Do manufacturers know....

[plastic penguin]

.... when they've produced a - let's say - less than satisfactory product - or a new component that doesn't quite hit the heights of a previous model?

I know they spend millions on R&D, not pointing a finger at any one maker, but just looking for a "general" answer rather than a swipe at a particular model or review/star ratings etc. etc.

Would be good to hear from the pros on here.

(Please note: If there are any naysayers towards any one maker or product here, then don't reply.)

When I worked for a print management company if a job came back below a certain standard or with imperfections, we'd get them to re-print the lot.

 

[richardw42]

I know they spend millions on R&D,

do they ?

 

[chebby]

I know they spend millions on R&D,

do they ?

The better ones will spend a higher percentage of their income/turnover/profits (or whatever) on R&D and good design, but, it will only be 'millions' for the very largest enterprises.

 

[CnoEvil]

I suppose it depends on what element of the product you are talking about.

In the era of firmware updates, some faults are corrected "on the hoof", so to speak.....in the case of Arcam AVRs, I believe they used their customers as Beta Testers.

 

[matthewpiano]

Sometimes manufacturers can get badly caught out. When I worked at Sony Centre we had a really good range of Hard Drive + DVD recorders - RDR-HXD890 etc. I still use a RDR-HXD-995 and it is excellent. When the time came for Sony to launch a new range they launched the RDR-DC range with looks to match their Blu-Ray players, and a new-look on-screen TV Guide. In reality they were built more cheaply and, where we'd come to rely on the dependability of the HXD range, the DC range caused operational issues left, right and centre. Over time firmware updates gradually sorted things out, but the product can't possibly have been tested as thoroughly as it needed to be - perhaps much like the Arcam AVRs.

 

[MajorFubar]

Good thread.

Not all replacement products are better than their predecessors. Sometimes the manufacturers misunderstand the needs of the market. Sometimes it's a calculated risk they intentionally take in a drive to reduce costs or to push their products in new directions.

When Cyrus launched the Cyrus 3 amp in 1993 with only a (so-so) MM phono stage and no MC stage at all, I was quite well known at my local dealers. According to him, amps from the likes of Cyrus, Audiolab and Naim were particularly attractive to vinyl enthusiasts, with CD enthusiasts preferring options from such as Marantz, Kenwood and of course Pioneer (in the shape of the ubiquitous A400). He said 'loads' of existing Cyrus 2 customers (and to a lesser extent, Cyrus 1 customers) had phoned him about a possible upgrade, and they were 'astounded' to find out the new amp wouldn't natively accomodate their MC cartridges. At the time, he genuinely believed the decision to leave-out a MC phono-stage hurt early sales of Cyrus 3s, though I'm sure he was quick to point people in the direction of alternatives from his stock which could accomodate their needs.

EDIT: forgot to say, I don't think it's just HiFi manufacturers either. I know of people who have not upgraded their older Apple computers to more recent models because of the 'missing' internal DVD/CD RW drive. Apple must believe the decision hasn't hurt hardware sales globally in a big way, but certainly locally, I know of plenty people who have resisted the upgrade for that very reason. And as proof, the 'last gen' models of Macbooks, iMacs and Mac Minis with optical drives are in very strong demand on eBay and elsewhere,