Biggest sounding speakers....?

Just commenting on his reputation Isaac - it's widely discussed

here is the original story


this is bloody amusing too and should back up the BS allegation ;-)

 

Stereo Mic I would agree with previous comments on libellous statements, you need to be very careful what you say especially quoting the two reference that you have.

First report from Stereophile detailed an account of an incident that was actually proven to be caused by another trader on the same industrial estate as VSA illegally dumping waste into the nearby water channels. This disaster not only affected VSA but other traders on the same estate and left a bad taste in the mouth for all involved. The information in this report is also very out of date.

I would also be careful on reading too much into anything Stereophile printed about VSA prior to 2004 because of the negative viewpoint the magazine took of VSA for the manufacturer refusing to be bullied into committing to extensive advertising contracts just to get the mag to review their products.

As for the 6 Moons article, this is an old article and if you were to actually talk to the founder of that site hopefully he would be honest enough to admit that Albert Von Schweikert did take the time out to contact him direct to challenge him on his qualifications and ability to question the VSA design theory. If the truth be known, I bet you would find that Mr. Von Schweikert is far more qualified than the 6 Moons author and the author was left very much with his tail dangling between his legs.

It is also worth noting that the 6 Moons people (if you have any contacts in the USA) have funnily enough been quite complimentary towards VSA of late, they were when I was at the launch of the VR-11 at least. You might want to review this page to get an idea of how 6 Moons seem to be making an effort to be nice:

http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/he2005mh/1.html

As for the technology of the Global AXIS network may I also direct you to the review of the VR-1 that Mr. Keith Howard (one of the UK's leading technical writers for both audio and engineering subjects) wrote in Hi-Fi News and the previous technical report on the various types of polar sound. These far from report this design as being BS!

If this is your reference material then I suggest you should back down your negative viewpoint.

Don't get me wrong, I encountered some things that concerned me but this was purely from a business administration aspect and as a former Quality Systems and Business Management specialist they did not meet my criteria.

I still think that their products offer great value for money and superb performance. Problem is, there are very few of us in the UK that can honestly make that statement because of the limited exposure they've had here.

 

What concerns me LE is that the company alledgedly owed huge amounts of money prior to the accident anyway, so the rest of of little importance to me.

I do tend to take the VR-1 review at HFN with a pinch of salt sorry, as I do all commercial offerings. The six moons article dos make sense however. It's not saying that the speakers don't work, merely that the company dress the product with overly flowery marketing speak.

Funnily enough, Meadowlark setup in Watertown after VS left. Very similar design principles, similar marketing spiel, sadly same result. I wonder if they will rise like the Pheonix in another US state soon.

Speaking personally, I would prefer to buy my loudspeakers from a company I expect and hope to be around to support them in the future, even if this means paying more for them. Given that there are so many of these manufacturers right here in the UK, they would be my first port of call.

 

Dev.....the definitions given above were provided by a scientific dictionary and used in there correct scientific meaning, this has no bearing into there use in the speaker industry. Dipolar is mainly used in conjunction with atoms having the same charge at either end. Bipole is also used in this context meaning having different charges.

A dipole speaker speak....Quote

The dipole or doublet can be thought of as having two monopoles back to back and 180 degrees out of phase. However , the source is at the edge rather than the centre of the of each radiating sphere. So that the pressure level at any given point depends not only on the distance from the source, but also the angle from the main axis."

Audio and Hifi engineers pocket book.....V capel.

I placed these into the thread just to provide clear meaning.

What and how people then use the words is of no consequence to me .....but if people use the wrong one, its not suprising that confusion occurs.

 

...but were bailed out by other investors because of the strength of the company's technological skill.

Agreed, I myself have always been skeptical about reviews in the past but it was me personally that arranged the VR-1 review. I met HFN Editor and presented the product and said that I wanted a no-holds barred review, he suggested Keith Harris and I took the VR-1's to his place where they remained for a good six-months. There was no "hey, you review these favourably and you get a free pair of speakers", it was a thorough review and I was not privy to the results until they were published in the HFN mag. To me, this review was the most honest and true way of letting the public know what the attributes of these speakers were.

Albert and the founder of Meadowlark used to work together I think at one point, hence sharing the design principles. I have heard some say that Meadowlark learned the basics from Albert and then went off to do their own thing but using Alberts design theory. I can't comment on that myself as I did try to stay objective and out of the politics!

I can totally sympathise with you there my friend, financial stability was a major concern, not to mention viewing foreign markets at least as important as the domestic! Personally, for a product as good as VSA is I would take the gamble (mind you they have always had a great reputation for supporting customers with spares, repairs and upgrades no matter what has gone on).

 

And another point of view.........unrelated shaggy dog.

I was involed in the preproduction of a preamp many years ago.......I was put in contact with a top reviewer [who will remain naimless], we meet had a couple of drinks. He would review the product favourably on the condition he got to keep the item...infact we could jot down a few key phrases that we might like to see included. This was not what I expect and was frankly disgusted by the approach. Mind the mag has long since ceased production ...though like the provebial bad penny the journalist [ and I use the term advisably] still occassionaly appears from under his rock.

and the pre amp.......................

well there are a few knocking about but it never got into full production.


So tend to read any review in the HiFi press with a very large pinch of salt, and then try to verify the review using at least my own ears if I'm parting with my hard earned.....

 

Someone pointed it out to me that certain journo's keep products and funnily enough they get good reviews. Who'd have thought it eh!

 

Well I certainly did not leave anything with the reviewer, I made it quite clear that nohting was free and if they wanted the speakers they had to pay. But it is a fact that bribing has been rife in the industry. How many times have you come across ads in the used market for audio gear from journalist's selling off their freebies

 

It's a minefield, isn't it? When you apply to a magazine editor to get your products reviewed how do you know what the policy of the reviewer will be? And what would the review be like if you don't give the product when it's asked for?

So far, I've managed to get my speakers reviewed in an above board way but this question certainly concerns me.

An alternative approach, and one that is adopted by some Internet-based publications, is for the reviewer to test your product but only write up the review if it's favourable. Is that a better approach?

To an extent, reviews are a matter of reading between the lines anyway. Most are quite favourable. You have to be familiar with the writings of a particular reviewer to really know how favourable. Also, the text in the middle of the review is nothing like as important as the start or end of the review. Do you have to bribe extra for a happy ending?

At least we can be thankful that we're not like the motor car industry where manufacturers have to cough up for all-expenses-paid booze-ups on expensive jaunts to exotic overseas locations (except those journos among us who will be cursing the fact that they're in the wrong industry).

 

That I believe is also the (publicly stated) approach of HiFi+. I believe the manufacturers get a copy of any "bad" review though for their own information/guidance.

Steve, I know that HiFi+ reviewed your speakers (and published the review ) and there's nothing to suggest it was anything other than completely above board but IMO there's definitely something dodgy about the constantly glowing reviews that Nordost products get and the vast amounts of Nordost advertising in HiFi+ ....

Michael.

 

I think the same could be said about Cambridge Audio products - judging by the pages of Richer Sounds ads found in What HiFi. I've noticed that other manufacturers may have had a rave review for their kit as soon as it's released, then when Cambridge Audio release a product that competes with it at the same price point, that too gets a glowing review and the other manufacturer's product that was previously reviewed rarely gets mentioned!

 

The problem with magazine reviews effects the consumer and the smaller manufacturer.

I went for the reviewer (Paul Messenger) rather than the publication. It turned out that we decided on HiFi+. I wanted the next review to be in HiFi Choice. However, their policy is that the company has to have a dealer network in place and, as I have sold directly up until now, this is not possible. With the release of the new range I am looking to sell through a small number of high quality dealers so this will change. However, this is yet another area of difficulty for the smaller manufacturer.

Let's face it, larger manufacturers probably don't care if they have to 'leave' their products with the reviewer; they can afford to spend thousands of pounds on advertising and even run their own retail network (as mentioned by nsherin).

 

Seems this is more rife than I was told. I also got very fed-up with one mag who would give their full-page advertisers glowing results, cyrus to name one, could do no wrong in that mag.

Whilst I agree that the car mags do require a decent booze-up they do not sit on the fence when it comes to testing cars, they also have to buy their long-termers.

 

Stereophile were well known in the USA to refuse to do product reviews unless the manufacturer/distributor agreed to sign up for extensive advertising contracts. Not sure what the situation is now but this really fires up the small businesses because they need the reviews to create product exposure but at the outset can not afford large advertising bills.

Hi-Fi News here in the UK did stipulate that before the review was published I had to have at least one UK dealer in place, which I thought was fair.

Hope any of you guys on here who are producing audio products get the mix right, it's always good to see the small guy succeed.

 

I know a Speaker manufacturer who has had his speakers reviwed in the main three UK mags, Hi-Fi World, HI-Fi Pus and HFNRR. He has never advertised with any of them and the last time I spoke to him had only a single UK dealer.

Ken

 

...I think that's probably because he gets by with the very minimum of requirements that the mags like to see. Of course, there could be some 'old boys' type arrangement going on too

 

I think not, considering he is 12,000 miles away and only started speaker manufacture about 3 years ago.

Ken

 

...that was said in jest,...hence the sticking out tongue smiley,...but then again, if you are not part of the 'old boys club' you wouldn't know anyway,...hehehe