wife wrote:very expensive Knobs demos

Interesting tidbit. I have no concept of the economics of pedal demos.

lost in music wrote:

aens_wife wrote:very expensive Knobs demos

Interesting tidbit. I have no concept of the economics of pedal demos.

I have some insight from builders on this over the years. I'm not sure what Knobs charges, but PGS, Gearmandude and a few others are pretty high dollarv.

aens_wife wrote:

Jesus Was a Robot wrote: When I see pedals coming out that are barely different than the last several years of releases, I guess I get kind of bored. Some companies push the envelope and offer unique new things or change it up a ton to make an existing idea better. Other release the same old same old in a new repacked box with a few added on tweaks for a few hundred more.

Agreed. Entirely.

And for what its worth, almost everyone who works with/for us is both a consumer of gear and a builder/designer. The idea that we don't look at it from that perspective is just silly.

The point is that you (as "builder") are going to have an inherent bias towards the pricepoint of any given pedal being inherently justified, the same way I (as "generic consumer") am going to have an inherent bias toward a lower price point, all other factors being equal. Not that you can't consider the other perspective, or that you don't.

Aka: Not a good or a bad thing, just a thing.

We've pretty firmly established voting with your wallet as the only real solution here so now we're just waxing, I think.

greyscales wrote:

Jesus Was a Robot wrote:Some companies push the envelope and offer unique new things or change it up a ton to make an existing idea better. Other release the same old same old in a new repacked box with a few added on tweaks for a few hundred more.

That can also be an issue of risk/reward.

You can be super innovative and not sell shit because people aren't used to it. Guitarists aren't really the most progressive when it comes to technology. 99% of guitarists still want tube amps designed in the 1960s and pedals designed in the 70s or 80s.

It's a lot safer and easier to sell familiar products. You might spend a couple hours "designing" a new tubescreamer and you can easily figure out how much you can make per pedal. There's already a market, even if it is oversaturated.
Coming up with a pedal that is unlike any other is not guaranteed success. You don't know how well it will sell, your margins will be tighter, you have to figure out how to market it. When you don't have investors, those risks don't seem smart. It honestly makes a lot more sense to make a Klone with a twist because people are familiar with it, know what to expect, and you've got built-in hype to build off.

A thousand times this.

Original thinking has to fit inside a mighty tight framework in order to be successful. Over stepping the ratio of feature:price can be mind numbingly quick when you take a novel path.

This is where the ILF community really shines, buncha weirdos and be certain you're loved for it.