This is a dishonest characterization of the criticisms in this thread and bad faith engagement isn't doing you any favors.
The reality is that Danny is an unrepentant liar who over many years has consistently deleted any comments or posts that even slightly call his claims into question. His credibility is nil among anyone who cares about audio science, and that is not the same as "I don't like Danny." Personally, I don't know Danny, so I have no like or dislike of him at all--he's not even a person to me, just an online TV show that I learned long ago deals primarily in deception and treats audio buyers as prey to be defrauded for his own enrichment.
Okay. ANYWAY.
I’m not asking anyone to accept Danny, GR Research, or his upgrade recommendations on faith. I’m also not arguing that credibility is irrelevant. If someone has a documented history of misrepresenting data, deleting legitimate criticism, or using measurements selectively, then that is a fair reason to scrutinize their conclusions more heavily.
But that still does not answer the specific point.
The claim being discussed was not “Danny is trustworthy, therefore Wilson is bad.” The point was that a specific video showed specific measurements on the speakers being discussed, and those measurements raised enough concerns that I personally would not be interested in buying them.
The proper rebuttal would be something like:
His measurement setup was flawed.
The mic placement was wrong.
The gated/windowed response was misleading.
The impedance data was inaccurate.
The crossover interpretation was incorrect.
The speaker was modified, damaged, or not representative.
The measured issues are inaudible or expected for that design approach.
Any of those would be a direct response.
But broad attacks on Danny’s character, even if you believe they are deserved, do not by themselves invalidate the measurements shown in that specific case. They may be a reason to be skeptical, but skepticism still needs to connect back to the evidence.
So my position is pretty simple: don’t defend Danny. Don’t defend GR Research. Don’t defend the upgrade kit. Attack the measurements or the interpretation if they are wrong.
That was my point.