Edenlights, you do make a good point. Some dealers just don't have the option of choosing AMX or Crestron. I can use AMX, but have always used Crestron. I started as a crestron programmer coming from IT. Now that I have my own company I can't get dealership. The sales rep called me a week before CEDIA to meet him in Denver and then blew me off. I didn't even get past introducing my self. So I refuse to be a Crestron dealer for now. HomeLogic works fine for me. I'm waiting to see what Savant is up to for the high-end and of course Lifeware.

I'm definitley NOT dissing 2-way as a whole I just find that from a laymans point of view the ability to see or hear what you want to accomplish is more important than its viewability on a screen. Can it be valuable? Absolutley. Will it make or break a system based SOLELY on performance - probably not.

For those who have spent a better part of their time with AMX or Crestron it is the norm so "Anything else would be uncivilized" (couldn't help myself:-). The point being that the layperson, as automation begins to move more mainstream will be impressed by the 2 way capabilities of the better systems but it won't necessarily sway them on a purchase if actual functionality is similar. If you are providing the best for the best than by all means include it. My point was to point out a difference between monitoring and feeback. Monitoring be it volume, lights, security etc is of far more value than feedback (hence why I made the comment about the choice of those words). The best feedback is our eyes and ears.

How many years have you had customers ask you why the volume level on some receivers counts down to zero as the volume went up? To the customer that "feedback" meant absolutely nothing. Me also working in pro audio knows that in db you are working towards unity gain where the input signal equals the output signal, which again means nothing if your amplifier impedance wasn't properly matched.

The receivers that show an onscreen or on dsiply bar graph representing the volume level or poisition of the volume knob is relative and tells you nothing about the actual volume of the system!

Race analogy:

A race car driver (the end user) needs a speedometer and other diagnostic tools limitedley (there focus is on driving the car/enjoying the system), whereas the crew NEEDS complete diagnostics to optimize the vehicle performance, troubleshoot etc.

Not the best analogy but I think my point is clear - many features of the hi-end control systems are more important to the integrator than they are to the end user. They may be of EXTREME value to the integrator for a number of reasons where the end user just wants the system to work, work well, reliably, and consistently. An easy to use system is more important to most customers than fancy gui's and relative information. That's why the ipod is so popular (including it's integration with itunes) - which is also an argument why an integrated software hardware approach ala AMX/Cresrtron is better than the software model with generic hardware.

but the feedback is a relative position, it doesn't matter what the number or graphic is, you just want to be able to see what the current level is, compared to your "normal" level, whatever that may be.

I agree. "commitment" probably wans't the best choice of words but my intention was to point out that custom av is an evolution of the retail model where moving boxes was the norm. Now retail is moving a tiny bit into the CI channel because moving boxes doesn't cut it anymore. If retail is moving into CI then where is CI moving too? The hi-end will never be a problem because there will ALWAYS be someone who wants more and better quality product but it will get harder.

agreed


agreed


Exactly, assuming the CI is in control of the install and the installs quality which comes back to EI in the non LifeController equipped systems being dangerous with the automation and everything else being on the same box

I don't want to debate the issue too much but it seems to me you are implying a distinction or conflict that does not exist between --way feedback and ease of use. Or to put it another way that too much use of 2-way feedback can lead to "featuritis". It just doesn't jibe.

I don't think anyone here is advocating displaying the current TV tint settings on the touchscreen! Right now I have a touchscreen in front of me. Virtually EVERY single screen has INVALUABLE 2-way feedback. If I go to the climate page I see the current temp and set point. If I go to the light page I can see the light status. If I go to the windows page I can see if the shades are up or down. If I go to the motorized gate page I can see if the gate is open or closed. And on and on and on. I'm not displaying this stuff because I'm an integrator that "loves 2-way feedback". I'm displaying it because it's integral to the system.

Your volume analogy is a perfect example of why 2-way feedback is so important. You are right, if the bar graph has unity gain represnt 0 that is confusing as hell to people - that's typical of something an engineer designs. But if the bar graph simply represents minimum and maximum, that's invaluable feedback. And I've never had even 1 person even ask me about a volume bar graph - it's immediately intuitive.

Now if your point is that the type of 2-way feedback I detail above is not make or break as you put it, well I'd respond that's just silly. That's like saying surround sound is not make or break and most people can be quite happy with a plasma and a good pair of speakers. Sure they can. So what :-)?

Again, as I stated with 3Q it is of much more value to the integrator than the end user. You could have no visual display of volume for the end user and "state of the state" sense for the integrator and the end user would know no difference but the integrator would have a better performing system.

From the sales perspective it's eye candy, to the end user it's cool, to the hi-end programmer it's an absolute must.

What if the media system provides relative volume information for the CDs in the media repository, and the customer wants to make use of it automatically when a CD is selected? That requires adjustment of the volume relative to its current state, not setting of an absolute volume level, and that requires knowing what the current volume is.

Agreed. If the system is always controlled from the control system and never directly interfacing with the product then that could be acheived by just having the last selected state remain high-lighted. That IS feedback but not monitoring.

On the Tuner page, having

Since most people use presets more than anything else, showing the current preset does the same thing. Again feedback, but not monitoring. Most clients do not scan stations in their homes (some, yes, most no)

Volume is

Not hugely important. Once your familiar with the operation of the system this wouldn't be an issue. Volume limiter, turn-on volume etc. If everytime you turn on the system you exhibit this behavior there is a much larger problem:-D. (I had a dog once that was somewhat blind and everytime he cam in from outdoors he ran right into the table leg - I guess I wasn't too smart either, it took months before I figured - just move the damn table!)

Question:

I do know the min and max numbers of the top of my head which varies based on how and when I've chosen to tune the system. I always us my hardwired remote (Old Sony ES XRC-900) and after the system is tuned I never look at the volume - I turn it up to where it sounds good for a particular cd/station etc. the display is useless other than letting me know I don't have a problem with the stereo:-) (I freaked out when the display started taking a dive) I do use the display to adjust bass and treble occasionaly since the remote has no discretes for bass, treb, bal


I wouldn't agree "any decent control system" but it does truly differentiate the BEST systems. I would assume that by going into BB especially this soon after introduction EI doesn't consider themselves the BEST. It'll be interesting to see where Savant fall into this game since they are specifically targeting the top 200 dealers in the US who are probably already AMX or Crestron dealers.

I would like to know as well. It's hard to tell from the vagueness of their website which of the rs232 devices are 2-way

To argue that a customer does not find volume feedback useful is very misguided. In fact, we sold a system several years back that provided volume feedback on the keypad PHAST to be specific). However if the room had surround sound it was impossible to give them volume feedback on the keypad because the system could not display volume from the surround processor. People would notice on their own and asked WITHOUT EXCEPTION "why don't I have the volume bar in this room". The very moment they had a volume bar, it became an indispensable feature.

When you adjust volume on your laptop do you look at the bar graph on the screen? Of course you do! In fact the reason I hate the stock cd player that came with my car is that when I turn it on I don't get feedback, and it's easy to turn it up and then blow my ears out because it doesn't display volume as it starts up.

Similarly, any device (lets say a laptop with the old spin knobs) that has a knob that just spins always leaves you wondering and double checking where the volume actually is. You often spin it all the way in one direction just to make sure you know where you are. And then you wonder if you just turned it all the way done or up.

agreed.

Providing that type of functionality will set the integrators apart but I'd wager that unless that was sold and shown as a benefit many customers would live with it the way they have with multidisc changers and be fine (not blown away). Also from a software perspective, decent software should have this ability built in so it would/could minimize the necessity of that from a programming perspective of the integrator. The big issue of course is price vs. performance and where your customer lies.

I wonder if we can keep this thread going long enough to get my post count up and get to super member quickly:-) At least my old member status


Exactly, if the volumer bar were never there they MAY not have asked for volume

No, usually I grab the slider and move it to where I want and the only reason why I look is because I have to. The few times I used the buttons that allow me to adjust up, down, or mute I look because it's on the screen in front of me - I have no choice. If it weren't there it wouldn't matter to me but now that I'm used to it I would be annoyed if it were taken away.

Are you suggesting that "ignorance is bliss"? If so, then you are sadly misguided by your own wants/desires and/or your ability to provide things that clients want/desire. Just because a client doesn't ask for something by name, doesn't mean they don't want it. I can guarantee that if you give a client the choice, they will ask for it.


If you are marketing a system like EI and stating:


Then you better be able to do 95+%, and at this point, it looks like EI can't even do the basic system I proposed. Taking out features that we as integrators use like real-time feedback for the "random" button and replacing it with a system variable isn't better, it's faking it, and it isn't reliable. What if I push "random" on the front on the changer? How does your "fake" feedback handle that? Re-designing the system based on your product doesn't count. If you can't do true one-button interfaces, then trying to sell the client out of a system that can is not doing the client any favors. If you can't customize the GUI, then trying to convice people that they don't need this "feature" isnt helping them either.

I remember an old class on sales, discussing positive versus negative competitive sales techiniques. One of the points made was about when someone asks you about a competitor, you can do several things.
1)You can tell them why you are better. You can empahsize what you do well and how your abilities make you a better value.
2)You tell them why the other guys aren't as good. You can emphasize the negatives about the other company until you have devalued them enough in the eyes of the client that you now seem like a comparable value.
If you take the first route, you are showing why you are a better product, plain and simple. If you take the second route all you are saying is "we can't compete on thier level, so we have to cut them down to ours".


If all you build are one-way IR systems, then this may be a good solution, but if you do AMX/Crestron, this is not even in the same league. My only grief is that if you are going to claim your product is better(or 95+%), than it better be. If you are going to claim that you are the only product on the market that is network based then you better be sure you are.

This is an industry where big claims are a dime-a-dozen.

But isn't the point that those folks who want to sell a system want to provide more benefits to the customer so that they get more sales relative to someone who provides less? There are two perspectives here. One is a CI who is selling a system that doesnt' support X and therefore just pretends X doesn't exist and hopes the customer doesn't know better. The other is the marketplace of products in this space and what they can do and CIs selling the ones that do X will make other product look sub-optimal by pointing this out.

[EDIT: Oops, this is kind of redundant relative to the previous post since I didn't read to the end before posting...]

Personally, I'd like to hear more about Lifeware. I vote we, myself included, stop debating this issue. It's like debating "murder - good or bad?" Enough said.

Absolutley not! I'm just want to make sure that we meet the client needs most importantly. The clients wants/desires and needs may be 2 entirely different things. Back to one of my earlier posts about using the right tool for the job

I agree wholeheartedly and pointing out the negative in your competitors or competitive product is the worst form of sales. Obviously #1 does the same as #2 without being negative.

The truth is I don't actually see EI targeting the AMX/Crestron dealer because they can't do the same things. AMX/Crestron are what they are because of what you can do with them.

To use Steve from EI's analogy (though I don't consider EI a Bentley) AMX/Crestron are the best - Ferrari, Lambo / Rolls, Bentley (pick your style) and call EI a Lexus - clearly they are targeting a different market. With C4 looking like Ford or GM


Amen - aren't all industires though - must be the sales/marketing gene.