In Reply to: RE: Should we send a "representative" to Magnepan? posted by gentlegiantfan on October 17, 2011 at 09:57:19:
"Quality" is unfortunately an emotional issue. There are many definitions, including Crosby's (_Quality_Is_Free_) "conformance to requirements" which isn't as simplistic as it sounds. Some problems come about when customer and supplier don't agree on requirements; I think taping up mylar on a $5K speaker is unacceptable, but according to some accounts that is/was standard practice at Magnepan, and they hopefully have the data to show it doesn't significantly impair the sound or reduce longevity (but what _is_ significant, and how long should speakers last?).
It's really all about money. What is the customer willing to pay, what effort is the supplier willing to expend, and what is the most efficient way to meet the supplied quality level? Throw in the ability of the customer to switch at will (no long-term supply contract) and things get murkier still.
Preventing "defects" efficiently is always a good thing, and hand production processes can benefit from many best practices. But we don't need NASA quality here in terms of failure prevention, and some folks become so invested in defect prevention that they become inefficient; the cost of prevention _can_ be more than the benefit.
I agree, though, I'd like more information on Magnepan's manufacturing (including quality) systems. And as frugal as those folks are, I suspect they'd be open to ideas that improve their customers' experience and lower Magnepan's total cost, if they weren't barraged with them and if the ideas were presented respectfully. That's an advantage of funneling things through a single representative like Josh.
Dave
--it's close enough for jazz...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Should we send a "representative" to Magnepan? - DaveStL 11:34:26 10/17/11 (1)
- RE: Should we send a "representative" to Magnepan? - josh358 14:12:28 10/17/11 (0)