From Brian Willoughby Sent Mon, Oct 1st 2018, 05:01
From Brian Willoughby Sent Mon, Oct 1st 2018, 05:01
On Sep 29, 2018, at 2:00 PM, Kenny Balys <xxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > Thanks for all the wonderful info and for clearing up my false = impression. >=20 >=20 > Brian, if your article(s) is(are) handy why not post it(them) here on = AH? It > will find its way to the archives and I, for one, would find it very = interesting > reading. Many Transoniq Hacker issues are available in PDF. I believe that I = downloaded all that were available and searched through them, but I=E2=80=99= m not sure. I seem to recall looking for my articles, but either I = didn=E2=80=99t find them at all - because those issues aren=E2=80=99t = available - or I found them and simply forgot. I do have my own physical = copies of the Transoniq Hacker, but it would probably be a while before = I could scan them and run OCR. I=E2=80=99m sure some day they=E2=80=99ll = all be available. > As a side comment, I really think it corrupt that both Emu and Ensoniq = were > shuttered by Creative Labs which made its money from a dead simple = sound card > (the Sound Blaster) that any first year student could have built. I = have a chip > on my shoulder over this. The cultural loss to the world is tragic. I don=E2=80=99t know the Emu story, but Ensoniq nearly kicked Creative = Labs=E2=80=99 a$$ by making a Sound Blaster clone that actually took = less CPU overhead than the original hardware. I think this was mostly = due to the efficiency of PCI as compared to (E)ISA. Somehow, even with = the ISA emulation layer going, the AudioPCI and Soundscape cards took = just a tiny fraction of the available bandwidth. After Ensoniq gained computer industry visibility with their Soundscape = cards, Creative Labs saw the buyout as the only way to stay in business = - or so I assume. Then again, maybe Ensoniq was never much of a threat, = and Creative Labs just wanted to obtain the superior IP. On the flip side, the mere fact that Ensoniq were willing to sell the = entire company seems like fairly clear evidence that they were not = making enough money in the American synth/sampler manufacturing market = to stay alive without Creative Labs=E2=80=99 money. I mean, nobody can = force a company to sell unless there=E2=80=99s a hostile takeover, and I = doubt that happened to Ensoniq. At the very least, companies can protect = themselves from hostile takeovers by never selling more than 49% of = their shares into the open market. Another option would have been for = Ensoniq to spin off their audio card division and sell it to Creative = Labs, while maintaining their music instrument core as their own, = private company. I=E2=80=99m not exactly surprised that they didn=E2=80=99= t do this, considering how difficult American synth companies have found = it. Anyway, once Ensoniq's owners sold the company, I consider that to be = their death certificate. The fact that Creative Labs didn=E2=80=99t care = about musicians=E2=80=99 instruments - as opposed to video gamers=E2=80=99= toys - should not have come as a surprise to anyone. I visited Ensoniq = around this time (probably before Creative Labs bought them, since my = checks came from Ensoniq), and it was obvious that they were not exactly = flush with cash. i know nothing about how Emu ended up on the auction block - or whatever = turn of events made selling their company more attractive than = continuing with their brand. Perhaps it was chip tariffs or other = disadvantages of being an American manufacturer in an international = market. If anyone knows more detailed history on Emu-to-Creative Labs, = I=E2=80=99d be curious. Brian