? Op is a reviewer. He tested the same speaker that got glowing write up from Erin and was finding serious issues in its performance. Alan performed no investigation, instead making it the reviewers problem to prove the issues beyond any doubt. The only way for this was for the reviewer to actually find the causes and fix them. Even then, there is no acknowledgement from Alan of all of these problems, asking other customers to look at the issues and if so, help them fix it.Alan’s response was measured, polite and customer friendly. I find his replies where professional and it to be concerning that some anonymous enthusiast generate general allegations from this.
I go through this all the time myself with products that don't perform. I don't care how polite a manufacturer is. I care that when careful objective testing is showing problem, they take the problems seriously and work to replicate, or show that their sample under identical condition doesn't have that problem. That is the constructive path to work with a reviewer and/or user with strong evidence of issues.
Let's remember that Alan created a shadow account and praised Erin's review left and right until we caught up to him and terminated his other persona. This is not an above board individual so don't give him credit for something that didn't amount to anything. A bit of discount to a buyer of multi-thousand dollar speaker wouldn't appease me.
Where does this leave other buyers? They don't have our reviewer to check their speakers. The "we test every speaker" line doesn't work when this sample is clearly not tested.
As for Erin, I like to understand if his sample for sure did not have these problems. And that was not the reason for missing 86 dBSPL where one of the main problems was seen. He received not one, but two versions of this speaker. At the time, I commented that buyers would have no idea of what version they are getting and this thread proves it. So he has a role in this as well to clean up.