Consolidating music HARDWARE. What do you think?

Hey everyone, while the software consolidation effort, is far from done, it's had pretty positive results so far!

Next comes a slightly more challenging undertaking: consolidating hardware music gear variations.

As a reminder, software was a little simpler to merge based on the premise that 1) old version software is hard to buy, and 2) separating what artist used Ableton 7 vs. Ableton 10 holds little value.

We had a team meeting and came up with what could work for hardware, but of course want to run it by you all before implementing.

First let me say that the guitar problem might be more challenging to solve due to so many variables (color/year/materials/details/limited editions/spotty record keeping/obscure & unknown configurations). So for now I'll speak to non-guitar hardware.

The main 3 buckets we were able to come up with to differentiate item "groupings" are as follows:

1. GENERATIONS:

This applies to hardware that gets regular generational or "MK" updates, like audio interfaces, MIDI keyboards, studio monitors (think KRK Rokit 5 G1/G2/G3/G4 or Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 Gen1/Gen2/Gen3). There are hardware tweaks in every generation, but the "spirit" of the gear remains the same. If you were to describe a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 as...

A simple audio interface to record a guitar & mic or stereo instrument. It's hard to beat the design and quality for the price of the 2i2. Perfect for podcasters and budding & experienced music producers alike.

... that description wouldn't really change across Gen1, Gen2, Gen3 etc.

2. EDITIONS/COLORS/FINISHES:

This applies to hardware that is functionally identical, with the difference being solely cosmetic. Think headphones or Pioneer CDJs that come in white black and gray, or a limited edition guitar pedal "blackout edition" or with fancy artwork.

3. CONFIGURATION:

This applies to hardware where the basic functionality/circuitry is the same, but there is some configuration you can choose that alters a component. An example would be if you get to pick your speaker in a combo amp, or the Yamaha THR series of amps.

The idea would be that there would be a consolidated item page with variants that you could select of the above relationship types, kinda like this:

https://i.imgur.com/D151Xf4.png

So just like Ableton 11 is the main item page now for Ableton, the reviews and pro artists for hardware would roll up into the "latest version" one (with filtering of course so you could only look for what has been written about a certain edition/configuration). And when writing a review or subbing an item to an artist that has variants you get to pick if you're referring to a specific variant.

What do you all think of this? Aside from the mess that will be consolidating guitars, are we missing anything glaring?

I'd say that's a great idea, and would be useful for many. At the moment, I can't really think of anything more to add or improve it.

I think you're spot on from where I'm sitting.... I mean, something like a Dynamite limiter could be heavily cnsolidated. The circuit NEVER changed even though the case construction and even brand name varied. I have 2 of the versions but I can tell you they're indistinguishable right down to the PCB. They're functionally the same item but we have separate entries. I may actually be responsible for it, mindlesly adding to my personal gear list.... we have a lot of that in studio gear.

While I appreciate the generational organization, I have some concerns. Equipboard has become a historical database of sorts and consolidating items might mean losing records about individual items’ variations and popularity over time. That said, I have a few questions:

• Some configurations have major differences, while others do not. If this were to go through, how would consolidation be decided?
• Would the reviews for items of different generations and configurations remain separate?
• Aren’t colors already merged?
• How would this effect Reverb and Sweetwater links for pertinent items? Those vendors keep generations and configurations separate. Would merging them cause a price confusion or rating confusion?

Thanks everyone for the input, and great questions eyesee. I'll address them one by one:

• Some configurations have major differences, while others do not. If this were to go through, how would consolidation be decided?

I think that might be decided on a case by case basis, if something is very ambiguous. I anticipate the merge duplicates process is going to be where this takes place, and those have comment threads to discuss edge cases and ambiguities. So I anticipate having some back and forth discussions. And that's actually perfectly fine, bc for instance clifford_bao_777 knows a ton about bass gear and can really help with merges that require subject matter expertise.

• Would the reviews for items of different generations and configurations remain separate?

That's a good question. My thought is they would be combined under the "main" item but definitely be filterable. Amazon I believe actually works exactly like that.

• Aren’t colors already merged?

Yes and no. We've kind of "unofficially" started treating them as the same item, but this new system would allow us to keep a different color as a "sub-item." So for instance white and black Yamaha HS5 studio monitors would each maintain a separate SKU/UPC for pricing and availability but be rolled up to the same item.

• How would this effect Reverb and Sweetwater links for pertinent items? Those vendors keep generations and configurations separate. Would merging them cause a price confusion or rating confusion?

Great question! For an item -> sub-item relationship, the sub-items would maintain their own purchase identifiers. So like in my example screenshot with the KRKs, if you were to click on one of the older versions ,the buy links and prices would change to reflect that variant.

I think that might be decided on a case by case basis, if something is very ambiguous. I anticipate the merge duplicates process is going to be where this takes place, and those have comment threads to discuss edge cases and ambiguities. So I anticipate having some back and forth discussions. And that's actually perfectly fine, bc for instance clifford_bao_777 knows a ton about bass gear and can really help with merges that require subject matter expertise.

Okay, some supplemental questions:

• Given recent events, is there a way to prevent this consolidation/merging from further accidentally deleting submissions?
• What if successors span multiple brands?
• What if a single artist has multiple iterations of a consolidated item? How would this be displayed on the main item page?
• Would there be designated "experts" among the userbase? Maybe even consults from the items' companies?

My thought is they would be combined under the "main" item but definitely be filterable.

Does this mean that reviews will be tagged with their respective editions?

Yes and no. We've kind of "unofficially" started treating them as the same item, but this new system would allow us to keep a different color as a "sub-item." So for instance white and black Yamaha HS5 studio monitors would each maintain a separate SKU/UPC for pricing and availability but be rolled up to the same item.

Okay, so this would make price aggregation more comprehensive. Got it. Still, is the color difference that significant? It might get overcrowded, especially for guitars.

Great question! For an item -> sub-item relationship, the sub-items would maintain their own purchase identifiers. So like in my example screenshot with the KRKs, if you were to click on one of the older versions ,the buy links and prices would change to reflect that variant.

Would they remain searchable as separate items? Would they remain separate on brand pages? Furthermore, would users retain the ability to save specific iterations to their user pages?

• Given recent events, is there a way to prevent this consolidation/merging from further accidentally deleting submissions?

That won't happen ever again.

• What if successors span multiple brands?

Haven't planned for this, I'd need examples, but a different brand would probably mean a different item.

• What if a single artist has multiple iterations of a consolidated item? How would this be displayed on the main item page?

I wasn't gonna do this, but if it's something you all think is critical, we can accommodate the request.

• Would there be designated "experts" among the userbase? Maybe even consults from the items' companies?

Mods and high gearIQ folks for starters. Haven't thought about formalizing it though.

Okay, so this would make price aggregation more comprehensive. Got it. Still, is the color difference that significant? It might get overcrowded, especially for guitars.

If they have a different SKU/UPC/part number or whatever, they'd be tracked separately.

Would they remain searchable as separate items? Would they remain separate on brand pages? Furthermore, would users retain the ability to save specific iterations to their user pages?

Searchable as separate items, yes. Separate on brand pages, probably not. You might see something like "Scarlett Focusrite 2i2" and a tag right under it [3 variations]. Eventually users will have the ability to save a specific iteration to their user page, yes. Maybe not for v1 but eventually.

I will say, this would be useful for this particular item. It would also realize my request to organize something like an Electro-Harmonix Big Muff.

• What if successors span multiple brands?

Haven't planned for this, I'd need examples, but a different brand would probably mean a different item.

Coggins Audio comes to mind since its Lovetone and Dinosaural products are being reissued under ThorpyFX. Digidesign's rebranding as Avid is another thing to consider. Then there's the ToadWorks Barracuda, the latest version of which is branded under TEN Effects.

• What if a single artist has multiple iterations of a consolidated item? How would this be displayed on the main item page?

I wasn't gonna do this, but if it's something you all think is critical, we can accommodate the request.

For example, John Scofield has used ProCo's Vintage Rat, RAT 2 and the Silver Anniversary Rat. J Mascis also has his enormous Big Muff collection; he has five brandings of the Ram's Head Big Muff alone! To that point, would items with significant OEM iterations have subgroups within the consolidated items?

Would they remain searchable as separate items? Would they remain separate on brand pages? Furthermore, would users retain the ability to save specific iterations to their user pages?

Searchable as separate items, yes. Separate on brand pages, probably not. You might see something like "Scarlett Focusrite 2i2" and a tag right under it [3 variations]. Eventually users will have the ability to save a specific iteration to their user page, yes. Maybe not for v1 but eventually.

Would this separation also apply to alternative items? Certain recommendations apply to specific iterations. Also, would this mean the retirement of the alternative items' limited edition tag?

This all sounds solid to me, but with the same caveat/plea as for the software consolidation:

Preserve the current level of granularity behind the scenes so reviews and artist attributions can be filtered by generation/edition/configuration down the road, Amazon-style.

Even though there's an occasional software release that feels like a regression stability-wise, or the devs roll out a UI redesign that is initially unpopular, the trajectory for software products is still pretty linear, and the codebase you buy almost always benefits from free improvements over time. Hardware doesn't always follow this same path, especially "mk 2" products that are the result of manufacturing constraints -- e.g. a crucial chipset is discontinued and the product has to be redesigned purely to accommodate a more readily-available chipset -- or makers of a Mk 1 product are acquired and the new parent company releases a mk 2 years later that is more about fitting into a new overarching corporate strategy than it is about being a clear improvement over the original.

...anyway, just my verbose way of again making my case for keeping the generation/edition/configuration info that is already attributed, in the event that a hardware product line makes a big generational jump forwards or backwards in terms of quality.

... but regardless of whether or not a hardware line gets better or worse over time, I think the net benefit of this consolidation will be a win for all of us. I especially like that this could help upstart/boutique hardware companies, as they're often iterating faster than we could otherwise keep up with here. e.g. Black Corporation's Mk 1 and Mk 2 Deckard's Dream synths get pooled together for better numbers and, ultimately, better visibility on the site.

I especially like that this could help upstart/boutique hardware companies, as they're often iterating faster than we could otherwise keep up with here. e.g. Black Corporation's Mk 1 and Mk 2 Deckard's Dream synths get pooled together for better numbers and, ultimately, better visibility on the site.

I really dog that effect too... the little guys have it tough enough already

For example, John Scofield has used ProCo's Vintage Rat, RAT 2 and the Silver Anniversary Rat. J Mascis also has his enormous Big Muff collection; he has five brandings of the Ram's Head Big Muff alone! To that point, would items with significant OEM iterations have subgroups within the consolidated items?

I think this is the hardest part of this whole thing. We have to maintain this level of granularity. I personally bought a Matthews Whaler V2 only to return it because the V1 sounds much better to my ears.

However, when I recommend to someone a great starter MIDI keyboard like the AKAI MPK Mini, it's so frustrating to have mk1, mk2, mk3, and three different color variants for each all exist separately. The pros that uses any of those, in my humble opinion, should be rolled up into one.

So there's definitely some subjectivity here in the type of grouping, and we'll need to design for that.

Kinda related, we've been taking the liberty to roll up Apple hardware. There's not really a code change behind this, but it's just silly to have 85 different iMac variants (most with completely out of date buy links). Like guitars, everyone was just adding new items with ultra-specific titles representing what they have (e.g. "Apple iMac 2012 model with 8gb ram").

These don't really need any variants, because they have pretty clear cut primary models. So the approach is to just make a "General" model, and explain what that is in the description. We're not done yet, still need to roll up iPads, and will probably have a different item representing MacBook (General), MacBook Air (General), and MacBook Pro (General).

Just to beat a dead horse, this is easier than the guitar roll-up because while an older Mac might be sought after, it's 99% because it's available refurbished or on the used market for cheaper. Also no matter how elite of a gear hunter you are it's practically impossible to identify what Mac a pro is using down to its hardware specs.

https://i.imgur.com/63GU8Xw.png

Just to beat a dead horse, this is easier than the guitar roll-up because while an older Mac might be sought after, it's 99% because it's available refurbished or on the used market for cheaper. Also no matter how elite of a gear hunter you are it's practically impossible to identify what Mac a pro is using down to its hardware specs.

agreed 100%

Just to beat a dead horse, this is easier than the guitar roll-up because while an older Mac might be sought after, it's 99% because it's available refurbished or on the used market for cheaper. Also no matter how elite of a gear hunter you are it's practically impossible to identify what Mac a pro is using down to its hardware specs.

agreed 100%

Seconded. However, models that are aesthetically different enough might merit separate status.

Seconded. However, models that are aesthetically different enough might merit separate status.

Exactly yes! And you can see we went that route with the Mac Pro and Mac Pro Cylinder.

Different screen sizes of MacBook Pro should be merged into one, right? My intuition is yes. 13-inch, 15-inch, 16-inch, 17-inch...

Different screen sizes of MacBook Pro should be merged into one, right? My intuition is yes. 13-inch, 15-inch, 16-inch, 17-inch...

Sounds good. It can still be specified in submission notes.

How do you all think we should handle iPhones? It's a bit trickier because with other Apple products, I can for the most part consolidate down to the primary models they have on their website. But for iPhones, the primary models are pretty granular:

https://i.imgur.com/4NBrn1q.png

But on Equipboard, that leads to this:

https://i.imgur.com/joD5xem.png

How do you all think we should handle iPhones?

I'm having a hard time grocking the benefit of more than one entry for iPhone, total. If there's a desire to have an Amazon link to each current model for sale, that makes some sense, but other than that, I'm not sure who cares? iPhone vs. Samsung vs. Google, etc would seem to be the significant thing to know about what an Artist is using, but which current iPhone model, specifically, is only relevant for about 18 months, tops... if that.

I'm having a hard time grocking the benefit of more than one entry for iPhone, total. If there's a desire to have an Amazon link to each current model for sale, that makes some sense, but other than that, I'm not sure who cares? iPhone vs. Samsung vs. Google, etc would seem to be the significant thing to know about what an Artist is using, but which current iPhone model, specifically, is only relevant for about 18 months, tops... if that.

Nah, it's not for Amazon links. I don't foresee that being a strength of EB, selling phones bc of artist usage. Or even price comparison for that matter. I guess I'm thinking more about user reviews, and genre usage might be interesting. But I think as I type this out, you are right. They could probably all be consolidated to "Apple iPhone (General)" and it would make for a good page, and be fine. Even if someone is hating on their 5 year old iPhone in their Equipboard review, so be it.

Anyone oppose merging all iPhone models?