dCS threatens with a 7-figure lawsuit over a review

[Roland68]

And it goes on:

dCS Response and Story

For those who did not see, this was posted on The HEADPHONE Show yesterday. This video was made in relation to an ongoing situation regarding @GoldenSound by dCS in regards to a video review he did of the dCS Bartok in 2021 before he had joined The HEADPHONE Show and Headphones.com which...

forum.headphones.com

Torben

After that, it should be clear to everyone that there will be no more independent tests of dCS products in the future, because no independent reviewer will agree to write a test report.

And anyone interested in dCS can then do without all other tests, because they will be nothing more than advertisements.
Has dCS really done itself a favor by doing this?

 

[SIY]

After that, it should be clear to everyone that there will be no more independent tests of dCS products in the future, because no independent reviewer will agree to write a test report.

Why would that stop anyone from doing a review? It certainly wouldn't stop me.

 

[mhardy6647]

A naughty word?
Keith

I had to look it up.
So, that's a good thing.
I like words -- even (perhaps especially) neologisms.

 

[Ismapics]

Why would that stop anyone from doing a review? It certainly wouldn't stop me.

You can do a review and no one can stop you. However here the distinction is that Golden Sound does a data analysis with the same Audio Analyzer that Amir uses, finds good results and then spends the rest of the review disparaging and blabbering about "not having an edge, being dull" contradicting the findings without clearly stating it was his editorial opinion (as in not factual). He touts that he makes measurements to then do exactly like any other YT talking head and use fancy words. Consumers maybe - just maybe - duped into thinking the gear is not good at all, when another person may find it stellar and can even say it measures well too. See where the distinction is.

 

[Purité Audio]

It’s just his particular ‘angle’ measurements and subjective nonsense.
It’s just about money and nothing to do with customer service for both parties.
Keith

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

There is lesson to GoldenSound and all would be "influencers". Objectivity is the ultimate shield. Make sure you have a profound understanding, I would suggest mastery but this takes a long time, of the field you choose to cover... a good grasp of communication and of the Law. Your will not be perfectly protected but you can fend away superficial attempts at bullying. Facts remain facts. Facts, repeatable, measurable are not easy to challenge.
Delving into the tropes of subjectivity: fioritures, strange wordings and.. at times what can be constructed as fabrications... is exposing yourself. Trying without any proof to corelate measurements with fleeting, not repeatable impressions, shall expose you some day. I skimmed through a few of his videos and the amount of B.S. is high ...
Also taking on influencer capital or creds to delve into "design" or "consultation", are minefield. How can you remain objective if you are also the competition? Or working/collaborating with it?

Caveat Emptor

Peace.

 

[ta240]

Objectivity is the ultimate shield.

It seems like part of the problem here was combining objectivity that showed one thing with subjectivity that said another.
A bit like the consumer reports Bose issue where the suit wasn't about just a bad review, it was about a review where the notes said one thing and the actual printed review said a more exaggerated version.
In a world where extremes are all that get noticed, there is an incentive for reviewers to make their opinions in either direction much stronger.

 

[Roland68]

Why would that stop anyone from doing a review? It certainly wouldn't stop me.

This was one of the topics that I discussed with reviewers, operators of test sites and manufacturers at this year's High-End in Munich.
The very people who take such reviews seriously would no longer test devices from manufacturers who have taken action against other reviewers. From the discussions I came up with the following reasons:
- No desire for legal disputes or problems
- Boycotting these manufacturers
- Positive, genuine reviews are more interesting for everyone involved

In addition, in a case like this there is the enormous amount of time and personal stress that no one who has not been through something like this can understand.
I have accompanied several legal disputes with my employers and the effort required to prepare reports, evidence, documentation, etc. was not hundreds but thousands or more hours, and proceedings can take years.

 

[SIY]

This was one of the topics that I discussed with reviewers, operators of test sites and manufacturers at this year's High-End in Munich.
The very people who take such reviews seriously would no longer test devices from manufacturers who have taken action against other reviewers. From the discussions I came up with the following reasons:
- No desire for legal disputes or problems
- Boycotting these manufacturers
- Positive, genuine reviews are more interesting for everyone involved

In addition, in a case like this there is the enormous amount of time and personal stress that no one who has not been through something like this can understand.
I have accompanied several legal disputes with my employers and the effort required to prepare reports, evidence, documentation, etc. was not hundreds but thousands or more hours, and proceedings can take years.

I'd be happy to, and just as happy to call their bluff if they didn't like it.

And before you ask, I have been involved in a lot of litigation, including with Monster, so I have a pretty good idea of the dynamics involved.

 

[Human Bass]

You can do a review and no one can stop you. However here the distinction is that Golden Sound does a data analysis with the same Audio Analyzer that Amir uses, finds good results and then spends the rest of the review disparaging and blabbering about "not having an edge, being dull" contradicting the findings without clearly stating it was his editorial opinion (as in not factual). He touts that he makes measurements to then do exactly like any other YT talking head and use fancy words. Consumers maybe - just maybe - duped into thinking the gear is not good at all, when another person may find it stellar and can even say it measures well too. See where the distinction is.

His audience enjoys the subjective take. The right he has to compliment Holo May is the same one to criticize the Bartok.

His (and anyone's else) tastes and preference have no obligation of being "scientifically sound". Although I personally love hard data to filter the BS, what really matters is to enjoy the audio. And when it comes to super expensive gear, it is even more comprehensible to criticize when the bliss isnt delivered enough.

 

[kemmler3D]

There is lesson to GoldenSound and all would be "influencers". Objectivity is the ultimate shield. Make sure you have a profound understanding, ...Facts remain facts. Facts, repeatable, measurable are not easy to challenge.

Delving into the tropes of subjectivity: fioritures, strange wordings and.. at times what can be constructed as fabrications... is exposing yourself.

You might be right in terms of what dCS thinks is worth fighting over, but legally, as far as I know, no.

Did you forget the whole Tekton fiasco already? Eric A threatened to sue over minor quibbles in the facts. He didn't have much to say about the subjective evaluation IIRC.

And false statements of fact that lead to damages are what you can successfully sue over, NOT opinions. "I think nobody should ever buy Tekton again, they sound like dog farts" - legally 100% safe. "Tekton speakers are slightly radioactive" - I might be on the hook for damages if anyone believes me.

The gray area that got talked about during the Tekton thing was false statements of fact made negligently, not maliciously, and whether that could create liability.

 

[Roland68]

I'd be happy to, and just as happy to call their bluff if they didn't like it.

And before you ask, I have been involved in a lot of litigation, including with Monster, so I have a pretty good idea of the dynamics involved.

But nobody would pay them for their time and they get nothing in return.
My time would definitely be too precious to waste on a company like dCS, such a company is simply not worth it. And what better way to punish such a company than by ignoring it.
As the saying goes, what is worse than bad press? No press.

 

[DSJR]

Hi

There is lesson to GoldenSound and all would be "influencers". Objectivity is the ultimate shield. Make sure you have a profound understanding, I would suggest mastery but this takes a long time, of the field you choose to cover... a good grasp of communication and of the Law. Your will mot be perfectly protected but you can fend away superficial attempts at bullying. Facts remain facts. Facts, repeatable, measurable are not easy to challenge.
Delving into the tropes of subjectivity: fioritures, strange wordings and.. at times what can be constructed as fabrications... is exposing yourself. Trying without any proof to corelate measurements with fleeting, not repeatable impressions, shall expose you some day. I skimmed through a few of his videos and the amount of B.S. is high ...
Also taking on influencer capital or creds to delve into "design" or "consultation", are minefield. How can you remain objective if you are also the competition? Or working/collaborating with it?

Caveat Emptor

Peace.

As I tried to say earlier, he's young and full of it, not at all in a bad way but maybe naive in his desire to play to an audience (why give a talk at Canjam, is he suitably experienced as yet?)

Apparently and according to one poster on the HP forum, he has functioning ears, which seemingly most of us (including @amirm I believe) don't. Who gives a stuff that Amir's training is arguably better than most of us put together as regards 'hearing differences.'

One thing Cameron would do well to explore, is to try to find out WHY something sounds different to him, if indeed it does. Do null tests to conform and then learn as much as possible about the measurements and how they relate to each other. SINAD simply isn't enough *on its own!*

 

[kemmler3D]

One thing Cameron would do well to explore, is to try to find out WHY something sounds different to him, if indeed it does. Do null tests to conform and then learn as much as possible about the measurements and how they relate to each other. SINAD simply isn't enough *on its own!*

I think we'd all do well to explore that if we want to understand measurements / gear. Hunting down what you hear in the measurements is a great way to learn!

 

[Mad_Economist]

I think we'd all do well to explore that if we want to understand measurements / gear. Hunting down what you hear in the measurements is a great way to learn!

One note of caution here is that well controlled listening tests are essential for anything like that. Having a subjective experience and then going spelunking for things that might just happen to correlate in the data is a surefire recipe for a wild goose chase otherwise.

 

[dasdoing]

This was one of the topics that I discussed with reviewers, operators of test sites and manufacturers at this year's High-End in Munich.
The very people who take such reviews seriously would no longer test devices from manufacturers who have taken action against other reviewers. From the discussions I came up with the following reasons:
- No desire for legal disputes or problems
- Boycotting these manufacturers
- Positive, genuine reviews are more interesting for everyone involved

In addition, in a case like this there is the enormous amount of time and personal stress that no one who has not been through something like this can understand.
I have accompanied several legal disputes with my employers and the effort required to prepare reports, evidence, documentation, etc. was not hundreds but thousands or more hours, and proceedings can take years.

and unfortunately, it means they win.
the few sales they lose from people following the discussion are very soon compensated.
And not having future reviews of their products gives the marketing team all the liberty they want.

 

[Ninjastar]

It's getting a bit boring now isn't it. If they're certain that no legal action is gonna take place, then they should quit airing their dirty laundry in public (both parties) and just sort it out in private conversation. As long as the threat of legal action has been removed, that's all that matters really, as that was the only reason for this all being "public" in the first place.

They're not simply two people having a disagreement. They both run businesses so they both need to earn the public's trust.

If someone was calling me a liar in a public space, I would definitely want to counter their claims in a public space.

If Headphones.com is to be believed (and I tend to put more trust in their side as they have actual screenshots of e-mails), then dCS is lying to make the public believe they are the victim in this.

If I'm Headphones.com, there is no way I would let them get away with that.

 

[Roland68]

and unfortunately, it means they win.
the few sales they lose from people following the discussion are very soon compensated.
And not having future reviews of their products gives the marketing team all the liberty they want.

Then you don't understand that marketing has changed a long time ago.
When was the last time you saw direct advertising, for example from Yamaha, Sony, Marantz Elac, or even dCS? And why should that change in the future to the advantage of dCS?
Buyers also demand comparisons with other devices in this area. If the usual channels for this are not available or are greatly reduced, the only option left is the dealers.

 

[tmtomh]

Having a subjective experience and then going spelunking for things that might just happen to correlate in the data is a surefire recipe for a wild goose chase otherwise.

Well said and spot-on!

 

[Gadgety]

The dCS Ring DAC, state of the art. In 1989. External clocking was state of the art, too, but probably before 2003 or so or in an environment requiring simultaneous clocking of multiple DACs. dCS claims that their external clock "...enhances all aspects of sound for an even more immersive listening experience" and "Minimises jitter and irregularities that can cause distortion." I find that it's mainly their marketing irregularities that cause distortion. dCS are so overpriced it's unbelievable, and they're trying to maintain their 20, 30, 40, 50 and even 90 thousand dollar price points in a market where technology has caught up a long time ago, offering equivalent, or better, performance for a fraction of the price. Or even a fraction of a fraction of their pricing. dCS, true Veblen goods. I bet their total market is extremely limited, as in very, very few units, and they know that they almost totally depend on perception and marketing to maintain whatever sales they can accomplish. Someone saw the review and dCS lost half their sales, all five units.