advertisement


MDAC First Listen (part 00101000)

Status
Not open for further replies.
LarsS said:
John, are you suggesting I'm to pay for the maybe useless salvaged MDAC's out there?

I may be going for the FWC depending on timeschedule and cost.

However, I'm not going to pay for the salvaged MDAC units if that's what your proposing.

I'd say the only decent way of handling them is either you buy them back out of your own pocket or repair and sell them on.

There should also be defined a Fair Exit for those that decides to leave the project.
Click to expand...

Remember Rock & hard place :((((( ok I could keep it simple instead and charge GBP100 for the FWC development as per the original plan and pay off the Salvaged DAC owners & keep the balance!!!

Ok, new plan there will be two payment options for the FWC:-

1. £65 + FWC "at cost" to help solve the salvage MDAC owner situation.

2. £100 + FWC "at cost", I'll buy back the salvage units, and keep the balance to help live on as per the original plan!

I've a glass of JD and coke in front of me and I'm going to ponder the new front panel ID for the Fusion DAC and VFET amp..... I just don't know what to say :(
 
rtrt said:
That feels like a hard nosed business viewpoint Lars and at first take may seem a reasonable position.

I'm not sure it is though, given that John hasn't operated this project in a hard nosed manner. He's often gone out of his way to accommodate others and their specific situation - suspect thats how he operates in life generally tbh.

So in my personal opinion, we should try to do the same where we can.

It is only my opinion, I don't have any specific 'skin' in this particular aspect as I haven't purchased a salvaged MDAC, though I'd be happy to support my share of any written off hardware, as i'd regard it as part of the costs vs benefits of being involved in this kind of project
Click to expand...

+1
I am sure that the split cost for everyone involved will be offset by the improvements offered by the full width case.
EDIT
I did not see John's suggestion before posting ...
 
Oh this is not my evening, turns out the glass I front of me is JUST coke, the bar men did not hear me ask for JD & Coke !!! ;( oh we'll you just have to laugh :)
 
The sensible way is for john to fix the salvaged dacs, and sell them on, with our help, and then the cost of his time and any loss is split between those who wish to proceed to the fwc. That minimizes everyone's loss and risk.

But we have to know the numbers before we can move forward.
 
JohnW said:
Ok, new plan there will be two payment options for the FWC:-

1. £65 + FWC "at cost" to help solve the salvage MDAC owner situation.

2. £100 + FWC "at cost", I'll buy back the salvage units, and keep the balance to help live on as per the original plan!
Click to expand...

This I can live with. Collateral damage due to Project advancements; R&D
 
OK, just to add where I am at the moment.

Johns information today has addressed my major concerns, ie timescale. I was very concerned about scope creep just sending this project out into the distant future. That clearly isn't the case.

I think the involvement of miniDSP as a partner organisation is going to be very productive. I think there is a far more realistic chance of future product development within sensible time scales, and their obvious technical expertise in the dsp arena will help.

The proposed additional costs to me aren't unreasonable, but we do need to make this right for somehow for those that object to the change for whatever reason.

John, can I suggest the first step is an email goes out to all project members explaining what is proposed, asking for their response/opinions so we have a proper idea of where everyone stands. Some strong views have been posted today in both directions, but I don't think that means there is any sort of consensus has been formed.
 
iansr said:
I have no sympathy for any objections based on the hassle of having to sell a current MDAC. I have a Fusion MDAC which cost a lot more than a standard unit and it will be redundant once I get the new unit. I will sell it for what I can get. C'est la vie.
As for having having to change racks, cables, move furniture around etc, that is just part of the collateral damage you have to accept when you get into this hobby.
Click to expand...

I'm very well aware that this hobby is a luxury and therefore expensive ... It was by some part money that let to the decision to back this project; the promise was to get a very high end DAC that was affordable, an upgrade to the MDAC for enthusiasts and DIYs.

Getting pushed out of a foremost DIY project by some who don't need to care about money and space, but only want the ultimate product at the expense of everything else, to me does not look like the original crowd backed project anymore. I might be wrong, but the project grows and gets new options regardless of the ones that supported a much simpler idea in the beginning. I’m okay with that, but please respect, that I would like to get my funding back and very much lose my trust in John.

I wonder why people who want the FWC and all the additional features don’t wait for the commercialized version of the MDAC2 (if that’s going to happen), as that’s what the Fusion DAC is to me.
 
Repairing 34 MDAC's is not really the best use of my time - problem is there's no indication of the fault, and most appear to work, ship the unit as I have done and discover a sticky relay or bad crystal with time....

I was trying to minimise cost - after such a "Hard" reply in the earlier post I just feel like charging the original £100 development cost for the FWC option and then use these funds to settle the issue of the salvaged units by purchasing them back and then even have some funds spare. I was only trying to reduce the impact of the FWC cost :((((
 
Maybe audio lab would purchase them back? Even at significantly less than you paid for them John.

They'd presumably have access to facilities & resources that you don't, to test, fix and sell on as refurbs and still make a profit themselves.
 
JohnW said:
Repairing 34 MDAC's is not really the best use of my time - problem is there's no indication of the fault, and most appear to work, ship the unit as I have done and discover a sticky relay or bad crystal with time....

I was trying to minimise cost - after such a "Hard" reply in the earlier post I just feel like charging the original £100 development cost for the FWC option and then use these funds to settle the issue of the salvaged units by purchasing them back and then even have some funds spare. I was only trying to reduce the impact of the FWC cost :((((
Click to expand...

Is the solution I proposed not the best way to do it?
- Salvaged buyers would get their money back
- mdac2 supporters moving to fwc would pay the bare minimum to compensate the salvaged buyers
- you would get no involvement at all with the salvaged units problems?
- it would be in the end less than 63£

Any problem with my approach ?
 
Nutron,

Are you reading my replies??? I've committed to take care of your units, not to worry about the cost impact of the FWC!

I don't want to cripple 4 years of work because I have to compromise performance and features to squeeze the design into an outgrown chassis unless I have to by popular demand. In your Master / Slave setup you can hide the slave units and thus save space.

Outside of these original 200 PFM units built and test by myself the "official" Fusion DACs will be sold at a FAR higher price! Outside of the development funds, these PFM units are being sold at cost! Also the Fusion bulk foils will not be an option due to the complexities of managing the production supply chain. I'll be hand modifying the Fusion bulk foil PFM units myself.
 
As i'm on both the MDAC2 and VFET RollerCoasters i haven't anticipated the additional cost of the FWC nor the evolution of EUR vs GBP ...

On the other hand there's two things to point out:
- MDAC2 FWC will allow every owner to sell its own MDAC then attenuating the cost instead of putting a beautiful but useless PCB on its garage shelfs.
- MDAC2 will be a no compromise design which is what i've expected when joining both projects !

So after thinking a little bt about iti'm also in for the FWC. Do the best for us john and if i have to drink famous grouse instead of aberlour for the next two years i will !

Best regards
 
Wow John, what a dilemma.

I go back to the, then, proposed future 8200CDQ UPGRADE mooted about February 2012. It was to incorporate all the features of what has evolved into the MDAC2 wide with CD slot loader. When this was not to go ahead I came onboard the MDAC2 project. Consequently I was highly delighted when you proposed the wide version of the MDAC2 (Fusion DAC). It would be my much preferred choice over the half-width version.

Having said that there must be a way if possible of accommodating those who, for whatever reason, ‘need’ an MDAC2 based on the original concept. How can these different viewpoints be reconciled? Thinking aloud:

• Do all SMD vendors operate with the same restrictions? Am I correct it is entirely, or primarily, the SMD vendor that has precipitated the present situation? Does each SMD vendor ‘project’ come with fixed (and high) overheads? Are there any other SMD vendors, with more flexibility, that could be approached?

• If there has to be only one audio PCB what is the feasibility of a dual purpose board – one primarily for either standard or wide usage but which could be retrofitted with the necessary changes for the alternative use? I’m sure this must have been considered and deemed impractical.

I have a MDAC1 (Toy) which was painstakingly modified by you during my visit to Prostějov. I’ll keep this whatever.

I also purchased a ‘second-hand’ MDAC as a donor unit to accommodate new MDAC2 boards. (I use inverted comma ‘second-hand’ because the item advertised had been sold, but the dealer arranged for a new one to be supplied direct from Audiolab at the same price). I plan to sell this if the FWC becomes available. Either way, which ever way it goes, I could live with either outcome but I am very much in the FWC camp.

One other query about the remote control: in the case of the half-width upgrade the same remote control would have been retained. If selling a donor unit complete there would be no remote control available for the Fusion DAC?

Ok, new plan there will be two payment options for the FWC:-

1. £65 + FWC "at cost" to help solve the salvage MDAC owner situation.

2. £100 + FWC "at cost", I'll buy back the salvage units, and keep the balance to help live on as per the original plan!
Click to expand...

I am content with these suggestions. I really hope we can find a way forward which doesn't disenfranchise anyone.

Roger.
 
fusion5 said:
I could send over some JD :D
Click to expand...

Ironic, I finally get a chance to venture out of my lab for the first time in four years - sitting and observing the going on's of the Wanchi wildlife, pen and paper in hand toying with ideas for the Fusion DAC front panel and the bar man cannot get my order correct - and I have a rather nice bottle of JD back in the lab!!! :)))
 
It's no consolation to those with severely limited funds and/or space, but for me anyway the price of a new HugoTT does put these cost issues into perspective.
 
JohnW said:
Ironic, I finally get a chance to venture out of my lab for the first time in four years - sitting and observing the going on's of the Wanchi wildlife, pen and paper in hand toying with ideas for the Fusion DAC front panel and the bar man cannot get my order correct - and I have a rather nice bottle of JD back in the lab!!! :)))
Click to expand...

Well, order another one!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top