snake oil brought to book!

Ha ha!

http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_44177.htm

 

****, I need a new keyboard.

 

that's just made my day.

superb!

 

god I remember I was getting a Russ Andrews promotional magazine with a cartoon about Hifi Harry...
that was after I bought the inline attenuators that were no good at all

and did this ASA read the advertising of the many thousand quid stands ?

http://www.russandrews.com/category...A2671037508048SKORWFKQTLCGYWXU&cat_id=Pnewtor



what the heck is a "scraftman" anyway? :JPS:
What makes Torlyte so good?

You are here: What makes Torlyte so good?
Go back to the previous page





Torlyte has an original and functional beauty all of its own. Made from wood, the unique contruction of Torlyte offers a clean, extended, tuneful bass, a more realistic mid-range especially on voices, less 'splash' and more information in the treble, and improvements in the three-dimensional stereo image. The front-to-back depth snaps into focus, the recording acoustic becomes much easier to discern and those subtle, mysterios sounds made by the musicians can be identified with ease.

Don't be fooled into thinking this is just a simple piece of wood; each piece is handmade by a skilled scraftsman. More air than wood, Torlyte is constructed from individually fabricated grids and skins, requiring numberous complex machine and manual operations. All this naturally comes at a price, but we believe that the sonic payoff makes it an extremely worthwhile investment.

Torlyte manages the feat of making the musicians sound better (actually their real talent was being hidden by smear and distortion caused by the acoustic feedback).

And better... it's not black!

 

This line from the ASA ruling filled me with wonder that an audio manufacturer would think this way..


" Our expert disagreed with Russ Andrews assertion that sound quality variations were subjective and not capable of objective substantiation "

How??? can a manufacturer dismiss objective measurement in audio and be taken seriously?

 

Also, not to mention the fact that "experimental details for the perceptual measurements were not given" - reminds us (if we need it) that subjective things are routinely measured by psychologists, psychophysics experiments, etc (the mentioned ABX seen in this light is a tiny part or possibility offered by a constellation of experimental psychology methods.)

 

The Silver Signature PowerKordâ„¢ with Cryo'd Wattgate (£1,805)

A bit pricey, BUT:

"... Distortion levels inside equipment is vastly reduced, letting you hear a sound that is vastly clearer and purer, more detailed and far more dynamic ...",

 

The ASA website means you can report any defective advertising simply by filling a form in - online.

If anyone feels strongly that advertising by Russ Andrews breaks ASA guidelines on other products - or that other manufacturers in audio do the same, then I'd reccomend filling the form in.

 

lets send in one from each page

 

yes strange that no one has taken RA to the advertising standards ......or perhaps people have and failed ?

 

Fantastic.

I look forward to Naim's ad campaign for their new mains cable.

Maybe mods on forums will take notice of the ASA's findings in future ;-)

 

Well they certainly got a good kicking there!
I'd caution getting carried away by this 'doyen of sanity and reasoned thought' the ASA-they're just as likely to reach the opposite conclusion in the face of similar data.
In fact a good copywriter could have worded this ad in such a way as to avoid a ban. So caveat emptor.

 

And they could also appoint someone to break the kneecaps and bump off the families of anyone found making statements not adequately substantiated with appropriate measurements and verifiable evidence

 

Are you volunteering?

 

Hi Pete

Not sure I'm reading you right there - the page at the top of the link is an advertising standards ruling against RA.

 

That vacancy is filled. In any case, users of homeopathic medicine are ineligible

 

Only really justified if making those statements for profit

In other cases, a simple ritual humiliation should suffice.

 

In the judgement there are sections like " Our expert disagreed with Russ Andrews assertion that sound quality variations were subjective and not capable of objective substantiation. He said, in the field of audio, the ABX test method was well established and probably one of the most commonly used. " Whilst not being a fanboi of Russ's I'd quite like to know the status of the "expert". Disagreement between experts is fairly common - just take a look at academia for example. Also "probably one of the most commonly..." is pretty loose, don't you think.
There are many products, most I imagine without a no-questions asked 60 day return policy which would not stand scrutiny. I'd also like to know who instigated the complaint - fun though the outcome has been for forums like this.....

 

ASA Adjudication is very thorough. It ends by asserting, "We told Russ Andrews not use the claims again unless they could substantiate them with robust scientific evidence."

Will Russ Andrews stop his tactics more suited to a snake oil merchant or will he, the sort of clever man that he is, find ways around CAP Codes?

Personally, I would also like to see him withdraw some of his dodgy products.

 

I think that the ASA ruling only applies to the booklet that he periodically sends to customers. It doesn't have the power to stop him from saying what he wants online.

Online for the Signature PowerKord™:

"Your system will sound more musical, with less distortion and will let you hear a far more open, spacious sound"

http://www.russandrews.com/lookup/1...SYSKXHLL/product-Signature-PowerKord-1548.htm