Are there any audiophile electronics companies who have a transparent, honest marketing as a priority?

[Blake Klondike]

I'm lucky enough to live in Boston, with 4-6 independent high-end audio shops in driving distance. But, at many of these, it is often hard to know when I am being sold to, rather than helped, when it comes to their recommendations.

I am a big fan of the philosophy that JDS Labs and, in my experience, Harbeth, have re: how to build, advertise and market their products. It seems to have a first-principles similarity with the work here at ASR. Just wondering if anyone can recommend any other audio companies, regardless of product, with a similar approach? Thanks!

 

[SIY]

Here's a tell- if they start talking about component brands ("We use Caddock resistors and MIT cable!"), run away. Fast. Ditto any mention of quantum mechanics.

I've had recent good experience with Kali, Vanatoo, and Legacy.

 

[kevinh]

Mini DSP
Klipsch
March Audio
Nord

 

[RayDunzl]

Benchmark provides a suite of measurements in the manuals with (maybe) all their products.

They aren't cheap, made in Syracuse, NY.

Manuals: https://benchmarkmedia.com/pages/manuals

Video Tour of Manufacturing

 

[Blake Klondike]

Thanks for the responses so far! When it comes to straight-dealing audiophile experiences, I walked into a shop in town (don't know posting etiquette re: naming names) with $800 to spend and the mgr asked what I had for a setup. I told him, and his response was "If you like the way your current system sounds, go buy $800 worth of CDs and enjoy them." I am always glad to learn more about honest companies that are transparent about making/selling quality products.

 

[Old Listener]

I like Audioengine's products and the company is easy to deal with.

 

[LTig]

I'm lucky enough to live in Boston, with 4-6 independent high-end audio shops in driving distance. But, at many of these, it is often hard to know when I am being sold to, rather than helped, when it comes to their recommendations.

Go into a shop which specializes in recording studio equipment.

I am a big fan of the philosophy that JDS Labs and, in my experience, Harbeth, have re: how to build, advertise and market their products. It seems to have a first-principles similarity with the work here at ASR. Just wondering if anyone can recommend any other audio companies, regardless of product, with a similar approach? Thanks!

Those that I know, in alphabetical order:

• Speakers: Genelec, Neumann
• DACs: Benchmark, Motu, RME
• Amplifiers: Bryston, Classé

 

[JJB70]

Marketing is marketing, as long as it avoids the more extreme and bonkers stuff I tend to let the printed/on-line stuff go by. The problem is rigged demo techniques which play with volume and source material to convince you are hearing a difference that doesn't exist. I'm not talking about the normal psycho-acoustic sighted bias, but actually creating a difference by foul means. To me that is outright fraud. The main issue is the product itself, when I see for example Nordost and Audioquest stuff the problem isn't so much their marketing but the snake oil crap that they're selling. At one time Quad had a very straight forward marketing approach but you don't see them so much under the newer owners. Cambridge audio also seem to be pretty straightforward. I find often it is correlated to the product, companies majoring on solid and well engineered products with good bang per buck don't need to use all sorts of dishonest tricks to sell their gear (i.e. JDS Labs).

Two tricks which are very effective are to cultivate a very well developed sense of geniality to hide spin and BS under a "how could such a nice fellow by telling me crap" veneer (see Paul McGowan for an example of how to do this well), o,r the sort of little guys cutting to the chase and telling it like it is and being straight up in a way those evil big companies never are method to obscure the asinine content and bollox spin and so promote their BS more effectively (see Schiit for a good example).

 

[sergeauckland]

Thanks for the responses so far! When it comes to straight-dealing audiophile experiences, I walked into a shop in town (don't know posting etiquette re: naming names) with $800 to spend and the mgr asked what I had for a setup. I told him, and his response was "If you like the way your current system sounds, go buy $800 worth of CDs and enjoy them." I am always glad to learn more about honest companies that are transparent about making/selling quality products.

Back in the 1980s, I got tired of Corporate Life and set up my own HiFi shop with the above philosophy.

I went bust a few years later.

S.

 

[svart-hvitt]

Back in the 1980s, I got tired of Corporate Life and set up my own HiFi shop with the above philosophy.

I went bust a few years later.

S.

Lol

 

[Purité Audio]

Back in the 1980s, I got tired of Corporate Life and set up my own HiFi shop with the above philosophy.

I went bust a few years later.

S.

Audiophiles prefer bullshit to the truth.
Keith

 

[Willem]

Quad of Peter Walker's days was such a no bullshit company. He did suffer the consequences when the audiophools started to criticize his innovative current dumping 405 power amplifier. For me, the benefit was that I could attend a private blind demo of his three amplifiers. Audiophools had claimed that their quality had only declined, with his early valve amplifier claimed to be the most 'musical' and his current dumping 405 the worst. Peter enjoyed a devilish pleasure in my inability to tell them apart. He was also well known for his ridicule of cable myths.
These days, Alan Shaw of Harbeth is a man of similar engineering integrity and dedication to the scientific method.

 

[sergeauckland]

Quad of Peter Walker's days was such a no bullshit company. He did suffer the consequences when the audiophools started to criticize his innovative current dumping 405 power amplifier. For me, the benefit was that I could attend a private blind demo of his three amplifiers. Audiophools had claimed that their quality had only declined, with his early valve amplifier claimed to be the most 'musical' and his current dumping 405 the worst. Peter enjoyed a devilish pleasure in my inability to tell them apart. He was also well known for his ridicule of cable myths.
These days, Alan Shaw of Harbeth is a man of similar engineering integrity and dedication to the scientific method.

Peter Walker even went as far as to commission a consultant, James Moir & Associates, to run some blind listening tests that proved PW's contention that there's no audible difference between the Quad II, 303 and 405. The Quad IIs were bridged to provide enough power.
Martin Colloms disagreed with some aspects of the James Moir tests, and commissioned his own, comparing TVA valve amplifiers, Naim and Quad amplifiers, with substantially the same result. Of course the press ridiculed the whole concept that a Naim amp could sound the same as a Quad. Everybody knows Naim has PRAT, whilst Quad is 'pipe and slippers'.

S

 

[Willem]

Indeed. The James Moir experiment was a neat one. As for the Naim sound, it has been argued that their signature sound is in fact due to their high input sensitivity: they clip easily. The compression/distortion that follows is viewed as PRAT.

 

[MKD1]

I recently had a minor issue with my Atom amp and sent an e-mail to JDS for assistance. A guy named John S***** responded the same day and was immensely helpful and down to earth. I realized later that John S***** is the "JS" in JDS Labs-- i.e. the President of the company was answering customer support. Thoroughly impressed with JDS as engineers and as customer support. Great company with a President setting a great example.

 

[SIY]

As for the Naim sound, it has been argued that their signature sound is in fact due to their high input sensitivity: they clip easily. The compression/distortion that follows is viewed as PRAT.

The amps of theirs I've worked with had marginal stability. Oh, sorry, I meant "unusually revealing of cable differences."

 

[Willem]

 

[svart-hvitt]

Peter Walker even went as far as to commission a consultant, James Moir & Associates, to run some blind listening tests that proved PW's contention that there's no audible difference between the Quad II, 303 and 405. The Quad IIs were bridged to provide enough power.
Martin Colloms disagreed with some aspects of the James Moir tests, and commissioned his own, comparing TVA valve amplifiers, Naim and Quad amplifiers, with substantially the same result. Of course the press ridiculed the whole concept that a Naim amp could sound the same as a Quad. Everybody knows Naim has PRAT, whilst Quad is 'pipe and slippers'.

S

Cool story!

Any links, sources?

 

[Willem]

https://linearaudio.nl/sites/linearaudio.net/files/Valves versus Transistors DCD.pdf

 

[GGroch]

I have always considered Emotiva as unusually transparent and honest in their marketing.

Their website provides complete specifications and accurate descriptions of benefits.

They decided a few years back to no longer run "limited time" sales events. They do lower pricing on clearance and B-stock items, but felt that limited time promos just forced them to raise prices the rest of the year to maintain needed margins.

I have never owned one of their products, so have never dealt with there customer service....but this thread is on marketing.