I love the opportunity to learn from other business owners. A couple of weeks ago, Mark DiPietro, CEO of SoundVision in Charlotte, North Carolina, made the long trek up to Richmond, Virginia, to visit Livewire. We didn’t really have an agenda. I’ve done similar cultural exchanges dozens of times, and the lack of structure is usually what makes these check-ins most productive; either visiting another integrator or another integrator coming to see me. Since Mark and I do the same thing for a living, the conversations usually flow effortlessly, and we find ourselves at the end of the hangout lamenting that we needed more time. We ended up running the gamut, talking about our showrooms, employees, and using AI to accelerate different parts of our businesses.
We both remarked that there seems to be a K-shaped flow emerging. Some are using AI to do their 40 hours’ worth of work in eight hours. On the other hand, others are trying to cram 200 hours into their 9-to-5 grind. Both Mark and I fall into the latter bucket and, as a result, are fizzing with ideas. One of these lightbulb moments Mark shared with me is a custom GPT he built called The Discerning Customer.
The Discerning Customer
This mini chatbot poses as a typical SoundVision customer. All you do is feed it a scope of work (PDF, etc.) and it comes back with all sorts of questions and comments about the proposal, and is a wonderful pre-game before actually showing it to a live human. I took Mark’s ChatGPT prompt (with his permission) and decided to create our own custom GPT called Livewire Buddy Check.
Also by Henry Clifford: AI Hack #673: Negotiating With ChatGPT Riding Shotgun
Our new AI pal is designed to check system design integrity and come back with probing questions a prospect might ask. We implemented a new stop on our workflow where the system designer needs to run it through the chatbot first. Only after the Buddy Check has provided a minimal amount of friction and feedback should they proceed to do a human review. I think this is going to be a huge time saver not only in the short term with saving salespeople from giving system design feedback that could have been caught earlier, but also in terms of catching design integrity issues while anticipating customer concerns before a real human can present them.
This isn’t a silver bullet, and while it doesn’t replace good system design or human judgment, it’s still incredibly helpful. Any issues caught during the pre-sales or design and engineering phase prevent wasted man hours and rework. This is all inside a two-week period where I was able to see an idea championed by somebody I really respect, modify it to suit our needs, implement it in our organization immediately, and now I’m in a position to share it with you. Such exciting times we live in.
Also by Henry Clifford: AI Hack #723: Tell Them It’s Going To Die
What are you doing to cram 200 hours’ worth of work into 40?
Stay frosty, and see you in the field.
Livewire Buddy Check Results
Here’s some sample output from Livewire Buddy Check based on a recent proposal we built:
Thanks for sharing the proposal. I’ve reviewed the Premium 2-Channel Audio System (Pro-Ject) quote and scope in detail. Below is my feedback in the role of a discerning but fair client, focused on clarity, risk, and long-term value.
Top 3 Risks / Unknowns
- Signal integrity and gain staging for vinyl distribution. The turntable’s built-in phono stage is feeding both the NAD M10 V3 and a Sonos Port. This introduces potential concerns around output level, impedance matching, and noise when splitting an analog source — especially if both paths are active simultaneously.
- System balance and room assumptions. Klipsch Forte IV speakers are highly sensitive and room interactive. The proposal does not state any assumptions about room size, listening distance, acoustic treatment, or placement constraints, all of which materially affect performance.
- Cost clarity: labor vs. materials vs. “White Glove” line. The summary shows large roll-ups (Product + Labor, White Glove Project Delivery), but it’s difficult to understand what portion of the ~$18.5k is equipment vs. install/programming vs. project overhead — making value comparison harder.
Targeted Questions
- Vinyl —> Sonos path. When the Pro-Ject’s internal phono stage feeds both the NAD and the Sonos Port, is there any buffering, isolation, or switching to prevent loading or noise? What happens if both are active at the same time?
- Why internal phono vs. external. What was the rationale for using the Debut Carbon’s internal phono stage instead of an external phono preamp at this system level? Was this a cost, simplicity, or performance decision?
- Speaker/amp pairing rationale. The Forte IVs are very efficient. How was the NAD M10 V3 selected versus a lower-power or more analog-leaning integrated amp? What trade-offs were considered?
- Room assumptions. What room size, seating distance, and placement flexibility are assumed for the listening room? Are any acoustic limitations (glass, symmetry, fireplace, etc.) already known?
- Cost transparency. Can you provide a high-level split showing:
- Equipment total
- Installation labor
- Programming/configuration
- White Glove / project management
This doesn’t need to be granular, just decision-useful.
- Future flexibility. If I later decide I want a higher-end cartridge, external phono stage, or to remove Sonos from the vinyl path entirely, what parts of this system would become redundant?
What I Need Next
- A one-page signal flow diagram (vinyl → NAD → speakers, and vinyl → Sonos → house)
- A room assumption summary (size, placement expectations, any known constraints)
- A cost breakdown at category level (not line-item micromanagement)
- Confirmation of whether simultaneous vinyl playback to the listening room and Sonos zones is expected to be used—and supported without compromise
Once I have that, I can react more confidently to whether this is the right tier for me, or whether it should be adjusted up or down.
