RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 24041 times.

Vapor Audio

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 2022
  • Building Audio Bling since 2007
    • Vapor Audio
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #60 on: 7 Oct 2015, 05:47 pm »
I do find a lot of this stuff kind of funny but I would like to get your opinion on something. Say you had a room at RMAF and this guy No Audiophile, of whom you don't know, walked in and said after 5 minutes what he said about the dc10 room. Would you take his criticism seriously? Would you think something must be wrong because he is a member of the press and therefore would try to change something up? And just before you do try to change something Tyson and Pez come strolling in and sit down for about 20 minutes and tell you this is the best room they've heard all day!

Do you listen to Tyson and Pez and think No Audiophile is no longer telling it like it is and that he's just full of shit? Just curious as to how a speaker manufacturer responds to criticism and praise all at the same time. I don't know how anybody can take a review seriously because as we all know everybody hears differently and has different preferences as to what good sound should sound like.

I talked with him at the show, and could tell just by the look on his face when I answered questions that he was a tough nut to crack.  That my typical superfluous answers to design questions weren't going to satisfy, so went into the more in-depth break down of what we're doing.  Even then, when he walked away I had no idea what to expect ... if he was a fan of our room or not.  So when his first page of coverage went online, and I saw his no punches pulled approach, I got a bit nervous.  "What would he say about us?"  So yeah, it was a big sigh of relief when I saw what was said  :)

We plan on sending him something to review in the near future.  Confidence in our product isn't an issue, and I personally appreciate his zero ass-kissery style.  If he reviews something from us and enjoys it, I'll know he's speaking truth without any ulterior motives.
« Last Edit: 7 Oct 2015, 07:56 pm by Vapor Audio »

Don_S

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #61 on: 7 Oct 2015, 05:59 pm »
I find it disheartening that too many confuse telling the truth with being rude, quick to judge, and using unnecessary profanity.  We were taught several important life-lessons in kindergarten. One was to tell the truth.  Another was don’t be mean—AKA, “play nice”.
 
Put the two “commandments” together and the writer/speaker must take responsibility for their words and actions. Criticism does not need to be delivered with a face-slap. When abrasive style trumps substance credibility suffers.

rajacat

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3132
  • Washington State
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #62 on: 7 Oct 2015, 06:03 pm »
I talked with him at the show, and could tell just by the look on his face when I answered questions that he was a tough nut to crack.  That my typical superfluous answers to design questions weren't going to satisfy, so went into the more in-depth break down of what we're doing.  Even then, when he walked away I had no idea what to expect ... if he was a fan of our room or not.  So when his first page of coverage went online, and I saw his no punches pulled approach, I got a bit nervous.  "What would he say about us?"  So yeah, it was a big sigh of relief when I saw what was said  :)

We plan on sending him something to review in the near future.  Confidence in our product isn't an issue, and I personally appreciate his zero ass-kissery style.  If he reviews something from us and enjoys it, I'll know he's speaking truth, not angling in any way for some sort of payola.

If he had posted a negative opinion of your speakers, would've you still appreciated his "zero ass-kissery" shtick?

Vapor Audio

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 2022
  • Building Audio Bling since 2007
    • Vapor Audio
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #63 on: 7 Oct 2015, 06:20 pm »
If he had posted a negative opinion of your speakers, would've you still appreciated his "zero ass-kissery" shtick?

Hard to say for sure how I'd feel in that case, fortunately we earned positive words.  But I'm someone who has always appreciated those who speak exactly their version of truth, which is pretty obvious what he's doing. 

Early B.

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #64 on: 7 Oct 2015, 07:23 pm »
SIDE NOTE:  We often err in placing too much value on opinions -- either our own or others. Opinions and honesty are useless without having some level of knowledge or experience about the subject matter. Honesty is not a virtue because one can be wrong or even worse -- hurtful.  "I think you're an asshole, and I'm just being honest."



 

lowtech

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 492
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #65 on: 7 Oct 2015, 07:53 pm »
my typical superfluous answers to design questions weren't going to satisfy...

Thanks for sharing that insight.

Zero

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #66 on: 7 Oct 2015, 07:58 pm »
The line that separates honesty and dickishness can be difficult to determine at times.   At the end of the day, I think show coverage should be viewed more as a form of entertainment than a definitive telling of what each system is or is not capable of. 

Sure, manufacturers want to put their best foot forward at these shows, but it's a whole lot easier said than done.  Imagine uprooting your entire stereo system and hauling it to a hotel room where you're almost guaranteed to encounter a number of BS issues.  At the end of the day, it's a rush to try and eek out something that'll sound good in a room that -you hope- will be crowded with people.

And on the flip side, the show reviewer has quite a few burdens to bear as well.  It's no secret that most of the rooms sound their best during the last day of the show.  So unless you can somehow make a mad dash during the last day and cover every single space, the odds of you getting to hear the best outta each room is slim to none.  You then have the issue of trying to position yourself into the sweet spot of every room, which ain't easy.  Then there will always be backround noise that'll compete for your attention.  You'll have people who won't know when to shut the living f*** up.  And the list goes on....

Anyway, back the point at hand....    This is all entertainment, folks.  The problem is when people assign an overinflated sense of value to these kind of reports.  Besides, if you want honesty, I'm pretty sure that my take on the rooms at RMAF would be the most negative in show coverage history - hence why I'm not even going to 'go there'.  :D 



rockadanny

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #67 on: 7 Oct 2015, 08:52 pm »
Enjoyed the reviews and photos. Good job.  :thumb:

(BTW, I found nothing in the reviews inappropriate for adult readers. Constructive criticism: I do think you should have skipped the name-calling - "slack-jawed lackey" - unless of course this person did something heinously anti-audio to warrant such label (i.e., ceaseless, room disturbing gum-flapping during playback). In which case perhaps you should have at least divulged your reason for it.)
« Last Edit: 8 Oct 2015, 03:22 am by rockadanny »

S Clark

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 5246
  • Measurements don't make your toes tap
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #68 on: 7 Oct 2015, 08:57 pm »
The line that separates honesty and dickishness can be difficult to determine at times. 
But if you have to choose, I'd rather a reviewer be a bit of dick than a little dishonest.
Keep at it, No Audiophile. 

Pete Schumacher

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 590
  • It's all in the pursuit
    • Vapor Audio
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #69 on: 7 Oct 2015, 11:04 pm »
To find out if No Audiophile is of any use to you would be to go out and listen to what he likes and dislikes.  If you agree, then you have a point of reference from which to work.

We were cracking up reading his coverage . . . that's a plus.

FlexibleAudio

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 3
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #70 on: 8 Oct 2015, 01:54 am »
+1

People are adults and can sift through the good, the bad, and the ugly and make their own decisions.  What I find more tiresome is the stealth, guerrilla marketing at play in the many of the forums these days.....like a one note instrument....

I couldn't agree more with this post. I get sick of the peddlers hocking their wares on forums. That's why I left another forum after 1000 posts and joined here.

vortrex

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 892
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #71 on: 8 Oct 2015, 02:24 am »
Obviously a Vapor shill.

Rick Craig

  • Industry Contributor
  • Posts: 3362
  • Selah Audio
    • http://www.selahaudio.com
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #72 on: 8 Oct 2015, 02:30 am »

DaveC113

  • Industry Contributor
  • Posts: 3885
  • ZenWaveAudio.com
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #73 on: 8 Oct 2015, 02:36 am »
If No Audiophile really isn't an audiophile why does he go to all the trouble to take pretty pictures, give commentary and post it here? :scratch: His interest in fancy audio gear reveals that he's actually an audiophile.

Actually, I do appreciate that NA posted here and after rereading, most of the the "reviews" I didn't find too many that were over the top negative in a mean way. His review of the  DC10 Audio Berlin, "This was the worst sound of the show. If you imagine a cardboard tube glued to the front of a tweeter that is similar to what these sounded like."
seemed to be harsh. If they were that bad, there must have been something wrong with the setup or the builders' taste must be WAY different than the "No Audiophile". This is the problem with trying to compare speakers at a show. For instance, most of the reviews don't take into account such issues as acoustical treatments, power conditioning that would give unfair advantage to one speaker over the other.  The playing field isn't level so the reviews must be viewed as commentary not reviews.

He also lied to our face about what he thought about the sound, told us it was great and then made that ridiculous comment on his blog. Not a big deal, everyone else seems to think the sound was good to great. An example of a comment that reflects badly on the person making it imo.

Tomy2Tone

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #74 on: 8 Oct 2015, 02:54 am »
He also lied to our face about what he thought about the sound, told us it was great and then made that ridiculous comment on his blog. Not a big deal, everyone else seems to think the sound was good to great. An example of a comment that reflects badly on the person making it imo.

Wow, really? The part I don't get in all this is apparently you don't have to be good at being a reviewer. In fact you can flat out suck, but as long as you're "keepin it real" or "telling it like it is" then it's ok. If it's the guy that was in there Saturday night in the Nimbus/ Mojo room I think he spent maybe 5 minutes listening and then left.

At least put in an effort to know the sound of the speakers by spending time in there and bring some familiar tracks like Tyson and Pez do so you're more able to discern from one room to the next...

DaveC113

  • Industry Contributor
  • Posts: 3885
  • ZenWaveAudio.com
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #75 on: 8 Oct 2015, 03:14 am »
Yeah, as I said it's no big deal. I know exactly where that comment came from, directional speakers sound different than speakers that have a wide dispersion pattern. The lack of 1st reflections can sound odd at first. Lying to us and posting a rude comment just shows the level of experience and character of the poster. And yes, any idiot can call themselves a reviewer and post ridiculous garbage, but they won't last long.

Wind Chaser

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #76 on: 8 Oct 2015, 03:15 am »
I don't know why anyone would take any of this so seriously. A guy states his opinion on nothing more than a quick first impression and some think the fate of business could hang in the balance?  :scratch:

Folsom

Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #77 on: 8 Oct 2015, 03:18 am »
I love the pictures.

Honesty is good. However there's an evident bias where if he sees something he doesn't believe is pure engineering of what he thinks is correct, it's disqualified. While there's snake oil, maybe not as much as some think, one that's that has an attitude of honesty should at least test before coming to a conclusion. I can't help but wonder if the d10 room got this treatment. But hell, I don't know, maybe they didn't sound good.

RMAF sadly is basically a speaker show. It's so hard to judge the electronics if you've not heard the speakers before. But in all cases you know a lot of about the speakers. That sad, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Nimbus review was due to electronics or noise from the location.

For the record I know that Dave's D4 cable set is superb, so there's zero fault anywhere near the cables for any possible problems with the d10 room.

mresseguie

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 2826
  • Beware manufacturer who treats people like crap.
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #78 on: 8 Oct 2015, 03:19 am »
Yeah, as I said it's no big deal. I know exactly where that comment came from, directional speakers sound different than speakers that have a wide dispersion pattern. The lack of 1st reflections can sound odd at first. Lying to us and posting a rude comment just shows the level of experience and character of the poster. And yes, any idiot can call themselves a reviewer and post ridiculous garbage, but they won't last long.

Dave,

You've lost me entirely. I can see you have a lot of energy over this, but I have not discovered what it is that has you so upset. Could you please explain?

Regards,

Michael

aevans

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 62
Re: RMAF Coverage from No Audiophile
« Reply #79 on: 8 Oct 2015, 03:56 am »
- deleted