Long-time VPI owner -- record cleaning machine in 1996; VPI Scout owner since 2004 and yes, it's been upgraded a few times with tonearm, motor, platter, feet, etc.
I applaud VPI's effort to bring rationality to its line. My major concern is that VPI retains some strategy for managing innovation while at the same time making it easier for vinyl enthusiasts to understand their line. Matt's explanation above is great for the moment, but represents a risk to future growth if it becomes etched in stone.
Historically, one of the great things about VPI has been their willingness and ability to explore new ideas and/or revisit historical ones in a new light. A lot of this was driven by Harry's enthusiasm for the form and the continuous spirit of experimentation. At the same time, this hobbyist orientation makes it difficult to explain, especially since the ideas are often contradictory. For example, how do you reconcile the ideas about a plinth-mounted motor (inspired by Empire turntables from the early 1960's, I hear) in the Classic with a SAMA (stand alone motor pod) in the Scout/Prime? Maybe you cannot, so the solution is to axe the Classic line. Sigh.
I'm sorry to see the Classic line go, because I think it did some things very right compared to my Scout. But I understand the need to rationalize a line and stop producing an endless variety of different approaches to doing the same thing at the same/similar price point. But does this mean that the basic platforms cannot change, and forevermore all the innovations will be rearrangements of the existing formats? This, I think, would be a big mistake.
Hopefully, once the line gets straightened out, efficiency is established, and rationality will be delivered. At that point, I hope the doors will remain open for new ideas (not just new lines of electronics) that will continue to burnish VPI's past successes. I wish them every chance of future growth & success, and hope they will remain a USA-focused contributor to evolution in the great reproduction of music.
I applaud VPI's effort to bring rationality to its line. My major concern is that VPI retains some strategy for managing innovation while at the same time making it easier for vinyl enthusiasts to understand their line. Matt's explanation above is great for the moment, but represents a risk to future growth if it becomes etched in stone.
Historically, one of the great things about VPI has been their willingness and ability to explore new ideas and/or revisit historical ones in a new light. A lot of this was driven by Harry's enthusiasm for the form and the continuous spirit of experimentation. At the same time, this hobbyist orientation makes it difficult to explain, especially since the ideas are often contradictory. For example, how do you reconcile the ideas about a plinth-mounted motor (inspired by Empire turntables from the early 1960's, I hear) in the Classic with a SAMA (stand alone motor pod) in the Scout/Prime? Maybe you cannot, so the solution is to axe the Classic line. Sigh.
I'm sorry to see the Classic line go, because I think it did some things very right compared to my Scout. But I understand the need to rationalize a line and stop producing an endless variety of different approaches to doing the same thing at the same/similar price point. But does this mean that the basic platforms cannot change, and forevermore all the innovations will be rearrangements of the existing formats? This, I think, would be a big mistake.
Hopefully, once the line gets straightened out, efficiency is established, and rationality will be delivered. At that point, I hope the doors will remain open for new ideas (not just new lines of electronics) that will continue to burnish VPI's past successes. I wish them every chance of future growth & success, and hope they will remain a USA-focused contributor to evolution in the great reproduction of music.