The Role of R&D in Product Development

With all respect to those who have written so eloquently, most high end audio manufacturers are remarkably small companies.  Many with less than ten employees, including the owner.  So, no "departments".  Everybody does everything from answering the phone, assembly to shipping.  It's the owner who does the new product development and marketing.

@kevemaher 

Seemingly like everyone else, the hidden message in your first post went right over my head.

Now that it’s been clarified, I disagree with it. Equating "snake oil" products with shoddy engineering does not seem to reflect reality.

Products having absolutely no bearing on sound quality despite the false promises and flat-out lies oozing from their marketing materials can nonetheless be beautifully made; whether they actually do anything of value besides their primary purpose of separating credulous audiophiles from their Social Security checks is besides the point.

For some unfathomable reason you bring up Paul McGowan as a purveyor of snake oil; in reality, PS Audio is probably one of the audio companies most likely to adhere to the engineering best practices you enunciate in your first post. 

Under his kindly grandpa airs, Uncle Paul is a ruthless huckster, but we all know that. He is also a quasi-historic elder statesman in this industry. Think what you will of PS Audio products, they’ve been at the forefront of innovation on more than one occasion, and even when they’re familiar they still do what they’re supposed to do.

So... I don’t know. Interesting thread though :)

@devinplombier 

Thanks for the post. You eloquently describe the reason why I did not name names. I was asked by someone else's post. I mindlessly complied. I mentioned Mr. McGowan because I've seen his videos. They are creepy. I will not engage in any more targeted attack on anyone. I leaves me vulnerable to cherry picking, as I've seen.

I know nothing about the company. I've never owned nor even evaluated any of their product. they may make really good stuff for all I know.

Please look at the big picture here. You may disagree. That's fine, but picking a part of what I wrote and diving down on that is missing my point completely.

Please step back and look at the big picture.

@coppy777 

You are correct. I may have mentioned in this thread that I was employee #3 in a Silicon Valley startup in telecomm when that was hot. 

Yeah, we struggled and took on al lot of tasks. I built the lab, hired people, designed the optics, all the detection, the feedback loop for stability, performed rigorous testing and calibration and had a lot of input on packaging.

There was however, the understanding that as we grew, we would need to put in place teams from each discipline. It was understood that this (along with gobs of startup cash) was the way to grow and prosper.

Small boutique companies are exciting. One may be enticed by their offerings. Sometimes the ones who started the company want it to remain small. This can be a successful way to run a business if it is kept small. There is always the possibility that because many functions are done by one person, something important might be overlooked. The customer should be aware of this from the beginning.

As a hypothetical, imagine that you've developed a gizmo that you think people may value highly. I contend that it is difficult to remain unbiased when someone else in the company or the customer points out a problem or has some constructive criticism.The "Hey, I designed it so there can't be anything wrong with it" attitude. I've been there before myself.

(This last is from my direct experience with a boutique tonearm manufacturer. I purchased an arm from them. After installing the arm and using it and praising its quality, I wrote an email to the inventor indicating certain places where I thought improvements could be made. I heard nothing back. After I made several attempts to get through to him, I realized that he had probably blocked me.) He just couldn't cope with my constructive criticism. I still have the arm, but it sits in box now.

Multiple disciplines in an organization help to prevent this sort of bias affecting goods developed and sold. There are exceptions of course. These systems may break down. But there will always be consequences down the line.

One can accept all I've written and go out and buy that product from a small company despite my warnings.

The sole reason that I wrote this post is to raise the awareness of possible quality and performance problems with a product that comes from a company that does not have the input that different disciplines bring to product development and manufacturing. The old "caveat emptor".

Please step back and look at the big picture.

@kevemaher 

I’m happy to, but respectfully you didn’t paint it very well.

If there is a reverse correlation at all between snake-oilishness and rigorous product development standards, it is tenuous at best.

Further diluting your point, there are one-man shops out there with zero organizational standards that turn out great-sounding, beautiful, valuable gear.

If you wish to denounce the lies and misrepresentations abundant in some companies’ mendacious marketing materials that cynically assume all audiophiles are gullible imbeciles, I’m all in support :)