Re: Subject: [Harp-L] Re: Question for Michael from Seydel

["Vern Smith" <jevern@xxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <EGS1217@xxxxxxx>
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 12:47 PM
Subject: Subject: [Harp-L] Re: Question for Michael from Seydel


> ......................... As well,  in  my very humble opinion, I can't
> imagine why her stunningly beautiful  instrument I saw and heard being 
> played by
> Michael Pelosky at SPAH 2005 would  require any retooling whatsoever. 
> Wouldn't
> that then change it so it no  longer WAS the Renaissance?  Pardon my 
> naivete,
> but why would Seydel  want or need to change it?

I am sure that Michael Timmler will have a good answer, but I would like to 
respond. I have made harmonica mouthpieces, combs, reeds, and offer a custom 
Hands-Free-Chromatic and an Ergonomic-Neck-Rack for sale.

You may be giving more credit than due to the harmonica and less credit than 
due to Polesky!

I would answer "No" to your question about it no longer being the 
Renaissance and offer some instances why Seydel (and we customers) might 
want or need some changes. Here are the reasons:

It is possible to make exactly the same product using different tools and 
procedures.   It would be possible to invest many millions of dollars to 
build an automatic factory that would produce a thousand Renaissance 
harmonicas each day.  Such a factory would require the design and 
construction of many expensive machines (generally referred to as 
"tooling").  The unit cost of the harmonicas would be very low but the 
investment in the factory to make them would be huge.  Such an operation 
would be appropriate only for a very large market demand.

At the other end of the spectrum is the way Douglas and Bobbie may have made 
their harps.  They might have done everything by hand that was possible to 
do and farmed the other tasks out to small shops. The startup investment for 
this type of operation would have been low but the cost per harp would be 
very high.  The price of the Renaissance suggests that this was the case.

Seydel must choose a point on the price-demand curve where the prices are 
lower and the sales are higher.  They can no doubt make use of their 
existing tools and machines but they must also make tooling, machines, jigs, 
and fixtures that adapt their equipment to the particular requirements of 
the Renaissance design.  I 'm sure that this is what Timmler referred to 
when he spoke of  "re-tooling"    Bottom line, it is possible that the 
process and the tools to make the Renaissance will change without the design 
being changed.

There is nothing magic about making harmonicas. Anyone who understands the 
process and has experience and resources can do as good a job as they choose 
to do. The differences in harmonicas can be mostly attributed to deliberate 
cost/quality trade-offs made to sell into a chosen market.  There will be 
opportunities to actually improve the Renaissance in which the essential 
working parts, the reeds, were the same Hohner uses in their $75 
wooden-combed 270s.

There are also, no doubt, many design details that can be changed without 
affecting either the appearance or the performance of the Renaissance. 
Making some of these changes could result in important cost reductions.

Ilus made changes in the design of the Renaissance over time and it would be 
unreasonable to expect that the same will not occur at Seydel.  Although we 
certainly don't yet know how good a job Seydel will do, it is too early in 
the game to start the hand-wringing about diminished quality.  They have the 
drawings and some Renaissance harps to use as "stalking horses"  That is, 
they can try a change and compare it to the old design.  If it improves 
performance, or reduces cost without affecting performance, it can and 
should be used.  The real danger IMO is that Seydel will pick the wrong 
point on the cost-demand curve, be unable to make a profit on the 
Renaissance, and drop it from their line.  This happened to the 2016 at 
Hohner.

A harp that looks like the Renaissance and plays and sounds as good or 
better - and costs less- will still be a Renaissance. The alternative is 
probably no Renaissance at all.

Vern