New Collaboration with Ascilab!

[amirm]

While you are very transparent with your business interests as long as you have ran ASR, I don't believe it's unreasonable to add the badges, especially you now have the exclusive rights of selling one of the hottest new comers to the industry in North America, which is arguably the largest market.

As you noted, I am already doing far, far more than any other reviewer in audio with ASR to remove any hint of bias. How can you with straight face demand more with that 'no delay' comment? What is your alternative? Watching a video with direct, commissioned links to products? Or magazines/websites full of expensive ads?

As I said in the OP, I am committed to running ASR in a trusted way. Please leave it to me to figure out how to continue to do that. If I have to have a new title to do that, I have failed in my job of explaining who I am and why I have done what I have with ASR.

Finally, my biggest worry is that this will be a failed venture, not a few people thinking negatively about ASR now. My success would be described by you all being happier getting easier access to wonderful products and support in North America with my brother having a business he can run. And of course helping an upstart with innovative technology getting a foothold in the super competitive audio market. I have been blessed with a successful career and am in no need of doing such things for money. Or extra work/financial risk it takes to get there. If someone is confused about this, a title is not going to fix it.

So please don't give me advice like that and certainly not with that tone.

 

[WillBrink]

Is good news for sure. I will be tracking the developments closely for sure.

 

[xanalog]

So please don't give me advice like that and certainly not with that tone.

errrr... I don't think your CV quite fits the qualifications needed for a dental hygienist.

 

[Robbo99999]

Apparently so and priced accordingly.

So the F6C at $3000 is gonna be their cheapest active version if I read that right? Well, no way I'll be buying one of their speakers if $3000 is their lowest priced active.

 

[DBASQL]

Very cool opportunity, I'll try a pair out when you get going. Will be great to have some theater ready products too.

 

[AudioJester]

So the F6C at $3000 is gonna be their cheapest active version if I read that right? Well, no way I'll be buying one of their speakers if $3000 is their lowest priced active.

If you dont want to pay extra for cutting edge measured performance and cardioid, lots of cheaper alternatives. Bang for buck probably Kali Audio is still hard to beat.

There was an active version of the A6B, not sure its still part of Ascilabs plans

 

[PristineSound]

As you noted, I am already doing far, far more than any other reviewer in audio with ASR to remove any hint of bias. How can you with straight face demand more with that 'no delay' comment? What is your alternative? Watching a video with direct, commissioned links to products? Or magazines/websites full of expensive ads?

As I said in the OP, I am committed to running ASR in a trusted way. Please leave it to me to figure out how to continue to do that. If I have to have a new title to do that, I have failed in my job of explaining who I am and why I have done what I have with ASR.

Finally, my biggest worry is that this will be a failed venture, not a few people thinking negatively about ASR now. My success would be described by you all being happier getting easier access to wonderful products and support in North America with my brother having a business he can run. And of course helping an upstart with innovative technology getting a foothold in the super competitive audio market. I have been blessed with a successful career and am in no need of doing such things for money. Or extra work/financial risk it takes to get there. If someone is confused about this, a title is not going to fix it.

So please don't give me advice like that and certainly not with that tone.

I apologized for the words "with no delay," the tone of written words vs. spoken words with facial expression is very different.

But of all new comers, I think Ascilab is the safest best. Best of luck.

 

[Bleib]

Best of luck, I'm glad they find distributors

 

[mac]

If you dont want to pay extra for cutting edge measured performance and cardioid, lots of cheaper alternatives. Bang for buck probably Kali Audio is still hard to beat.

There was an active version of the A6B, not sure its still part of Ascilabs plans

Unless they're offering something that directly competes with the 807p, the Kali isn't in the same league. The 305p MkII is a great performing active budget speaker, though. Anyway, and back on-topic, looking forward to the new AscilLab active models to be released.

 

[prestigetone]

Does anyone know the dimensions and kg of the cardioid version?

 

[xray]

So please don't give me advice like that and certainly not with that tone.

This reply should be sufficient IMO. It's your house and members are guests not paying customers. I have observed you to be open to suggestions and comments but when it starts sounding like demands then that's crossing the line.

 

[AudioJester]

Unless they're offering something that directly competes with the 807p, the Kali isn't in the same league. The 305p MkII is a great performing active budget speaker, though. Anyway, and back on-topic, looking forward to the new AscilLab active models to be released.

The V2 of the Kali measure much better. I found the Kali gets closer to my Genelec/Neumans than the JBL. The JBL got the chop when i needed to rationalise.

The thing with Ascilab passives, is they are so cheap with the performance they achieve. If you have space for electronics, superb dacs and amps are peanuts these days.
Ascilabs is such a great disruptor in the market!

 

[waldo2]

As you noted, I am already doing far, far more than any other reviewer in audio with ASR to remove any hint of bias. How can you with straight face demand more with that 'no delay' comment? What is your alternative? Watching a video with direct, commissioned links to products? Or magazines/websites full of expensive ads?

As I said in the OP, I am committed to running ASR in a trusted way. Please leave it to me to figure out how to continue to do that. If I have to have a new title to do that, I have failed in my job of explaining who I am and why I have done what I have with ASR.

Finally, my biggest worry is that this will be a failed venture, not a few people thinking negatively about ASR now. My success would be described by you all being happier getting easier access to wonderful products and support in North America with my brother having a business he can run. And of course helping an upstart with innovative technology getting a foothold in the super competitive audio market. I have been blessed with a successful career and am in no need of doing such things for money. Or extra work/financial risk it takes to get there. If someone is confused about this, a title is not going to fix it.

So please don't give me advice like that and certainly not with that tone.

It’s not that people don’t trust you. It’s that conflicts of interest are insidious. They worm their way into even the most honest of people’s deliberations. That’s the very reason that reputable organizations have strict rules against conflicts: not because they think their colleagues are dishonest, but because people, no matter how well meaning, are only human. By the way, comparing the conflict of distributing a speaker when you are reviewing competitors speakers with advertising and directed merchants and other obvious conflicts is not exculpatory. Few people here trust the reviewers you are referring to. Whether your conflict is greater or lesser is not the point. It is a paradigmatic conflict of interest.

 

[jhaider]

I wish the new venture well.

From as ASR perspective the only issue IMO is that the Neumanns, Genelecs, Dutch&Dutches, KEFs etc. of the world might be more reticent to supply review samples. Keeping those lines open will require skillful diplomacy. Of course user-supplied samples will be unaffected.

 

[prestigetone]

It’s not that people don’t trust you. It’s that conflicts of interest are insidious. They worm their way into even the most honest of people’s deliberations. That’s the very reason that reputable organizations have strict rules against conflicts: not because they think their colleagues are dishonest, but because people, no matter how well meaning, are only human. By the way, comparing the conflict of distributing a speaker when you are reviewing competitors speakers with advertising and directed merchants and other obvious conflicts is not exculpatory. Few people here trust the reviewers you are referring to. Whether your conflict is greater or lesser is not the point. It is a paradigmatic conflict of interest.

Well said

 

[amirm]

It’s not that people don’t trust you. It’s that conflicts of interest are insidious. They worm their way into even the most honest of people’s deliberations.

Might be true for many, but doesn't apply to me. I can turn on monetization on ASR and make $100K+ year in an instant. I can accept sponsorships and make a ton of money. Same with my youtube channel which is totally unmonetized despite 52K in subscribers. Every month or two, someone comes and asks to buy ASR. I have said NO to all of this and the evidence is in front of you with a clean site with nothing motivated by money.

Making money from the new venture is far harder. Chances of losing money is a lot higher than making it. If money motivated me, I would have gone the monetization route than creating this business. Heaven knows that I always tell people to avoid getting into audio business. I took the step to do this anyway because I firmly believe it will benefit many, with me last in line.

That’s the very reason that reputable organizations have strict rules against conflicts: not because they think their colleagues are dishonest, but because people, no matter how well meaning, are only human.

Where is this in audio business? A lot of you like Erin's reviews. Yet there is full monetization of his work. Did you give him the same advice?

Do you think your local minister is just motivated to shoplift than an addict? Just because something is possible, doesn't mean it is going to be.

Few people here trust the reviewers you are referring to.

Really? You don't trust the measurements in Stereophile? Or Soundstage? Or Erin's?

It is remarkable to me that with all the proof in front of you to show my true intentions contrary to your assumption, you still doubt. It feels like the proverbial giving an arm and you asking for the other. It is nonsense that I deal with outside of the forum but didn't expect it here.

 

[amirm]

From as ASR perspective the only issue IMO is that the Neumanns, Genelecs, Dutch&Dutches, KEFs etc. of the world might be more reticent to supply review samples.

There is some risk there but the benefit is to those companies remain: the large following ASR has and demand it creates when a product is well engineered.

The new store may also attract other companies who want their product sold there and that could be a path to get samples to test.

 

[waldo2]

Might be true for many, but doesn't apply to me. I can turn on monetization on ASR and make $100K+ year in an instant. I can accept sponsorships and make a ton of money. Same with my youtube channel which is totally unmonetized despite 52K in subscribers. Every month or two, someone comes and asks to buy ASR. I have said NO to all of this and the evidence is in front of you with a clean site with nothing motivated by money.

Making money from the new venture is far harder. Chances of losing money is a lot higher than making it. If money motivated me, I would have gone the monetization route than creating this business. Heaven knows that I always tell people to avoid getting into audio business. I took the step to do this anyway because I firmly believe it will benefit many, with me last in line.


Where is this in audio business? A lot of you like Erin's reviews. Yet there is full monetization of his work. Did you give him the same advice?

Do you think your local minister is just motivated to shoplift than an addict? Just because something is possible, doesn't mean it is going to be.

Really? You don't trust the measurements in Stereophile? Or Soundstage? Or Erin's?

It is remarkable to me that with all the proof in front of you to show my true intentions contrary to your assumption, you still doubt. It feels like the proverbial giving an arm and you asking for the other. It is nonsense that I deal with outside of the forum but didn't expect it here.

Ok I’ll shut up after just one more. Please understand that my comments are not a personal attack. They are general comments about common wisdom in the scientific and professional worlds relating to conflicts. I think of myself as a very ethical person. I try to hold myself the very highest standards, but I have definitely been placed in unanticipated professional situations where I found myself faced with conflicts of interest. I wish I could say my decision making there was unaffected and that I was immune from looking after my own interest. I tried to extricate from the conflicts as soon as possible, but I definitely did the calculation of “whats best for me” before I could resolve the conflicts. Please understand that this is not about you; it is about the nature of conflicts. You review other people’s speakers and affect the market. Surely it is clear that scientific peer reviewed journals would not accept submissions from someone with a financial interest in the content of the publication. Step back and think about it. I’m sure you have the best intentions, but, if you are like most of us, disregarding your own interests is nearly impossible. Also, comparing yourself to those you find disreputable is not a winning argument I think.

 

[amirm]

’m sure you have the best intentions, but, if you are like most of us, disregarding your own interests is nearly impossible.

I am not situated like most of you. What seems to be impossible for you, is very much what I practice every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

There are wealthy people who have gone to Africa to save animals and spend millions of dollars there. You are telling me that they would fit your assumption about human behavior? Why is it so hard for you to accept that not everyone wants to compromise their reputation for money?

And you didn't answer me on why you are trusting other reviewers who make money from every review.

 

[amirm]

You review other people’s speakers and affect the market. Surely it is clear that scientific peer reviewed journals would not accept submissions from someone with a financial interest in the content of the publication.

No it is not clear. Vast majority of papers published at AES is from companies with direct intent to make money. A lot is patented before disclosure. There is no requirement at all at AES that research papers be for good of man kind with zero monetary benefit.

AES management also works at companies that make money from audio products. Many have presented papers including Dr. Olive who was president of AES while working for Harman. Fielder who is a Fellow at Dolby and countless others. The peer review board is also made up of people who work at companies and would be approving papers that could directly compete with offerings from their own companies.

I don't know for sure how it works in other industries but I am pretty sure research funded by drug companies is accepted in peer review journals.