Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
PETITION - Firmware Update to the Zoom B3
- Thread starter Mo'Phat
- Start date
I am not shaking my head at the inquiry and attempt, that's certainly commendable.
it's comments like these
That makes me wonder how people seriously think they somehow know more about market research than professional market researchers at big successful corporations.
it's comments like these
That makes me wonder how people seriously think they somehow know more about market research than professional market researchers at big successful corporations.
Clearly you've never worked with marketing professionals at big, successful corporations.
My comment about PYPB threads was sort of tongue in cheek, but Talkbass would be one of the first places to research. It's a small percentage of bass players but disproportionately represents effects purchases in the category. And if 95% of bass players only use an OD, then what is the purpose of Zoom making any multi-effect product, much less the varieties of B1, B2, B3, 60b, etc?
Zoom said:
This statement doesn't add up to me.
The B3 is inherently non-simple and marketed towards players that like to use 3 effects. If they had that market research previously they never would have released the B3 in the first place. It seems the B3 is considered a financial failure and lesson learned the hard way to the Zoom corporation.
Translation "There is more money to be made selling additional products to the few that really want extra features, than to increase the sales appeal of a currently existing product".
I expected Zoom to snub us bass players. If they had the intention of upgrading their bass products they would have already done so. The release of the MS-60B and B1on revealed that they were moving in the direction of less features.
Zoom said:
This also doesn't add up. They are releasing a B1Xon so apparently they still feel like there is some demand for bass players that use expression pedals. Perhaps not at the B3 price point, but at the lower price point of the B1on.
Actually, I AM a marketing professional at a big, successful corporation. Well not really, my current company is mid-sized and privately owned. I am a former marketing professor and have spent my whole life working in market research.
Running production lines based on "a small percentage of bass players but disproportionately represents effects purchases in the category" is exactly the wrong way to judge general market demand.
Who said 95% of bass players only use OD? I said it was my casual observation on the stages that 95% use no effects at all, and the exceptions are usually one OD pedal, which is NOT to be confused with legitimate research. Clearly there is a small market for bass multi-effects unit, just not enough of one to ramp up new R&D efforts on an old product.
That you are in the group at which I'm poking fun would explain why you didn't get the joke.
Didn't say it was the way to judge general market demand. I said it would be the first place to look and consider when doing market research for bass players who use effects. I don't disagree at all with your underlining point that Zoom wouldn't make a business investment in something with no return. I disagree in denigrating the folks here who are reacting to a response from Zoom that seems contradictory at face value. They are valid reactions, even though I don't think we have the right to demand free extras on a product that I think is already a nice value with its existing feature set.
Well, you did make the statement in the context of supporting the Zoom response that market research shows bass players don't use many effects.
Right. But that's not the Zoom response. The response is bass players don't use pedals, so they aren't going to add more effects/functionality to the B3. The reality is they dont project to sell a significant amount of additional units based on updating the current firmware, which makes total sense. The guitar models didnt get more effects and updated functionality as a thanks to people who had already bought them. My guess is that sales flattened to a point that an update was projected to generate x amount of additional revenue, where x is a significant ROI for the dev/deployment cost of pushing a firmware update.
That you are in the group at which I'm poking fun would explain why you didn't get the joke.
Pleeease, elaborate.
Zoom has been working in this highly specialized market for 30+ years and clearly knows a thing or two about what sells and what is good for their bottom line. People who chatter on a relatively limited discussion board....and TBFX is microscopic in the grand scheme of the worldwide market.....have no access to that 30+ years of amassed data and knowledge. For some random poster to say "they don't know what they are doing, they should talk to us" is not valid. Valid in the sense of "correct". Zoom is doing just fine. They don't need our advice on how to make a successful product.
Yes, and I stand by that. Zoom knows the global demand for bass effects better than you or me or almost anybody on this forum. You can play every variant of the Big Muff and know what groundbreaking compressor is coming out next month but you still don't know how much product Zoom moved in Columbia last decade, or how many B3s were sold globally, or what their profit margin is on the bass division. If they are not updating firmware it's because they KNOW the numbers don't pan out to make it worthwhile. I added that my personal experience reflects their findings of bass players not being big effects users. My personal experience does not count as research since it is anecdotal and only includes some east-coast performing musicians from rock bands, which is a very small sliver of the relevant market.
Yes, this is correct. Zoom was taking the diplomatic route rather than saying outright "We're not dumping any more money into that old thing with zero profit potential, you should buy something new from us if you want that functionality." So how does that make it correct for random internet people to say "You should come to us, we know better than your research"?
We are at 173 signatures.
I, for one, wasn't trying to 'cause a large electronics corporation to change their R&D direction' in any way.
I started the petition as an effort to consolidate the users who purchased a piece of equipment and had reasonable expectations of firmware enhancements based on Zoom's other offerings - from the G3 all the way to the B1. I started it because nobody else did.
Sure, the 173 signatures maybe represent $8,650 of profit to Zoom. Maybe. ($200/unit, $30 materials?, $70 fabrication labor, $30 freight/importation to US, $20 misc. costs = $50/unit profit?) I bought two of the B3's, and have a couple of Zoom digital recorders, so I'm not a huge cash cow for them, personally.
Sure, each of the 173 might be a small drop in the bucket.
Sure, their market research may have been thorough and exhaustive, and in the grand scheme of where they put their focus - appeasing a mere 173 users might be cost-prohibitive.
The firmware upgrades that were being requested were not ground-breaking and (theoretically) could have been 'easy' for Zoom to do - seeing as how they've already been done for other similar products.
Zoom said no. I could keep fighting, but I'm not going to. There are probably 172 users that care more about it than I do, so I encourage someone to take the reins.
Far be it from anyone random on the internet to question the decisions of marketing professionals.
If the intent of these posts is to share knowledge in order to correct misinformation, there may be a better way to go about that.
Think of it more as...if you don't agree with the professional experts, don't jump to posting how it's because they don't know as much as you do about their product/industry.
You would think rhythm section guys would be able to relate, as marketing is ALSO one of those things that those who don't do it think it looks easy and they could probably do it even better than you if they tried.
You would think rhythm section guys would be able to relate, as marketing is ALSO one of those things that those who don't do it think it looks easy and they could probably do it even better than you if they tried.
I disagree with this premise. Their marketing is stellar - their expertise in selling their product is phenomenal. I proposed their market research is flawed based on their message to me - which was most-likely sent from a CSR with a script. Does Zoom know how to conduct market research? Certainly. Did they ask the right questions or populate their focus group on the correct demographic? Arguable. Omitting "pedal junkie" users skews the research.
Question\Observation:
Following the 80/20 rule (80% of profits come from 20% of your customers) wouldn't it make since that this forum and Zoom related treads would be a good source for refining the product and client profile.
Can you comment on how marketing research would typically view such a source of info?
Thanks for your insight.
DS
This is why I plan to replace my B3 with a B1Xon. 5 effects per patch. Same effects (minus the stereo effects) as the B3.
I will run the B1Xon into a passive DI. I just need to use my current B3 presets and manually program them into the B1Xon, and add the extras in the two available slots. Sell the B3. I will miss the ease of Edit&Share.
They "could" update the B3 similar to the G3 v2, but I doubt the marketshare is worth the cost.
I agree that most bass players don't use many effects, however my preamps / amps usually have or I add compressor, limiter, PEQ or GEQ. I also use a Source Audio Soundblox Pro Bass Envelope Filter, and can set one channel with dirt. Translating that to the B3 that is easily 4-5 slots and that isn't that many effects or anything outrageous IMO.
With the B3, I have to lose compressor or eq to add dirt, filters, reverb, delay, whatever.
At least the B1Xon will get me closer if not there but will be more of a PITA to program; and my G5 is close to having everything I need (except easy foot controlled program change).
So my quest for my ultimate, cost effective, all-in-one modeling unit for bass continues.
I will run the B1Xon into a passive DI. I just need to use my current B3 presets and manually program them into the B1Xon, and add the extras in the two available slots. Sell the B3. I will miss the ease of Edit&Share.
They "could" update the B3 similar to the G3 v2, but I doubt the marketshare is worth the cost.
I agree that most bass players don't use many effects, however my preamps / amps usually have or I add compressor, limiter, PEQ or GEQ. I also use a Source Audio Soundblox Pro Bass Envelope Filter, and can set one channel with dirt. Translating that to the B3 that is easily 4-5 slots and that isn't that many effects or anything outrageous IMO.
With the B3, I have to lose compressor or eq to add dirt, filters, reverb, delay, whatever.
At least the B1Xon will get me closer if not there but will be more of a PITA to program; and my G5 is close to having everything I need (except easy foot controlled program change).
So my quest for my ultimate, cost effective, all-in-one modeling unit for bass continues.
I really thought that the philosophy behind these 3 at a time multi effects was that they would likely be integrated into a pedalboard. They tried the B9 and it didn't exactly take over the world. It seems to me that the market trend is toward smaller units, the M5, the H9, etc. Also there's the whole IOS, phone and tablet trend. Plus the Fractal audio is available for people who have huge budgets and huge ambitions with effects. I'm still happy with the B3 as it is. Sure, I could design something Id like better but how many people would agree with me and buy it? I still like to mix and match.
If I understand what you're asking, I think you're talking about product development, not marketing research. Personally I think product developers can benefit greatly from forums, see where there are issues or holes in the marketplace that they didn't think of, and perhaps poach an improvement idea or two. But in the situation I was addressing...when a company's marketing department determines there's not a strong enough demand to justify upgrading firmware...a forum like this is not going to give insight into practical real-world demand. TBFX members are not typical consumers.
How about this: On the "Basses" subforum, the Wishbass thread is usually on the first page. There's a lot of talk about Wishbasses! Folks in that thread really love 'em! That might lead one to think there is a worthwhile profitable market for Wishbasses. But how many people have ever actually come across one unrelated to this forum? Few, I would think, especially since it appears like half the ones ever built are in the collections of two particular forum members.
A product developer might look at that thread and think "maybe we should do something with that ambrosia maple like Wish uses, it's very dramatic". But if a marketing guy looks at the thread and says "clearly from all this talk, bassists enjoy sanding and prepwork and we can save money by not doing the finishing ourselves, let's put out a line of Wishbass-style instruments through Guitar Center" then that dude's gonna be unemployed soon. Because he's drawing conclusions about what the general market wants from a non-general-market source.also, regarding "Omitting 'pedal junkie' users skews the research."...I don't see how they omitted 'pedal junkie' users. They are looking at the market as a whole and not coming here to give special consideration to 'pedal junkies'...that's not omission, that's being flat and unbiased. They aren't weeding anyone out and they aren't seeding anyone in.
And there was me thinking that people like us were the market for these products. How silly of me.
It's not silly, it's cognitive bias and it's extremely common. I have had many clients who cannot understand why the classic rock morning show they love so much is not the perfect place to advertise, even tho their target demographic is 17 year old girls.
People like us are PART of Zoom's target market...but a very small part of it. The vast majority of their purchasers are "general market" and not effects fanatics.
