Re: [AH] Looking for primary sources on why synth designers leave the kit-packing game.

From Ben Bradley
Sent Mon, Nov 12th 2018, 04:36

My father was a ham, built Heathkits, and got me a Heathkit portable
radio for my 10th birthday (1967). I didn't understand how it worked
back then, but later as a teen I read the "Circuit Description" part
of the manual, as well as the same section of every Heathkit manual I
could find, and that (among other things) really helped me learn
electronics.

I never made a synth kit (the closest I got was ordering the manuals
for Paia's 2700 series modules), but I can appreciate this:

> In MOTM=E2=80=99s case, I included not only schematics, but full, detaile=
d theory of operation. Why? Because the goal of kitbuilding, and what you S=
HOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR, is to LEARN.

I think most kit builders won't notice or understand a theory of
operation, but some will be interested enough to read it, and if it
starts or continues them along a journey of learning electronics, its
value will be much greater than the cost of a kit. Of course, the
problem is how do you "monetize" this when you sell the kit - people
can't understand the value until well after they'v bought it.

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 8:23 PM <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> For further perspective, you might explore the history of Heathkit:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathkit
>
> I built a few ham radio kits back in the day. I not only built them, but =
also learned how to align and calibrate them. So, they provided valuable le=
ssons in knowing how they work and how to maintain them. It was also part o=
f the knowledge required to pass the exam to receive a radio license. I app=
reciate receiving the same kind of knowledge when building well documented =
synth kits (Paul and John B products are good examples). I look at the sche=
matics as I put them together to understand the purpose of each component. =
-Karl.
>
> On November 11, 2018 at 5:38 PM Jimmy Moore <xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> Thank you Paul, these are great points!  The last bit is particularly rel=
evant in my case.  Cheers for taking the time to share.
>
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:21 AM Paul Schreiber < xxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wro=
te:
>>
>> a)      You have to make a 100% on every kit. Now try doing that for 1.8=
million parts (what MOTM shipped)
>>
>> b)      The prevailing mindset is: a kit should be CHEAPER than assemble=
d. This is 100% INCORRECT. A kit should be 25-50% MORE than assembled. See =
(1) above.
>>
>> c)       There is only so much you can do with resistors, caps and op am=
ps. The better caps/resistors/ICs are 100% SMT now. Limiting to thru-hole i=
n 2018 is just silly.
>>
>> d)      In MOTM=E2=80=99s case, I started running into =E2=80=98The Jigs=
aw Puzzle=E2=80=99 issue: everyone wanted BIGGER kits, with MORE parts. Whi=
ch takes MORE time. See (1) above.
>>
>> e)      In MOTM=E2=80=99s case, I included not only schematics, but full=
, detailed theory of operation. Why? Because the goal of kitbuilding, and w=
hat you SHOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR, is to LEARN. Not to blindly solder doo-d=
ad 23 into position 14. When I see =E2=80=9Ccan I use a TL072 for a TL082=
=E2=80=9D people are not learning. When I see =E2=80=9Ccan I use a 1.1K for=
 this 1K pullup resistor?=E2=80=9D people are not learning. The point is no=
t to learn to FOLLOW a cookbook. The point is learning is to WRITE the cook=
book. The point is NOT to =E2=80=98save money=E2=80=99.
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul S.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: analogue-return-237220-synth1=xxxxxxxxx.xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx [mailto:=
analogue-return-237220-synth1=xxxxxxxxx.xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx] On Behalf Of Jim=
my Moore
>> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2018 11:29 AM
>> To: analogue heaven
>> Subject: [AH] Looking for primary sources on why synth designers leave t=
he kit-packing game.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm writing my qualifying exam and one of the questions has to do with t=
he practicality of providing embedded hardware kits for non-expert users.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd like to use the modular synth community as an example of the invisib=
le labor of providing such a service to a smaller subset of a broader targe=
t audience.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have any citable resources (interviews, forum or blog posts,=
 web pages, formal statements, etc) explaining why people leave the kit pac=
king game?  I'm thinking of MOTM's Paul Schreiber or Bridechamber, specific=
ally.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>
>
>