Random Thoughts - Part Deux [NO POLITICS]

[Sarlacc]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

I think Ultra's making a distinction between the quality of the process, i.e., a high quality process produces extremely consistent results, vs. the quality of the actual end product itself, although I could be wrong.. jump in if I am, Ultra.

Using the McDonald's example, the food product available at McDonald's "restaurants" (I cringed when I wrote that) IS amazingly consistent.. pretty much every McDonald's in our area hands you exactly the same food. On the other hand, we have "good" and "bad" Wendy's, Burger King, and Dunkin' Donuts places all over the place, and that would represent a poorer process.. the food isn't consistent from one to the next.

You can have an excellent, high quality process that produces remarkably bad but very consistent products. "Bad" is, of course, in the eye of the end user.. they may be "great" products in some people's eyes, depending upon their desired goals for the product. Peavey speakers, Bundy trumpets, Behringer microphones.. all remarkably consistent products that do the job they're intended to do, but just not at a level that would be acceptable to professionals in those fields. In other words, products of entry-level quality that are the result of high quality processes.

That's my take on it, anyway. I don't know much about the actual lingo used in the manufacturing business, so I could be misrepresenting what Ultra said. If so.. let me know

That makes sense, I guess.

[Boomerang]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

We are about to go for round two I think... saw this at the same time Trump was in town.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Nah they were just meeting to talk about fake news, so I heard on the news anyway...

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

As long as they are used in the same sentence, at the risk of sounding pedantic I will explain that from a manufacturing standpoint, the word 'quality' is used to define the consistency of the product; the lack of change from one unit to the next. Macdonalds is a classic example of high quality in the context of fast food restaurants.

High quality processes are developed to, and do minimize cost, especially in mass production systems.






WTF did the Canadians ever develop besides frostbite and apologies.

Not much but the list is both impressive in the importance of some and the total triviality of others!
Insulin
Telephone
Light bulb
Five-pin bowling
Wonderbra
Artificial pacemaker
Robertson screw
Zipper
Electric Wheelchair
Poutine
Cobalt-60 “Bomb” Cancer Treatment
Java programming language
Bloody Caesar
Canadarm
Standard time
Electron microscope*
Ski-Doo
BlackBerry
Radio Voice Transmission
Birch-Bark Canoe
Basketball
Retractable Beer Carton Handle
UV Degradable Plastics
Instant Replay
Goalie mask
Marquis Wheat
Pablum
Lacrosse
Electric Oven
Steam Fog Horn
Walkie-Talkie
Alkaline battery
Paint roller*
Electronic Music Synthesizer
Weevac 6
Green Garbage Bag
Snowblower
Self-Propelled Combine Harvester
Instant mashed potatoes
Explosives Vapour Detector
Marine Screw Propeller
Plexiglas
Key Frame Animation
CPR-Mannequin: “Actar 911”
G-Suit
Ardox Spiral Nail
Automatic Lubricating Cup
Crash-Position Indicator
Caulking gun
Separable Baggage Check

[new2subaru]

Robertson screwdriver

[new2subaru]

Peanut butter!

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by Sarlacc

Extremely good point.



-so how do you express quality defined by the degree of excellence of something?

The excellence would have to be a measurable property to which a target value could be assigned. Then you could express the quality of that product by the consistency of its excellence.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

That's my take on it, anyway. I don't know much about the actual lingo used in the manufacturing business, so I could be misrepresenting what Ultra said. If so.. let me know

I think so. Behringer, Peavey, etc. produce very high quality products that aren't excellent.

I have a perfectly good Carvin XV212. Blah.

[MuseChaser]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

I think so. Behringer, Peavey, etc. produce very high quality products that aren't excellent.

I have a perfectly good Carvin XV212. Blah.

I had a Peavey fretless bass that I thought was really good... until I played a really good fretless bass. All of a sudden, the Peavey was awful. I've been playing an Alembic for the last twenty years or so and can't really call the Peavey a "very high quality product," unless that's different than a "very high quality bass." I guess I can see the distinction.. not arguing with you at all, just trying to get usage of the words in the industry correct.

Another example.. I was a terrible trumpet player throughout HS, playing whatever junky beat up horns I could get my hands on. Then, I bought an intermediate horn that was all the rage when it came out.. the King 601, which was supposedly based off the Benge trumpet. That horn felt GREAT to me. Fast forward a decade or two, and a Burbank Benge, Mt. Vernon Bach, and Martin Committee later (sorry... pardon the trumpet geeking out... any other players here?), the King 601 felt like what it really was.. a cut above entry student horns, but not that great. I sold it. These day, the Benge gets most of my time. Again, I wouldn't call the King 601 a high quality trumpet; you won't see any pros playing it on gigs or at home... but a I guess you could call it a high quality product for its intended niche in the market.

Coming close?

[Ultramaroon]

Right. I'll grant you that but apart from Insulin, the Telephone, the Light bulb, Five-pin bowling, the Wonderbra, the Artificial pacemaker, the Robertson screw, the Zipper, the Electric Wheelchair, Poutine...
...
...

the Crash-Position Indicator, the Caulking gun, and Separable Baggage Check,

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by MuseChaser

I had a Peavey fretless bass that I thought was really good... until I played a really good fretless bass. All of a sudden, the Peavey was awful. I've been playing an Alembic for the last twenty years or so and can't really call the Peavey a "very high quality product," unless that's different than a "very high quality bass." I guess I can see the distinction.. not arguing with you at all, just trying to get usage of the words in the industry correct.

Another example.. I was a terrible trumpet player throughout HS, playing whatever junky beat up horns I could get my hands on. Then, I bought an intermediate horn that was all the rage when it came out.. the King 601, which was supposedly based off the Benge trumpet. That horn felt GREAT to me. Fast forward a decade or two, and a Burbank Benge, Mt. Vernon Bach, and Martin Committee later (sorry... pardon the trumpet geeking out... any other players here?), the King 601 felt like what it really was.. a cut above entry student horns, but not that great. I sold it. These day, the Benge gets most of my time. Again, I wouldn't call the King 601 a high quality trumpet; you won't see any pros playing it on gigs or at home... but a I guess you could call it a high quality product for its intended niche in the market.

Coming close?

I think so. As long as they all did what they were supposed to do consistently, and they are made using a well-defined, reproducible process, then yes.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

Right. I'll grant you that but apart from Insulin, the Telephone, the Light bulb, Five-pin bowling, the Wonderbra, the Artificial pacemaker, the Robertson screw, the Zipper, the Electric Wheelchair, Poutine...
...
...

the Crash-Position Indicator, the Caulking gun, and Separable Baggage Check,

Brought peace?

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Brought peace?

Oh, peace! Shut up!

[krayzie]

Originally Posted by Sarlacc

That's all news to me! Very interesting. Any documentation available online?

It was something discussed that I've read a long time ago from the watchuseek forum.

Basically I was intrigued by the fact that brands like Hamilton and IWC originated from the States and not Chocoland in the late 19th century.

I think the two most interesting watch brand history books I've read are Tissot and Seiko, since they both contain historical facts that are quite embarrassing to some of their competitors namely Omega (which Tissot saved financially in the late 20's) and the late 20th century Swiss watch industry as a whole (which Seiko almost destroyed single handedly during the Swiss chronometer competition in the late 60's and later in the 70's with quartz technology).

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Boomerang

Nah they were just meeting to talk about fake news, so I heard on the news anyway...

I heard "condemn and resist the reckless provocations of North Korea . . ." specifically but you know could just be hearsay. The photo is actually my own though, so they were certainly there.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk