The John Westlake/Lakewest MDAC/FDAC, VFET and Detox

[Stuart Frazer]

I should not have posted that. Have deleted it now. I am sure John will find a solution.

Wow, I'm not sure what to believe now, or what this says about you. Your first post (now deleted) is possibly very honest, the kind of honesty we would like from @JohnW And then you reverse your thinking?

John has brought much of this situation on himself. He cannot take all the good bits, i.e. money and absolve himself of responsibility. He has had offers of Project Management help and more here but chooses to control almost everything himself.

I've no doubt that John is reading these posts from behind the curtains. It would be much better if he manned up and discussed a way forward with us.

 

[Timcat]

Unfortunately there needs to be two versions of the DevDAC board. There is really no way around it because:

One version that fit the original MDAC chassis it is needed for those that have bought donor units else they will want their money back which is not possible because it is a large amount.

Another version for those that have sold their MDAC many years ago and do not want to re-buy a used MDAC or would rather have a new chassis.

Personally I am option two and would not like to have to buy a used MDAC, if I could find one, in worse condition and double the price of the one I sold 5 years ago.

So I find it is easy to understand why it is impossible to choose one over the other.

From what you say, and in the absence of any reply from J.W., the inference is that a board or boards have yet to be designed or prototyped.

As for my other questions, I guess that we are no closer to an answer.

 

[Stuart Frazer]

From what you say, and in the absence of any reply from J.W., the inference is that a board or boards have yet to be designed or prototyped.

As for my other questions, I guess that we are no closer to an answer.

There is a prototype Rev 2 board that John made up, but it is a rats nest (John's description). This was listened to by a few investor visitors to John. The general feedback was positive and John was going to revise various bits and Jarek was going to code the firmware and they would design a working layout Rev 3 and maybe 4 board prior to production. Then Jarek leaves the project for some unknown reason and we are back in familiar territory.

 

[ti33er]

Jarek‘s depart could be for health reasons IMO ...I still think one day we will see something and joining with this 3rd party company could get the ball rolling - i.e. if it’s ProJect, they know how to get Chassis out the door

 

[sam_cat]

Don’t you think you’re encouraging him to piss around? I’m assuming that you can afford to have this charitable attitude? Unfortunately not everyone can so please stop encouraging him you sound like a teenage fanboi

No.
I have written the money off, and given up hope on seeing anything. Atm I couldnt afford it anyway ( ), situations change.
But if JohnW can deliver something then good, IMHO getting a manufacturer on board is probably the best way forward, but I am not in Johns shoes, and not in his situation. He needs to make the decision that is right for him, his family and his business.

Recent events have brought into focus whats actually important in life, and changed my focus in life somewhat.

Its just my position, my opinion. Your welcome to your own.

 

[flapland]

This feels very much like a thread on a model railway forum regarding a small supplier who overstretched their business skills and wasn't 100% forthcoming in terms of comms and also financial position. Many posts are the same and the general view on that site is to walk away and forget it.

 

[russel]

There is a prototype Rev 2 board that John made up, but it is a rats nest (John's description). This was listened to by a few investor visitors to John. The general feedback was positive and John was going to revise various bits and Jarek was going to code the firmware and they would design a working layout Rev 3 and maybe 4 board prior to production. Then Jarek leaves the project for some unknown reason and we are back in familiar territory.

The very least John could do is ship a working DAC board with minimal software that just allows it to play, then hopefully we can do the rest ourselves. That is at least achievable in a short timescale and show he is serious about finishing the project.

 

[Stunsworth]

The very least John could do is ship a working DAC board with minimal software that just allows it to play, then hopefully we can do the rest ourselves. That is at least achievable in a short timescale and show he is serious about finishing the project.

As far as I'm aware the board hasn't been designed yet. There was some ambiguity about whether or not it would be designed to fit into the existing MDAC case - but with a new front and rear panel, I guess it depends on whether anything come of the deal he's trying to arrange with an established manufacturer.

 

[Space is the Place]

This feels very much like a thread on a model railway forum regarding a small supplier who overstretched their business skills and wasn't 100% forthcoming in terms of comms and also financial position. Many posts are the same and the general view on that site is to walk away and forget it.

Did they invest £100,000?

Lets say the board and the panels to go with it do eventually became a reality, would it be a realistic assumption that they'd be north of £1000 in price?

So if i've invested £400 in an MDAC, another £400 in development etc, plus the £1k for the board/panels, that makes a £1800 Dac, my question would be, is it worth it?

This is purely hypothetical of course (The Hypothetical Dac).

 

[Stunsworth]

...my question would be, is it worth it?

I suspect that's a question many of us will be asking. At the moment my feeling is it won't be, but I'll make up my mind after seeing the costings.

 

[flapland]

Buyers invested at least the sum without return but its not clear how much the business owner invested. Ready to run railway models are expensive items, for example an express steam locomotive model is around £150-180 and the tooling for such a model is well over a £100k. Pretty much for the UK market 100% Chinese manufactured.

 

[Space is the Place]

What i've learned from this little saga, is don't invest in anything that doesn't have a clearly defined and managed deadline/timescale.
I remember at the start someone volunteered to manage the project, but the idea of someone managing it was ditched because the project would end up compromised.

In retrospect, a compromised Dac in the hand, is worth two uncompromising Dacs in the bush...

 

[Timcat]

There is a prototype Rev 2 board that John made up, but it is a rats nest (John's description). This was listened to by a few investor visitors to John. The general feedback was positive and John was going to revise various bits and Jarek was going to code the firmware and they would design a working layout Rev 3 and maybe 4 board prior to production. Then Jarek leaves the project for some unknown reason and we are back in familiar territory.

So, no prototype of the production board or boards have been produced.

 

[Stunsworth]

So, no prototype of the production board or boards have been produced.

No.

 

[Timcat]

Jarek‘s depart could be for health reasons IMO ...I still think one day we will see something and joining with this 3rd party company could get the ball rolling - i.e. if it’s ProJect, they know how to get Chassis out the door

My gut tells me they fell out. If Jarek departed on good terms, whether ill or not, I would have expected him to have at least left his working files with J.W. According to J.W. he did not.

Agree re. Project, but with no firmware and not prototype board yet, we must be at least 6 months away from production. Furthermore, I would expect Project would only proceed on the basis of a board that would fit inside a case that matches their other products (for future use in one) and not within an old MDAC case. If you think this through, assuming J.W. is doing a deal with a firm like Project, the obvious option for them would be to simply offer to supply the pfm contributors with their commercial product at cost.

 

[Timcat]

John W.,

At post 804 I asked you the following questions:

"Please might I ask for a little further clarification.

You say that "the DevDAC will be designed to fit within the original MDAC chassis". Does this mean that the board or boards have yet to be designed or prototyped?

Has any of the design work for the new front and rear panels been completed, or have any prototypes been produced?

You say that "DevDAC is the design that was "publicly" listened to just before the pandemic hit", but in an earlier post, you referred to this as a "rats nest". As I understand the term design, it means the largely completed device, including the boards etc. Please would you clarify what you mean by the design."

Some other members have very kindly tried to answer my questions. However, I am still waiting to hear directly from you. Would you please be so kind as to let me have your answers.

 

[2ManyBoxes]

I think that if you pay up front on an air product i.e. one that only exists as a vague idea in the designer's head, you are taking on a big risk of losing all of your investment.

From what I've read and how long this has been going on, I'd say that the designer has either had a mental block or a complete mental breakdown. Your chances of getting anything back are very, very slim.

I think that pursuing the guy at this point is probably counter-productive. You might even drive him into doing something drastic.

Let it go; chalk it up to experience; move on.

 

[Stunsworth]

If you think this through, assuming J.W. is doing a deal with a firm like Project, the obvious option for them would be to simply offer to supply the pfm contributors with their commercial product at cost.

That's what John was suggesting last week, but reading between the lines the deal with that manufacturer (I don't know who) hasn't yet been finalised however there's a second manufacturer interested. That second deal will mean that John has to give up more of his IP (again I don't know who the second manufacturer is, or the nature of the difference in the two deals).

John now seems to be suggesting that the board will fit in the old MDAC case, which I don't understand unless the second manufacturer is Audiolab and they have a warehouse of unused MDAC cases to use for the new DAC.

I'm confused as to what's actually happening (as you may have noticed).

 

[Timcat]

John now seems to be suggesting that the board will fit in the old MDAC case, which I don't understand unless the second manufacturer is Audiolab and they have a warehouse of unused MDAC cases to use for the new DAC.

I'm confused as to what's actually happening (as you may have noticed).

Neither do I and so am I!

 

[Space is the Place]

That's what John was suggesting last week, but reading between the lines the deal with that manufacturer (I don't know who) hasn't yet been finalised however there's a second manufacturer interested. That second deal will mean that John has to give up more of his IP (again I don't know who the second manufacturer is, or the nature of the difference in the two deals).

John now seems to be suggesting that the board will fit in the old MDAC case, which I don't understand unless the second manufacturer is Audiolab and they have a warehouse of unused MDAC cases to use for the new DAC.

I'm confused as to what's actually happening (as you may have noticed).

The existing MDAC will require the board, front and back panels to be replaced, so all that's left will be the sleeve and power supply.