Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
At 01:18 PM 8/23/2002, Liebig, Steuart A. wrote: >That stuff helps for sure, but I think it only reaches people who are >already familiar with the idea and pretty close to making a decision to >go >for it anyway. > >A manufacturer can't make that happen, they can only hope to be in the >right place to ride the wave >when it does. The musicians are ultimately what makes it happen. > >** herein lies therub, no? i guess my thinking would be that they have >someone like benny reitveld (spelling, sorry) who is doing this stuff and >all. people notice people like him doing stuff, people even notice david >torn. if you use some of their mugs, maybe it helps people who are >already >familiar with the sound say, "aha, that's how he did it" - - or maybe >not. >it will not be on the level of the fender stratocaster - - not yet a >least. the thing is, it seems like there could be a small window of >opportunity for some niche marketing by these companies. Sure, I don't think anybody disagrees with that. I certainly don't. It helps some, I just don't think it helps all that much more than the fact that a known artist is using the stuff in the first place. So far as I know Gibson intends to do various artist relation efforts with whoever they can in relation to the upcoming Echoplex Plus dealy. In fact, that's why I know about Benny's use of the Echoplex. Gibson called me about wanting to get him a copy of LoopIV. You guys talk about these industry folks like they don't know this stuff, when they are the ones doing it every single day for years. By now they have it pretty well dialed in as to when endorsers are effective, when they are not, and how much to invest in it. When it isn't happening it is more because it just wasn't making sense budget or organizationally or timing-wise. But the big problem is, who are you going to use for looping endorsements that are really big enough to matter? There are some people who are somewhat known and who use looping techniques, but they are not very mainstream or popular. A manufacturer has to consider whether the investment in that endorser will actually result in more sales than it costs. In some cases it probably will but oftentimes not. But what really needs to happen is for some artists to become really huge with looping being a big part of what they do. They will be well known for looping and many people will want it because of them. Those people make the best endorsers, because they are selling the stuff even without an endorsement deal just by being who they are. I don't think there is anybody really like that out there and I'm hoping to see it change. >In dealing with musical instrument industry for a few years, I've found >that musicians are incredibly conservative people when it comes to how >they make music. Sure, they'll get funny haircuts and wear crazy clothes, >but they won't try a new sound. Most of them don't want to try new things, >unless they see somebody else doing it successfully first. "Successfully" >is the key. When they hear music that they like and see that others like >it >too, then they want to emulate the music and the musicians doing it. They >become willing to try whatever technique or box is necessary. No video in >a >store gets them to that point. > >* correct on all accounts. but you have david torn doing stuff on albums >by bowie, etc. it seems that those could be the considered someone using >it successfully - - though not on korn levels Yes, that's something, although to me dt playing with Tori Amos is a much bigger deal since she's actually likely to get a bunch of hit singles off an album and much bigger sales. Her fans are a lot younger and more fanatical too. Still, and unfortunately, I think in both cases the focus will be on David Bowie and Tori Amos and everything else related to it will be overshadowed by them. If Tori were looping her voice and piano on her album and in concerts that would be something. >I think the steps for a new instrument becoming a popular instrument go >something like this: > >- a new idea/instrument comes along from some bright person or company. > - - etc > >** re your time line. i guess the question comes down to where are we in >the cycle? Right now I would say real-time looping is still stuck in an early adopter stage. It's well past the beginning experimenter stage. But the early adopter stage has been going a long time and things haven't yet bloomed past that to any mass acceptance stage. In my opinion it is still in a phase where most people doing it are still figuring it out and learning how to use the ideas well enough to really incorporate it into their music. Hopefully more of them will and we can look forward to some great and compelling music in the future, music that captures the imagination and interest of a wider audience who then want to play like that too. That's why I think people like Andre going out and trying to be teachers of looping is a good thing, and probably what the whole process really needs right now. > is gibson (fer instance) missing the window right now? Is Gibson missing what window right now? Do you think there is something significantly different right now from before? I honestly don't see that window of opportunity right now, although I hope one opens sometime soon. I think Gibson may be one of the few companies that has approached this right, whether by design or not, in that they have given their looping product and the idea of looping a good long time to develop. They've been patient when others expected overnight success. They keep it on a slow burn so it doesn't cost them much to keep it going, and so it will be there ready to ride if a wave of popular acceptance finally comes. They haven't blown their wad on marketing when the timing was wrong, either for them or the market. They've invested effort towards fixing problems that got in the way of sales, like production or organizational related issues that used to be more of a problem than now. After all, up until only very recently there was a perpetual waiting list for the Echoplex, so there wasn't any real reason to put effort into marketing something when you they couldn't really keep up with the demand that they had anyway. To me that is the right approach at this stage. Keep things simmering along until it's really ready to take off. Probably that has a lot to do with being a 100+ year old guitar company. They are used to musical instruments taking a while to get going and then lasting a while when they do succeed, and probably they are used to seeing things rise and fall with the fickle nature of pop culture. They don't think like a consumer technology company that tries to make everything run on a 6-month product cycle and flashes out of existence after a short hot life. Sure, there could be things like better manuals, or sales videos, or whatever. Those are things that are being worked on now in some plodding, yet economical fashion. But I really don't think any of those things just by themselves are going to sell a whole lot more units than are being sold already. We need some larger shift in the musical culture. It will make a minor difference, sure, but nothing big like for example, if hip hop producers were using live looping the way they use the MPC2000. >Like Trey Anastasio and the Boomerang. He doesn't do ads or endorsements >for it, he >just uses it all the time. So his fans buy it. > >* the what-if being, what if they did do some advert stuff with him? Could they even afford to? Will spending $15,000+ (or whatever it costs) on advertising with Trey Anastasio result in more than $15,000 profit on Boomerang sales, above and beyond what they sell anyway just because he's already using it? That's a lot of Boomerangs, but that's what it would take to make such a thing worthwhile. A risky thing to contemplate with a small niche product. It might be easier to just make sure Trey is happy and keeps using it. To me the sequence is something like this: 1. Trey Anastasio does not use Boomerang yet, sales are what they are. 2. Trey buys one, starts using it extensively in Phish performances and his later solo projects. Sales of Boomerangs improve a lot because Phish fans are into it and follow everything Trey does anyway. 3. Boomerang does hypothetical ad with Trey someday. Costs a lot of money to do, but only a few more sales occur beyond what was happening anyway just due to his constant touring and playing the boomerang. I remember Boomerang went to the NAMM show one year. Their booth was filled with people fascinated with their pedal every time I went by. They never went to the show again, and later I recall them complaining that the cost of going ended up being far higher than the sales they ended up getting as a result. Electrix said the same this year, and I've heard it before. That's a real danger for a small musical instrument maker. The cost of advertising is high compared to your income, and it might not do you nearly as much good as the free advertising of good musicians playing good music in front of a lot of people with your products. kim ______________________________________________________________________ Kim Flint | Looper's Delight kflint@loopers-delight.com | http://www.loopers-delight.com